Driver hit 98mph in 30mph zone in Newport

South Wales Argus: SPEEDING OFFENCE: Minaugas Indriunas outside Cwmbran Magistrates SPEEDING OFFENCE: Minaugas Indriunas outside Cwmbran Magistrates

A SPEEDING motorist was caught doing almost 100mph in a 30mph zone in Newport.

Minaugas Indruinas, 32, from Llys-y-Coed, Hengoed, sped down the Kingsway in a BMW on May 5 last year.

But he was caught by a speed camera doing 98mph on the A4042, close to where the road becomes a 20mph zone with speed humps.

PC Jodie Davies told Cwmbran Magistrates’ Court: “I have never known such a speed if I’m honest.”

Appearing wearing a navy coat and jeans, Indruinas admitted speeding.

His girlfriend spoke on his behalf as he is not fluent in English.

She told the court the two of them had a young daughter together and that he relied on his European licence to get to work in Blackwood and take his child to school: “He needs to commute to work.

“We have a little one and she’s going to school.”

Chairman of the bench Gary Shide said: “Because of the speed involved we feel we have no option but to disqualify you from driving.

“If you drive whilst disqualified you will commit a serious offence and you may be sent to prison.”

Indruinas submitted a letter of apology to the court.

He was banned from driving any motor vehicle for four months, ordered to pay a £500 fine, a victim surcharge of £50 and costs of £85.

The Argus previously reported that this speed camera raised more than £1million in only three years.

A Freedom of Information request revealed that the camera caught 23,582 drivers in the last three years, amounting to fines of £1,414,920.

The camera is the second highest-grossing fixed speed camera in Wales and England after one on the M60 near Stockport.

The camera in question is a Gatso, the most common yellow-boxed camera used for catching speeding offenders. It is on a stretch of road where the limit drops to 30mph.

There were five accidents, including a fatality, on the A4042 on the Kingsway, Newport, in the three years before the camera’s installation in 2002.

Highways chiefs caught 19,595 motorists on the ten highest-grossing cameras in Gwent, statistics from GoSafe, Wales’ Road Casualty Reduction Partnership, show.

Comments (46)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

11:06am Thu 9 Jan 14

DavidMclean says...

A good enough example of why some speed cameras are needed. Without that camera this idiot would be driving like this past YOUR house and past YOUR children's school.
A good enough example of why some speed cameras are needed. Without that camera this idiot would be driving like this past YOUR house and past YOUR children's school. DavidMclean
  • Score: 92

11:25am Thu 9 Jan 14

Vox Dei says...

That stretch of road shouldn't be a 30 limit though; 40 maybe, but never 30. People lose all respect for speed limits when they are used in this way. Witness the recent drop of part of the SDR by the tip from 50 to 30 just because of a staff-only pedestrian crossing that will rarely be used. There seems to be a recent mindset amongst traffic engineers that all new traffic light installations must be accompanied by an extensive permanent 30 limit. Maybe I shouldn't publicise this because if will probably lead to a cut, but Malpas Road has a 40 limit with pedestrian crossings and houses built-up to either side, but a dual carriageway well away from houses needs a drop from 50 to 30? I repeat, drivers will lose respect for ALL speed limits when they see this lunacy.
That stretch of road shouldn't be a 30 limit though; 40 maybe, but never 30. People lose all respect for speed limits when they are used in this way. Witness the recent drop of part of the SDR by the tip from 50 to 30 just because of a staff-only pedestrian crossing that will rarely be used. There seems to be a recent mindset amongst traffic engineers that all new traffic light installations must be accompanied by an extensive permanent 30 limit. Maybe I shouldn't publicise this because if will probably lead to a cut, but Malpas Road has a 40 limit with pedestrian crossings and houses built-up to either side, but a dual carriageway well away from houses needs a drop from 50 to 30? I repeat, drivers will lose respect for ALL speed limits when they see this lunacy. Vox Dei
  • Score: -16

11:28am Thu 9 Jan 14

sperduti says...

DavidMclean wrote:
A good enough example of why some speed cameras are needed. Without that camera this idiot would be driving like this past YOUR house and past YOUR children's school.
I totally agree !! since the Cardiff road speed camera has been removed , they should place it up by the gaer shops by the gaer inn as the cars that speed up and down this road is disgusting!!! an accident waiting to happen here !!
[quote][p][bold]DavidMclean[/bold] wrote: A good enough example of why some speed cameras are needed. Without that camera this idiot would be driving like this past YOUR house and past YOUR children's school.[/p][/quote]I totally agree !! since the Cardiff road speed camera has been removed , they should place it up by the gaer shops by the gaer inn as the cars that speed up and down this road is disgusting!!! an accident waiting to happen here !! sperduti
  • Score: 35

12:13pm Thu 9 Jan 14

Thomas O'Malley says...

I'm not excusing this idiot in any way - I'd throw away the key, but surely the point here is that most likely he HAS been driving past houses, schools, etc at stupid speeds for many years. There's no speed cameras in such places (where the public wouldn't object). Speed cameras are only in places where they will generate the most profit for the privately owned speed camera partnerships that run them. There's also unnecessary low limits on some roads and poory signed limits on other roads so the vast majority of drivers that drive at appropriate speeds for the road and conditions have no faith in speed cameras as a safety solution.
I'm not excusing this idiot in any way - I'd throw away the key, but surely the point here is that most likely he HAS been driving past houses, schools, etc at stupid speeds for many years. There's no speed cameras in such places (where the public wouldn't object). Speed cameras are only in places where they will generate the most profit for the privately owned speed camera partnerships that run them. There's also unnecessary low limits on some roads and poory signed limits on other roads so the vast majority of drivers that drive at appropriate speeds for the road and conditions have no faith in speed cameras as a safety solution. Thomas O'Malley
  • Score: 29

12:54pm Thu 9 Jan 14

Woodgnome says...

The penalty imposed was far too low. That speed in 30mph warrants immediate imprisonment.
The penalty imposed was far too low. That speed in 30mph warrants immediate imprisonment. Woodgnome
  • Score: 68

1:03pm Thu 9 Jan 14

spanner100 says...

Only banned for four months. What a puny ban!!.Wake up Magistrates and stop bowing to "Sob stories". The financial fine means little to a BMW owner.A totally disgraceful speed to be driving at!!.
Only banned for four months. What a puny ban!!.Wake up Magistrates and stop bowing to "Sob stories". The financial fine means little to a BMW owner.A totally disgraceful speed to be driving at!!. spanner100
  • Score: 89

1:06pm Thu 9 Jan 14

87oufc says...

DavidMclean wrote:
A good enough example of why some speed cameras are needed. Without that camera this idiot would be driving like this past YOUR house and past YOUR children's school.
Exactly! I often hear people have a moan at speed cameras and police offices. What is striking is the fact that these people have had a run in with either one if not both.

Don't want to get caught by a speed camera? - Don't speed!
Have a problem with speed cameras? - Follow the law like a lot of people do and they won't be a problem to you.
But they're in place just to take monies from tax paying people! - What ever is the truth and validity of that argument is made void if you don't speed and follow the law.
[quote][p][bold]DavidMclean[/bold] wrote: A good enough example of why some speed cameras are needed. Without that camera this idiot would be driving like this past YOUR house and past YOUR children's school.[/p][/quote]Exactly! I often hear people have a moan at speed cameras and police offices. What is striking is the fact that these people have had a run in with either one if not both. Don't want to get caught by a speed camera? - Don't speed! Have a problem with speed cameras? - Follow the law like a lot of people do and they won't be a problem to you. But they're in place just to take monies from tax paying people! - What ever is the truth and validity of that argument is made void if you don't speed and follow the law. 87oufc
  • Score: 33

1:11pm Thu 9 Jan 14

Robodad says...

Vox Dei wrote:
That stretch of road shouldn't be a 30 limit though; 40 maybe, but never 30. People lose all respect for speed limits when they are used in this way. Witness the recent drop of part of the SDR by the tip from 50 to 30 just because of a staff-only pedestrian crossing that will rarely be used. There seems to be a recent mindset amongst traffic engineers that all new traffic light installations must be accompanied by an extensive permanent 30 limit. Maybe I shouldn't publicise this because if will probably lead to a cut, but Malpas Road has a 40 limit with pedestrian crossings and houses built-up to either side, but a dual carriageway well away from houses needs a drop from 50 to 30? I repeat, drivers will lose respect for ALL speed limits when they see this lunacy.
It is not that long ago that the comments were all about how dangerous the roundabouts on the SDR are and how motorists needed to be slowed down. it seems that you cant please all the people all of the time. As for the section of Kingsway being a 40mph limit, i disagree. 30 is plenty close to a leisure centre, several pedestrian crossings and an arts centre.
[quote][p][bold]Vox Dei[/bold] wrote: That stretch of road shouldn't be a 30 limit though; 40 maybe, but never 30. People lose all respect for speed limits when they are used in this way. Witness the recent drop of part of the SDR by the tip from 50 to 30 just because of a staff-only pedestrian crossing that will rarely be used. There seems to be a recent mindset amongst traffic engineers that all new traffic light installations must be accompanied by an extensive permanent 30 limit. Maybe I shouldn't publicise this because if will probably lead to a cut, but Malpas Road has a 40 limit with pedestrian crossings and houses built-up to either side, but a dual carriageway well away from houses needs a drop from 50 to 30? I repeat, drivers will lose respect for ALL speed limits when they see this lunacy.[/p][/quote]It is not that long ago that the comments were all about how dangerous the roundabouts on the SDR are and how motorists needed to be slowed down. it seems that you cant please all the people all of the time. As for the section of Kingsway being a 40mph limit, i disagree. 30 is plenty close to a leisure centre, several pedestrian crossings and an arts centre. Robodad
  • Score: 18

1:35pm Thu 9 Jan 14

Vox Dei says...

The trouble with the "don't speed" argument is that, for example, 40mph is a perfectly safe speed for that stretch of road. Indeed, the other carriageway has a 50 limit. The 30 limit there is unnecessarily low which leads to lack of respect for speed limits where they ARE justified. Yes, someone who drives at nearly a ton through there is a madman, but speed cameras are a blunt instrument that treat someone doing a perfectly safe and appropriate speed for the conditions in the same way.
The trouble with the "don't speed" argument is that, for example, 40mph is a perfectly safe speed for that stretch of road. Indeed, the other carriageway has a 50 limit. The 30 limit there is unnecessarily low which leads to lack of respect for speed limits where they ARE justified. Yes, someone who drives at nearly a ton through there is a madman, but speed cameras are a blunt instrument that treat someone doing a perfectly safe and appropriate speed for the conditions in the same way. Vox Dei
  • Score: -4

1:41pm Thu 9 Jan 14

Vox Dei says...

Robodad, the limit drops to 20 before the Riverfront and there are road humps to reinforce that. The stretch in question is part of a grade-separated dual carriageway with no pedestrian footways and no housing either side. Coming from an equivalent stretch of road with a 50 limit it is clear that 30 is inappropriate. Drivers shouldn't be nannied with "buffer" limits. In fact they are specifically argued against by the DfT.
Robodad, the limit drops to 20 before the Riverfront and there are road humps to reinforce that. The stretch in question is part of a grade-separated dual carriageway with no pedestrian footways and no housing either side. Coming from an equivalent stretch of road with a 50 limit it is clear that 30 is inappropriate. Drivers shouldn't be nannied with "buffer" limits. In fact they are specifically argued against by the DfT. Vox Dei
  • Score: 9

1:56pm Thu 9 Jan 14

taz329 says...

I know this idiot and where he works and his driving is horrendous. People like this will kill someone one day. 4 months ban is a joke an absolute joke!!
I know this idiot and where he works and his driving is horrendous. People like this will kill someone one day. 4 months ban is a joke an absolute joke!! taz329
  • Score: 65

2:39pm Thu 9 Jan 14

GardenVarietyMushroom says...

Second highest grossing speed camera in England and Wales. Twenty three and a half thousand people caught speeding just off a stretch of the M4 notorious for accidents, and yet people will still claim that bad drivers aren't to blame for all the RTA's, and that it's all somehow the roads' fault.
Second highest grossing speed camera in England and Wales. Twenty three and a half thousand people caught speeding just off a stretch of the M4 notorious for accidents, and yet people will still claim that bad drivers aren't to blame for all the RTA's, and that it's all somehow the roads' fault. GardenVarietyMushroom
  • Score: 14

3:30pm Thu 9 Jan 14

Thomas O'Malley says...

87oufc wrote:
DavidMclean wrote: A good enough example of why some speed cameras are needed. Without that camera this idiot would be driving like this past YOUR house and past YOUR children's school.
Exactly! I often hear people have a moan at speed cameras and police offices. What is striking is the fact that these people have had a run in with either one if not both. Don't want to get caught by a speed camera? - Don't speed! Have a problem with speed cameras? - Follow the law like a lot of people do and they won't be a problem to you. But they're in place just to take monies from tax paying people! - What ever is the truth and validity of that argument is made void if you don't speed and follow the law.
The vast majority of speed cameras are portable ones operated by private companies for profit. That is the only reason they exist. They are not sited anywhere where they would actually make a difference to road safety (schools, housing estates) but on open stretches of road where they can maximise profit. Most people exceed the speed limit at some time and if you want to punish people for breaking the law then thats ok, but there's a vast array of motoring and non-motoring offences that also break the law that are not policed by cameras. Most councils removed static cameras when the law was changed and they couldn't keep the revenue locally (it goes to central government) so lets not pretend cameras as currently deployed are anything to do with road safety.

I'm afraid your argument that people that speed can't have an opinion is, with respect, a bit silly. You may drive within the speed limit every single time but the vast majority of drivers speed at some time - things only get improved through debate.

As it happens I've never had a speeding ticket and I'm very much in favour of speed cameras - but they need to be located where they actually make a difference to road safety, not located as cash cows for the profit of private companies as is currently the case.

I'm not in any way defending extreme idiots like the guy in this story but quite frankly speed cameras or anything else makes no difference to the way they run their selfish little lives.
[quote][p][bold]87oufc[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]DavidMclean[/bold] wrote: A good enough example of why some speed cameras are needed. Without that camera this idiot would be driving like this past YOUR house and past YOUR children's school.[/p][/quote]Exactly! I often hear people have a moan at speed cameras and police offices. What is striking is the fact that these people have had a run in with either one if not both. Don't want to get caught by a speed camera? - Don't speed! Have a problem with speed cameras? - Follow the law like a lot of people do and they won't be a problem to you. But they're in place just to take monies from tax paying people! - What ever is the truth and validity of that argument is made void if you don't speed and follow the law.[/p][/quote]The vast majority of speed cameras are portable ones operated by private companies for profit. That is the only reason they exist. They are not sited anywhere where they would actually make a difference to road safety (schools, housing estates) but on open stretches of road where they can maximise profit. Most people exceed the speed limit at some time and if you want to punish people for breaking the law then thats ok, but there's a vast array of motoring and non-motoring offences that also break the law that are not policed by cameras. Most councils removed static cameras when the law was changed and they couldn't keep the revenue locally (it goes to central government) so lets not pretend cameras as currently deployed are anything to do with road safety. I'm afraid your argument that people that speed can't have an opinion is, with respect, a bit silly. You may drive within the speed limit every single time but the vast majority of drivers speed at some time - things only get improved through debate. As it happens I've never had a speeding ticket and I'm very much in favour of speed cameras - but they need to be located where they actually make a difference to road safety, not located as cash cows for the profit of private companies as is currently the case. I'm not in any way defending extreme idiots like the guy in this story but quite frankly speed cameras or anything else makes no difference to the way they run their selfish little lives. Thomas O'Malley
  • Score: 13

4:03pm Thu 9 Jan 14

_Bryan_ says...

The problem with speed cameras is that their introduction has led to a sharp reduction in the number of police tasked with managing trafffic offfences.

As a result, there is a tendency to criminalise the "normal" driver who may stray a little over the limit and would traditionally have been given a polite reminder to watch their speed in ages past, whilst more reckless drivers will often memorise camera locations and get away with idiotic behaviour that would previously have been caught and dealt with.
The problem with speed cameras is that their introduction has led to a sharp reduction in the number of police tasked with managing trafffic offfences. As a result, there is a tendency to criminalise the "normal" driver who may stray a little over the limit and would traditionally have been given a polite reminder to watch their speed in ages past, whilst more reckless drivers will often memorise camera locations and get away with idiotic behaviour that would previously have been caught and dealt with. _Bryan_
  • Score: 10

4:07pm Thu 9 Jan 14

NakedDancer says...

GardenVarietyMushroo
m
wrote:
Second highest grossing speed camera in England and Wales. Twenty three and a half thousand people caught speeding just off a stretch of the M4 notorious for accidents, and yet people will still claim that bad drivers aren't to blame for all the RTA's, and that it's all somehow the roads' fault.
This article only gives A4042 stats for 1999-02, five RTAs in 3 years - which seems pretty low for a busy A road. As far as I'm aware the A4042 doesn't have regular (if any) RTAs, even though it's pretty congested with traffic forced off the M4 due to the Caerleon Road slip road closures.

This camera is so prolific because of the sudden drop in the speed limit and the camera partly hidden under the bridge. Of course most people know the camera is there and slow down for it then speed up again once past it.
[quote][p][bold]GardenVarietyMushroo m[/bold] wrote: Second highest grossing speed camera in England and Wales. Twenty three and a half thousand people caught speeding just off a stretch of the M4 notorious for accidents, and yet people will still claim that bad drivers aren't to blame for all the RTA's, and that it's all somehow the roads' fault.[/p][/quote]This article only gives A4042 stats for 1999-02, five RTAs in 3 years - which seems pretty low for a busy A road. As far as I'm aware the A4042 doesn't have regular (if any) RTAs, even though it's pretty congested with traffic forced off the M4 due to the Caerleon Road slip road closures. This camera is so prolific because of the sudden drop in the speed limit and the camera partly hidden under the bridge. Of course most people know the camera is there and slow down for it then speed up again once past it. NakedDancer
  • Score: 7

5:09pm Thu 9 Jan 14

mary66 says...

We all have family and work commitments, we all don't drive like a mad raving lunatic, sob sob, very dangerous man to be handling a car on our roads, his licence should be tore to strips, I feel for the person or persons he kills on the road when he's back in that car, only one source to blame and that is the law.
We all have family and work commitments, we all don't drive like a mad raving lunatic, sob sob, very dangerous man to be handling a car on our roads, his licence should be tore to strips, I feel for the person or persons he kills on the road when he's back in that car, only one source to blame and that is the law. mary66
  • Score: 27

5:10pm Thu 9 Jan 14

Woodgnome says...

taz329 wrote:
I know this idiot and where he works and his driving is horrendous. People like this will kill someone one day. 4 months ban is a joke an absolute joke!!
He should have been charged with dangerous driving which carries up to 2 years imprisonment. What were the Police thinking - public protection completely failed by them in this case?
[quote][p][bold]taz329[/bold] wrote: I know this idiot and where he works and his driving is horrendous. People like this will kill someone one day. 4 months ban is a joke an absolute joke!![/p][/quote]He should have been charged with dangerous driving which carries up to 2 years imprisonment. What were the Police thinking - public protection completely failed by them in this case? Woodgnome
  • Score: 38

5:19pm Thu 9 Jan 14

NakedDancer says...

I fear for his partner and daughter also. No-one should get in a car with this lunatic driving.
I fear for his partner and daughter also. No-one should get in a car with this lunatic driving. NakedDancer
  • Score: 23

5:31pm Thu 9 Jan 14

richie55 says...

Woodgnome wrote:
The penalty imposed was far too low. That speed in 30mph warrants immediate imprisonment.
I agree. If the is not a case of dangerous driving I dont know what is!
[quote][p][bold]Woodgnome[/bold] wrote: The penalty imposed was far too low. That speed in 30mph warrants immediate imprisonment.[/p][/quote]I agree. If the is not a case of dangerous driving I dont know what is! richie55
  • Score: 22

5:32pm Thu 9 Jan 14

richie55 says...

Woodgnome wrote:
The penalty imposed was far too low. That speed in 30mph warrants immediate imprisonment.
I agree. If the is not a case of dangerous driving I dont know what is!
[quote][p][bold]Woodgnome[/bold] wrote: The penalty imposed was far too low. That speed in 30mph warrants immediate imprisonment.[/p][/quote]I agree. If the is not a case of dangerous driving I dont know what is! richie55
  • Score: 10

6:00pm Thu 9 Jan 14

Jonnytrouble says...

Woodgnome wrote:
taz329 wrote:
I know this idiot and where he works and his driving is horrendous. People like this will kill someone one day. 4 months ban is a joke an absolute joke!!
He should have been charged with dangerous driving which carries up to 2 years imprisonment. What were the Police thinking - public protection completely failed by them in this case?
Not the Police out of there hands, case went to a soft Magistrates court he can't speak English properly and his girl friend did the pleading and
' begging ' !
HE got off this one very, very lightly...If as someone on here said that knows this idiot saying that he drive mad and gets back behind the wheel, next time we could be hearing of a Death or Deaths ?
[quote][p][bold]Woodgnome[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]taz329[/bold] wrote: I know this idiot and where he works and his driving is horrendous. People like this will kill someone one day. 4 months ban is a joke an absolute joke!![/p][/quote]He should have been charged with dangerous driving which carries up to 2 years imprisonment. What were the Police thinking - public protection completely failed by them in this case?[/p][/quote]Not the Police out of there hands, case went to a soft Magistrates court he can't speak English properly and his girl friend did the pleading and ' begging ' ! HE got off this one very, very lightly...If as someone on here said that knows this idiot saying that he drive mad and gets back behind the wheel, next time we could be hearing of a Death or Deaths ? Jonnytrouble
  • Score: 15

6:21pm Thu 9 Jan 14

Magor says...

I am sure others driving this fast have had long bans and a re-test, even prison.
I am sure others driving this fast have had long bans and a re-test, even prison. Magor
  • Score: 20

7:45pm Thu 9 Jan 14

newportrules says...

Not a fan of speed cameras to be honest. There are better ways to reduce poor driving (that's the issue...not speeding). But! This camera is signposted for around a mile before hand! There are marker signs before it. And...it leads into a heavily pedestrianised zone right outside the Riverfront and bus station etc etc. So! This guy IS an idiot! And, 98 in a 30 zone....JAIL!
Not a fan of speed cameras to be honest. There are better ways to reduce poor driving (that's the issue...not speeding). But! This camera is signposted for around a mile before hand! There are marker signs before it. And...it leads into a heavily pedestrianised zone right outside the Riverfront and bus station etc etc. So! This guy IS an idiot! And, 98 in a 30 zone....JAIL! newportrules
  • Score: 9

10:09pm Thu 9 Jan 14

foxy3rd says...

newportrules wrote:
Not a fan of speed cameras to be honest. There are better ways to reduce poor driving (that's the issue...not speeding). But! This camera is signposted for around a mile before hand! There are marker signs before it. And...it leads into a heavily pedestrianised zone right outside the Riverfront and bus station etc etc. So! This guy IS an idiot! And, 98 in a 30 zone....JAIL!
It also merges with the traffic coming down from the old and the lights are there plus 3 x 30 mph signs and road markings just before it.
You just have to concentrate on the limit change.
[quote][p][bold]newportrules[/bold] wrote: Not a fan of speed cameras to be honest. There are better ways to reduce poor driving (that's the issue...not speeding). But! This camera is signposted for around a mile before hand! There are marker signs before it. And...it leads into a heavily pedestrianised zone right outside the Riverfront and bus station etc etc. So! This guy IS an idiot! And, 98 in a 30 zone....JAIL![/p][/quote]It also merges with the traffic coming down from the old and the lights are there plus 3 x 30 mph signs and road markings just before it. You just have to concentrate on the limit change. foxy3rd
  • Score: 8

8:07am Fri 10 Jan 14

Katie Re-Registered says...

Terrifying. The man is obviously one of the many motorists clearly not mentally suited to driving. Probably said something politically incorrect here, but perhaps all motorists and potential motorists should undergo compulsory psychological tests which they have to pass before being allowed to control an item of machinery that is potentially more dangerous than a gun.
Terrifying. The man is obviously one of the many motorists clearly not mentally suited to driving. Probably said something politically incorrect here, but perhaps all motorists and potential motorists should undergo compulsory psychological tests which they have to pass before being allowed to control an item of machinery that is potentially more dangerous than a gun. Katie Re-Registered
  • Score: 3

8:11am Fri 10 Jan 14

Katie Re-Registered says...

Crikey, so his defence is that he needs to transport a child in his death machine?!!! Any judge that finds it acceptable for a child to transported at 98mph in 30mph zone in a motor vehicle is effectively sanctioning something as dangerous to that child's life as allowing them to go on a day trip with a paedophile!!!
Crikey, so his defence is that he needs to transport a child in his death machine?!!! Any judge that finds it acceptable for a child to transported at 98mph in 30mph zone in a motor vehicle is effectively sanctioning something as dangerous to that child's life as allowing them to go on a day trip with a paedophile!!! Katie Re-Registered
  • Score: 11

8:39am Fri 10 Jan 14

Anne teak says...

Here's how they do it in Scotiand. Almost the same case:

On pointing the device at the Audi A8 4-2 Quattro it was found to be driving at a top speed of 95mph in a 40mph zone.

Swiss-born Kovacevic, 22, was pursued and came to a halt at traffic lights beside Gallagher Retail Park.

He orded him to carry out 100 hours of community service, fined him £700 and banned him from driving for 14 months.

http://www.bbc.co.uk
/news/uk-scotland-ta
yside-central-127724
42
Here's how they do it in Scotiand. Almost the same case: On pointing the device at the Audi A8 4-2 Quattro it was found to be driving at a top speed of 95mph in a 40mph zone. Swiss-born Kovacevic, 22, was pursued and came to a halt at traffic lights beside Gallagher Retail Park. He orded him to carry out 100 hours of community service, fined him £700 and banned him from driving for 14 months. http://www.bbc.co.uk /news/uk-scotland-ta yside-central-127724 42 Anne teak
  • Score: 9

9:09am Fri 10 Jan 14

Woodgnome says...

Jonnytrouble wrote:
Woodgnome wrote:
taz329 wrote:
I know this idiot and where he works and his driving is horrendous. People like this will kill someone one day. 4 months ban is a joke an absolute joke!!
He should have been charged with dangerous driving which carries up to 2 years imprisonment. What were the Police thinking - public protection completely failed by them in this case?
Not the Police out of there hands, case went to a soft Magistrates court he can't speak English properly and his girl friend did the pleading and
' begging ' !
HE got off this one very, very lightly...If as someone on here said that knows this idiot saying that he drive mad and gets back behind the wheel, next time we could be hearing of a Death or Deaths ?
Nonsense - if the Police don't bring the charges the Court can only deal with what he's been charged with.
[quote][p][bold]Jonnytrouble[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Woodgnome[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]taz329[/bold] wrote: I know this idiot and where he works and his driving is horrendous. People like this will kill someone one day. 4 months ban is a joke an absolute joke!![/p][/quote]He should have been charged with dangerous driving which carries up to 2 years imprisonment. What were the Police thinking - public protection completely failed by them in this case?[/p][/quote]Not the Police out of there hands, case went to a soft Magistrates court he can't speak English properly and his girl friend did the pleading and ' begging ' ! HE got off this one very, very lightly...If as someone on here said that knows this idiot saying that he drive mad and gets back behind the wheel, next time we could be hearing of a Death or Deaths ?[/p][/quote]Nonsense - if the Police don't bring the charges the Court can only deal with what he's been charged with. Woodgnome
  • Score: 2

9:16am Fri 10 Jan 14

Dai Rear says...

DavidMclean wrote:
A good enough example of why some speed cameras are needed. Without that camera this idiot would be driving like this past YOUR house and past YOUR children's school.
Assuming he understands what it's all about-and he may very well come from a country with no roads-he'd just slow for the camera and go as fast afterwards. What is ACTUALLY needed is more police patrol cars but as you have to spend 80% of your time as a copper writing "reports" there isn't enough left to get out of the police station.
[quote][p][bold]DavidMclean[/bold] wrote: A good enough example of why some speed cameras are needed. Without that camera this idiot would be driving like this past YOUR house and past YOUR children's school.[/p][/quote]Assuming he understands what it's all about-and he may very well come from a country with no roads-he'd just slow for the camera and go as fast afterwards. What is ACTUALLY needed is more police patrol cars but as you have to spend 80% of your time as a copper writing "reports" there isn't enough left to get out of the police station. Dai Rear
  • Score: 2

9:22am Fri 10 Jan 14

_Bryan_ says...

Woodgnome wrote:
Jonnytrouble wrote:
Woodgnome wrote:
taz329 wrote: I know this idiot and where he works and his driving is horrendous. People like this will kill someone one day. 4 months ban is a joke an absolute joke!!
He should have been charged with dangerous driving which carries up to 2 years imprisonment. What were the Police thinking - public protection completely failed by them in this case?
Not the Police out of there hands, case went to a soft Magistrates court he can't speak English properly and his girl friend did the pleading and ' begging ' ! HE got off this one very, very lightly...If as someone on here said that knows this idiot saying that he drive mad and gets back behind the wheel, next time we could be hearing of a Death or Deaths ?
Nonsense - if the Police don't bring the charges the Court can only deal with what he's been charged with.
The charge would actually be decided by the CPS rather than the police. In most criminal cases, the police will present their evidence and the CPS will decide what offence will reach court.

However, I'm not sure if even this procedure is followed where someone is caught speeding by a gatso camera. It wouldn't surprise me if it was entirely automated with no discreion applied regarding the particular offence someone is charged with.
[quote][p][bold]Woodgnome[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Jonnytrouble[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Woodgnome[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]taz329[/bold] wrote: I know this idiot and where he works and his driving is horrendous. People like this will kill someone one day. 4 months ban is a joke an absolute joke!![/p][/quote]He should have been charged with dangerous driving which carries up to 2 years imprisonment. What were the Police thinking - public protection completely failed by them in this case?[/p][/quote]Not the Police out of there hands, case went to a soft Magistrates court he can't speak English properly and his girl friend did the pleading and ' begging ' ! HE got off this one very, very lightly...If as someone on here said that knows this idiot saying that he drive mad and gets back behind the wheel, next time we could be hearing of a Death or Deaths ?[/p][/quote]Nonsense - if the Police don't bring the charges the Court can only deal with what he's been charged with.[/p][/quote]The charge would actually be decided by the CPS rather than the police. In most criminal cases, the police will present their evidence and the CPS will decide what offence will reach court. However, I'm not sure if even this procedure is followed where someone is caught speeding by a gatso camera. It wouldn't surprise me if it was entirely automated with no discreion applied regarding the particular offence someone is charged with. _Bryan_
  • Score: 3

9:33am Fri 10 Jan 14

Dr Martin says...

Dai Rear wrote:
DavidMclean wrote:
A good enough example of why some speed cameras are needed. Without that camera this idiot would be driving like this past YOUR house and past YOUR children's school.
Assuming he understands what it's all about-and he may very well come from a country with no roads-he'd just slow for the camera and go as fast afterwards. What is ACTUALLY needed is more police patrol cars but as you have to spend 80% of your time as a copper writing "reports" there isn't enough left to get out of the police station.
@Dai Rear

found a cocky stoner who reckons he earns 100K fancy joining in?

http://www.dorsetech
o.co.uk/archive/2014
/01/03/10912808.Larg
e_amount_of_cannabis
_discovered_at_addre
ss_in_Poole
[quote][p][bold]Dai Rear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]DavidMclean[/bold] wrote: A good enough example of why some speed cameras are needed. Without that camera this idiot would be driving like this past YOUR house and past YOUR children's school.[/p][/quote]Assuming he understands what it's all about-and he may very well come from a country with no roads-he'd just slow for the camera and go as fast afterwards. What is ACTUALLY needed is more police patrol cars but as you have to spend 80% of your time as a copper writing "reports" there isn't enough left to get out of the police station.[/p][/quote]@Dai Rear found a cocky stoner who reckons he earns 100K fancy joining in? http://www.dorsetech o.co.uk/archive/2014 /01/03/10912808.Larg e_amount_of_cannabis _discovered_at_addre ss_in_Poole Dr Martin
  • Score: 1

9:40am Fri 10 Jan 14

Woodgnome says...

_Bryan_ wrote:
Woodgnome wrote:
Jonnytrouble wrote:
Woodgnome wrote:
taz329 wrote: I know this idiot and where he works and his driving is horrendous. People like this will kill someone one day. 4 months ban is a joke an absolute joke!!
He should have been charged with dangerous driving which carries up to 2 years imprisonment. What were the Police thinking - public protection completely failed by them in this case?
Not the Police out of there hands, case went to a soft Magistrates court he can't speak English properly and his girl friend did the pleading and ' begging ' ! HE got off this one very, very lightly...If as someone on here said that knows this idiot saying that he drive mad and gets back behind the wheel, next time we could be hearing of a Death or Deaths ?
Nonsense - if the Police don't bring the charges the Court can only deal with what he's been charged with.
The charge would actually be decided by the CPS rather than the police. In most criminal cases, the police will present their evidence and the CPS will decide what offence will reach court.

However, I'm not sure if even this procedure is followed where someone is caught speeding by a gatso camera. It wouldn't surprise me if it was entirely automated with no discreion applied regarding the particular offence someone is charged with.
Whatever Bryan - let's not nit pick. The system is not serving the people by protecting them from morons like this one. The charge and penalty do not fit the crime. What a message this sends out to the morons just like him.

I just hope that no insurance company will touch him with a barge pole - but then of course there is the risk of driving without insurance at all. His neighbours need to shop him if he doesn't behave in future.
[quote][p][bold]_Bryan_[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Woodgnome[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Jonnytrouble[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Woodgnome[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]taz329[/bold] wrote: I know this idiot and where he works and his driving is horrendous. People like this will kill someone one day. 4 months ban is a joke an absolute joke!![/p][/quote]He should have been charged with dangerous driving which carries up to 2 years imprisonment. What were the Police thinking - public protection completely failed by them in this case?[/p][/quote]Not the Police out of there hands, case went to a soft Magistrates court he can't speak English properly and his girl friend did the pleading and ' begging ' ! HE got off this one very, very lightly...If as someone on here said that knows this idiot saying that he drive mad and gets back behind the wheel, next time we could be hearing of a Death or Deaths ?[/p][/quote]Nonsense - if the Police don't bring the charges the Court can only deal with what he's been charged with.[/p][/quote]The charge would actually be decided by the CPS rather than the police. In most criminal cases, the police will present their evidence and the CPS will decide what offence will reach court. However, I'm not sure if even this procedure is followed where someone is caught speeding by a gatso camera. It wouldn't surprise me if it was entirely automated with no discreion applied regarding the particular offence someone is charged with.[/p][/quote]Whatever Bryan - let's not nit pick. The system is not serving the people by protecting them from morons like this one. The charge and penalty do not fit the crime. What a message this sends out to the morons just like him. I just hope that no insurance company will touch him with a barge pole - but then of course there is the risk of driving without insurance at all. His neighbours need to shop him if he doesn't behave in future. Woodgnome
  • Score: 4

10:08am Fri 10 Jan 14

Dai Rear says...

In other words a patrol car would have gathered enough evidence for a charge of dangerous driving with a minimum 1 year ban and an extended re-test. He may never have taken a driving test. It wouldn't keep him off the road; he could carry on driving in his own country, if it has roads, but at least we'd know that if he drove here and was picked up not having passed the re-test he'd be locked up for disqualified driving, for as long as he remains in Wales.
In other words a patrol car would have gathered enough evidence for a charge of dangerous driving with a minimum 1 year ban and an extended re-test. He may never have taken a driving test. It wouldn't keep him off the road; he could carry on driving in his own country, if it has roads, but at least we'd know that if he drove here and was picked up not having passed the re-test he'd be locked up for disqualified driving, for as long as he remains in Wales. Dai Rear
  • Score: 6

10:14am Fri 10 Jan 14

manofponty says...

Good enough for the idiot. Speeding is dangerous, and the selfish/and or stupid will ever try to justify it. I get tired of hearing whining about speed cameras from speed maniacs, Don't want to get fined for speeding? Then ease off on the accelerator. Rocket science it isn't.
Good enough for the idiot. Speeding is dangerous, and the selfish/and or stupid will ever try to justify it. I get tired of hearing whining about speed cameras from speed maniacs, Don't want to get fined for speeding? Then ease off on the accelerator. Rocket science it isn't. manofponty
  • Score: 5

9:11pm Fri 10 Jan 14

prstasker says...

I think he should have been sent on a speed awareness course and made to repeat his test.
I think he should have been sent on a speed awareness course and made to repeat his test. prstasker
  • Score: 7

11:29pm Fri 10 Jan 14

Leepod says...

"His girlfriend spoke on his behalf as he is not fluent in English"

Fair enough, but I bet he can read numbers!

4 months ban, pathetic should have least have had 12 month ban minimum, plus take a extended test, what an idiotic imbecile, deport deport deport!!
"His girlfriend spoke on his behalf as he is not fluent in English" Fair enough, but I bet he can read numbers! 4 months ban, pathetic should have least have had 12 month ban minimum, plus take a extended test, what an idiotic imbecile, deport deport deport!! Leepod
  • Score: 7

2:08pm Sat 11 Jan 14

DDDog1 says...

taz329 wrote:
I know this idiot and where he works and his driving is horrendous. People like this will kill someone one day. 4 months ban is a joke an absolute joke!!
Any chance you could go round and give him a slap
[quote][p][bold]taz329[/bold] wrote: I know this idiot and where he works and his driving is horrendous. People like this will kill someone one day. 4 months ban is a joke an absolute joke!![/p][/quote]Any chance you could go round and give him a slap DDDog1
  • Score: 8

3:10pm Sat 11 Jan 14

Finbarr Finkelstein says...

He will continue to drive and when he gets caught he will deny knowing he was disqualified. It looks like the court has relied on his girlfriend as an interpreter.
A fully qualified linguist should have been employed.
He will continue to drive and when he gets caught he will deny knowing he was disqualified. It looks like the court has relied on his girlfriend as an interpreter. A fully qualified linguist should have been employed. Finbarr Finkelstein
  • Score: 2

8:39am Sun 12 Jan 14

Dai Rear says...

_Bryan_ wrote:
Woodgnome wrote:
Jonnytrouble wrote:
Woodgnome wrote:
taz329 wrote: I know this idiot and where he works and his driving is horrendous. People like this will kill someone one day. 4 months ban is a joke an absolute joke!!
He should have been charged with dangerous driving which carries up to 2 years imprisonment. What were the Police thinking - public protection completely failed by them in this case?
Not the Police out of there hands, case went to a soft Magistrates court he can't speak English properly and his girl friend did the pleading and ' begging ' ! HE got off this one very, very lightly...If as someone on here said that knows this idiot saying that he drive mad and gets back behind the wheel, next time we could be hearing of a Death or Deaths ?
Nonsense - if the Police don't bring the charges the Court can only deal with what he's been charged with.
The charge would actually be decided by the CPS rather than the police. In most criminal cases, the police will present their evidence and the CPS will decide what offence will reach court.

However, I'm not sure if even this procedure is followed where someone is caught speeding by a gatso camera. It wouldn't surprise me if it was entirely automated with no discreion applied regarding the particular offence someone is charged with.
You're right. Summonses are issued. It doesn't initially go through CPS. At some point it should pass through their hands, but usually only at the level of "Associate Prosecutor" an unqualified person allowed to appear in court like the TV licence prosecutor or the electricity company person.
[quote][p][bold]_Bryan_[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Woodgnome[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Jonnytrouble[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Woodgnome[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]taz329[/bold] wrote: I know this idiot and where he works and his driving is horrendous. People like this will kill someone one day. 4 months ban is a joke an absolute joke!![/p][/quote]He should have been charged with dangerous driving which carries up to 2 years imprisonment. What were the Police thinking - public protection completely failed by them in this case?[/p][/quote]Not the Police out of there hands, case went to a soft Magistrates court he can't speak English properly and his girl friend did the pleading and ' begging ' ! HE got off this one very, very lightly...If as someone on here said that knows this idiot saying that he drive mad and gets back behind the wheel, next time we could be hearing of a Death or Deaths ?[/p][/quote]Nonsense - if the Police don't bring the charges the Court can only deal with what he's been charged with.[/p][/quote]The charge would actually be decided by the CPS rather than the police. In most criminal cases, the police will present their evidence and the CPS will decide what offence will reach court. However, I'm not sure if even this procedure is followed where someone is caught speeding by a gatso camera. It wouldn't surprise me if it was entirely automated with no discreion applied regarding the particular offence someone is charged with.[/p][/quote]You're right. Summonses are issued. It doesn't initially go through CPS. At some point it should pass through their hands, but usually only at the level of "Associate Prosecutor" an unqualified person allowed to appear in court like the TV licence prosecutor or the electricity company person. Dai Rear
  • Score: 1

10:24am Sun 12 Jan 14

regaturn says...

The court system has yet again been exposed as a joke, this case took 8 months to get to the court-Why?
The court system has yet again been exposed as a joke, this case took 8 months to get to the court-Why? regaturn
  • Score: 2

12:45pm Tue 14 Jan 14

Cymru Am Beth says...

richie55 wrote:
Woodgnome wrote:
The penalty imposed was far too low. That speed in 30mph warrants immediate imprisonment.
I agree. If the is not a case of dangerous driving I dont know what is!
Was probably easier to charge him with the lesser offence to get a conviction.
The Police and CPS should be ashamed of themselves, totally unfit for purpose.
[quote][p][bold]richie55[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Woodgnome[/bold] wrote: The penalty imposed was far too low. That speed in 30mph warrants immediate imprisonment.[/p][/quote]I agree. If the is not a case of dangerous driving I dont know what is![/p][/quote]Was probably easier to charge him with the lesser offence to get a conviction. The Police and CPS should be ashamed of themselves, totally unfit for purpose. Cymru Am Beth
  • Score: 2

9:49pm Wed 15 Jan 14

bugsy93 says...

Just proves that how our magistrates are out of touch with the real world.
A lorry driver who makes a genuine mistake with his tachograph would probably get fined a couple of months wages for trying to do a days work to earn a living. Then someone like this deliberately drives like a lunatic putting lives at risk gets a poultry sentence.
Our judicial system urgently needs some common sense injected into it.
Just proves that how our magistrates are out of touch with the real world. A lorry driver who makes a genuine mistake with his tachograph would probably get fined a couple of months wages for trying to do a days work to earn a living. Then someone like this deliberately drives like a lunatic putting lives at risk gets a poultry sentence. Our judicial system urgently needs some common sense injected into it. bugsy93
  • Score: -1

9:24am Thu 16 Jan 14

Woodgnome says...

bugsy93 wrote:
Just proves that how our magistrates are out of touch with the real world.
A lorry driver who makes a genuine mistake with his tachograph would probably get fined a couple of months wages for trying to do a days work to earn a living. Then someone like this deliberately drives like a lunatic putting lives at risk gets a poultry sentence.
Our judicial system urgently needs some common sense injected into it.
P.S. Quite right but what's a poultry sentence? To be force fed KFC's?
[quote][p][bold]bugsy93[/bold] wrote: Just proves that how our magistrates are out of touch with the real world. A lorry driver who makes a genuine mistake with his tachograph would probably get fined a couple of months wages for trying to do a days work to earn a living. Then someone like this deliberately drives like a lunatic putting lives at risk gets a poultry sentence. Our judicial system urgently needs some common sense injected into it.[/p][/quote]P.S. Quite right but what's a poultry sentence? To be force fed KFC's? Woodgnome
  • Score: 2

11:26pm Mon 20 Jan 14

Dee-Gee says...

I don't understand why people get upset about speed cameras being placed so's to generate revenue.

It's a tax on people who break the law! What could be better than that?
I don't understand why people get upset about speed cameras being placed so's to generate revenue. It's a tax on people who break the law! What could be better than that? Dee-Gee
  • Score: 0

3:48pm Thu 23 Jan 14

pen-y-fan says...

The immigrants that drive over here, can they actually READ English road signs?.. As was said, this man could hardly speak English.. Have we got thousands of drivers on our roads that have NO IDEA what our traffic signs are telling them?..
The immigrants that drive over here, can they actually READ English road signs?.. As was said, this man could hardly speak English.. Have we got thousands of drivers on our roads that have NO IDEA what our traffic signs are telling them?.. pen-y-fan
  • Score: 0

5:50pm Mon 27 Jan 14

bravoscar says...

You don't need to read road signs.
Millions was spent so anyone whatever country could understand them.
30 sign is the same in Spain Germany etc etc.
This blokes obviously an idiot with a name to match.
Throw it over the side and hope it can't swim!
You don't need to read road signs. Millions was spent so anyone whatever country could understand them. 30 sign is the same in Spain Germany etc etc. This blokes obviously an idiot with a name to match. Throw it over the side and hope it can't swim! bravoscar
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree