News1 min ago
Carlos Tevez Gets Community Service Order
Driving while disqualified and no insurance.
250 hours Community Service (probably teaching kids how to kick a ball).
Is that usual?
250 hours Community Service (probably teaching kids how to kick a ball).
Is that usual?
Answers
No it is not at all amazing, sir.prize. Taking the emotion out of this and looking at the sentencing guidelines (under which Tevez was sentenced) you will find that the usual “Starting Point” for the offence is a high level community order. Only if the offence takes place within a short time of the imposition of the ban (or if there are any...
12:52 Wed 03rd Apr 2013
Allegedly Tevez was earning £286,000 a week AFTER TAX two years ago.
Source: http:// www.dis cogs.co m/group s/topic /223017
And he gets fined £60 for driving while disqualified.
So that's what Merlin the Magician solicitor Gwyn Lewis has managed for him.
It should have been a custodial sentence.
Amazing isn't it?
Source: http://
And he gets fined £60 for driving while disqualified.
So that's what Merlin the Magician solicitor Gwyn Lewis has managed for him.
It should have been a custodial sentence.
Amazing isn't it?
No it is not at all amazing, sir.prize.
Taking the emotion out of this and looking at the Magistrates’ sentencing guidelines (under which Tevez was sentenced) you will find that the usual “Starting Point” for the offence is a high level community order. Only if the offence takes place within a short time of the imposition of the ban (or if there are any other aggravating features) should custody be considered. Being a highly paid footballer does not count as an aggravating feature and there seems little in the few details of the offence which have been provided to either aggravate or mitigate the offence.
Tevez was indeed sentenced to a high level community order (300 hours is the maximum that Magistrates can impose and he had to be given credit for his guilty plea).The £1,000 fine was probably for the offence of driving without insurance (which nearly always accompanies driving whilst disqualified).
Mr Tevez’s sentence seems entirely in line with sentencing guidelines. The blame for his apparent lenient sentence should be placed at the door of the Sentencing Council rather than the Magistrates. Less than five years ago the “starting Point” for the offence was immediate custody but, along with many other offences, the guidelines have seen a gradual but deliberate suppression of penalties.
Taking the emotion out of this and looking at the Magistrates’ sentencing guidelines (under which Tevez was sentenced) you will find that the usual “Starting Point” for the offence is a high level community order. Only if the offence takes place within a short time of the imposition of the ban (or if there are any other aggravating features) should custody be considered. Being a highly paid footballer does not count as an aggravating feature and there seems little in the few details of the offence which have been provided to either aggravate or mitigate the offence.
Tevez was indeed sentenced to a high level community order (300 hours is the maximum that Magistrates can impose and he had to be given credit for his guilty plea).The £1,000 fine was probably for the offence of driving without insurance (which nearly always accompanies driving whilst disqualified).
Mr Tevez’s sentence seems entirely in line with sentencing guidelines. The blame for his apparent lenient sentence should be placed at the door of the Sentencing Council rather than the Magistrates. Less than five years ago the “starting Point” for the offence was immediate custody but, along with many other offences, the guidelines have seen a gradual but deliberate suppression of penalties.
Probably for the same reason that he spends money on expensive cars and big houses - because he can.
Just a bit of additional information. Very few people receive custodial sentences for a first offence of driving whilst disqualified. There has to be considerable aggravation (such as, for example, being caught driving away from court following the disqualification, or stealing a vehicle, being involved in a police chase, causing a bad accident, repeatedly offending, that sort of thing) before custody is considered.
It is completely wrong in my view. Driving whilst disqualified is a deliberate act which the driver has chosen to undertake contrary to a court order. It is not something you can do "recklessly" or by accident. But as I said earlier sentencing guidelines have gradually suppressed sentences available to courts for many offences in recent years.
Just a bit of additional information. Very few people receive custodial sentences for a first offence of driving whilst disqualified. There has to be considerable aggravation (such as, for example, being caught driving away from court following the disqualification, or stealing a vehicle, being involved in a police chase, causing a bad accident, repeatedly offending, that sort of thing) before custody is considered.
It is completely wrong in my view. Driving whilst disqualified is a deliberate act which the driver has chosen to undertake contrary to a court order. It is not something you can do "recklessly" or by accident. But as I said earlier sentencing guidelines have gradually suppressed sentences available to courts for many offences in recent years.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.