Lord Ahmed. Justice?

[Everhelpful]

Out after 16 days. Justice been done or because of who he is?

[paraffin]

I thought he got 6 months? So, by my faltering calculations, should he not still have been banged away for at least another 2 months?

[Everhelpful]

12 WEEKS apparently,paraffin.

[Nosha123]

wasnt he the guy who killed a driver whilst using his mobile phone! an insult to the bereaved family.
I would say its because of who he is.. and what he is!
The father sentenced to 12 months (I think) for speeding on his motorbike (and incidentally didnt kill or injure anyone!) should lodge a complaint!!!

[The Sherman]

NO NO NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO


if you read what happened before jumping on a website shouting stupid vitriol against everyone he DID NOT KILL ANYONE BECAUSE OF USING A MOBILE PHONE!

never ever happened! He was using it a few minutes before hwe crashed into someone.
therefore he should have been fined like eveyone else gets for using phone whilst driving

[Nosha123]

Hey Sherman - you are the one shouting IN CAPITALS...

It wasnt Stupid vitriol - I was asking a question div!

Hence the reason I said "wasnt he the guy who"

Take a chill pill and calm down some!

[The Sherman]

haha sorry we were having an argument at work about it and i think i just carried it over! i apologise sorry!

[Nosha123]

Apology accepted Sherman!
and thank you for answering my query about when he was using his phone!

Still feel awful for the bereaved family though! Must be tough for them hearing this news!

[Oneeyedvic]

Sherman - he was texting somebody 5 times in 17 miles. So travelling at around 50 mph - he text somebody every 4 minutes.

Now bear in mind that you can't tell if someone is texting - you can only tell if they have sent a text (mobile signal). A phone call is easy to prove - texting is impossible to prove with out an eye witness.

Also bear in mind that other drivers had seen the vehicle and managed to avoid it.

Lord Ahmed didn't avoid the person.

I wouldn't be surprised to know that he was texting - but it is something that can't be proved either way.

[rov1200]

I think we can put it down to La La land. (get it?)

[Whickerman]

No, he was given a prison sentence as an example.

He did not kill anyone due to texting - this was actually stated by the trial judge - and in fact the man acted perfectly after the accident. In any other scenario (ie one where he hadn't been texting before) he would've been hailed a hero.

[SgtDibble]

The fact is he is a Labour peer and he had a top legal team.
Compare him to the Motorcyclist jailed for SIX MONTHS for just speeding. He dosen't fall off , dosen't hurt anyone, is sober and has a licence and insuance.and is not texting anyone on his mobile.
People have been DRUNK and stolen a car and not got that kind of sentence

[paraffin]

Or compare it to the female motorist who recently was also jailed for drink/driving - no injuries caused etc, simply over the limit.

I'm not trying to minimise the offence of D+D, but it does seem a tad OTT when such an offender receives a similar sentence to someone whose actions behind the wheel have caused the life of another.

How does that saying go? "One Law for the rich etc etc etc

[taranis]

Positive proof one law for the rich one for the poor.
All record of his imprisonment to be deleted so it does not affect his future. THIS IS ALL WRONG.

[VHG]

When you read things like this you get really annoyed

"Lord Ahmed's barrister, Jeremy Baker QC, had argued the jail sentence could "irreparably and permanently" damage Lord Ahmed's ability to carry out community work in the future"

Maybe he should have thought of that before driving along at 70mph while texting people (even if he wasnt doing it the moment before he hit the person)

I think he was let off because he was Muslim.

After all we dont want to upset the Muslims do we.

[VHG]

Note also from the original court case:

"Labour life peer Lord Ahmed of Rotherham admitted in court sending and receiving five messages at 60mph on the M1"

And the judge said

"the 'prolonged, deliberate and highly dangerous driving' of the peer meant only jail time could be justified"

Surely for such a complete disregard for human life, being so arrogant and crass as to send and receive FIVE text messages while doing 60 mph on a motorway, only a jail sentence is appropriate.

I bet if it had been a road sweeper from Crewe doing it he would have got more than 6 months in prison, AND probably served most of it.

Again, one law for the famous another for the plebs.

[McMouse]

He'll probably claim compensation for abuse of his human rights.

[gina32]

oneeyedvic, if its impossible to tell, as you say without a witness, how is it that when my daughter lost her phone, several times, when i called up to cancel it i asked when was the last time it was used, so we would be able to tell if it was pinched or just lost, the provider told me exactly where when and who to and text or phone call

[ludwig]

Gina, the point is that they only have a record of messages that were sent, so they know the last one sent was a few minutes before the crash.
At the actual time of the impact it's not unreasonable to assume that he had one hand on the wheel, his eyes off the road, fiddling about typing in the next message.