Jump to content
IGNORED

Dean Saunders (Merged)


Bristol Rob

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, RedM said:

That copper was more than patient, I would have thrown him in the cells when he started his nonsense. He was clearly playing for time and hoping he would sober up enough for the test to show negative. What a Dick, what makes him think he is above the law. I hope they throw the book at him.

Drink driving and the devastation it causes is horrendous. I am appalled people think they can do this still.

It’s funny how they have never done it before and should be catching real criminals.https://youtu.be/306MpG3YSyE

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Absolute tit. There is no excuse for drink driving. I’m not too surprised that he acted in such an entitled way. As for this whole ‘interfere with medication’ rubbish; that shouldn’t matter even if true because the bottom line is you are operating something with the potential to be a massive death machine, while inebriated.

Hope he gets what he deserves and that he can't buy his way out of it with a good lawyer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, glos old boy said:

Free after a day pending an appeal ........what is wrong with this country:gaah:

I don't see why that matters; it's not like he's a violent criminal who is just going to do it again straight away.

Why does it make a difference whether he serves his sentence now or in a year's time as long as the penalty is the same?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, glos old boy said:

Free after a day pending an appeal ........what is wrong with this country:gaah:

He’s pleaded guilty and appealing against his sentence as he has the absolute right to do

What is your understanding of justice if you have to serve that sentence before the appeal can be heard 

Brilliant ........

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, BobBobSuperBob said:

He’s pleaded guilty and appealing against his sentence as he has the absolute right to do

What is your understanding of justice if you have to serve that sentence before the appeal can be heard 

Brilliant ........

That'd be fine but most convicted criminals have to win their appeal before they get released don't they?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Robin1988 said:

That'd be fine but most convicted criminals have to win their appeal before they get released don't they?

Depends on the seriousness of the offence they’ve been convicted of , and a whole host of factors 

If convicted of murder , rape , armed robbery etc etc you may struggle to persuade a court to bail you pending an appeal !

Sounds to me the Judge has taken a dislike to Saunders and not sentenced him on the offence and circumstances personally

(He would serve 5 weeks and the appeal is set for October so he would have already have served his sentence by the appeal date)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, BobBobSuperBob said:

Depends on the seriousness of the offence they’ve been convicted of , and a whole host of factors 

If convicted of murder , rape , armed robbery etc etc you may struggle to persuade a court to bail you pending an appeal !

Sounds to me the Judge has taken a dislike to Saunders and not sentenced him on the offence and circumstances personally

(He would serve 5 weeks and the appeal is set for October so he would have already have served his sentence by the appeal date)

 

So to you it sounds like the judge has taken a dislike to him?  Does that mean you think 10weeks (actually only 5 locked up) imprisonment is harsh? 

I'd have thought another month or two on top would have been more acceptable, ..

He's appealing against 5weeks (effectively) what was he thinking appropriate  ffs?  A week at Butlins and a guest appearance as a red-coat perhaps? 

Hope on appeal the sentence is deemed too lenient and increased (for the cheek of appealing) rather than any reduction.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, WhistleHappy said:

So to you it sounds like the judge has taken a dislike to him?  Does that mean you think 10weeks (actually only 5 locked up) imprisonment is harsh? 

I'd have thought another month or two on top would have been more acceptable, ..

He's appealing against 5weeks (effectively) what was he thinking appropriate  ffs?  A week at Butlins and a guest appearance as a red-coat perhaps? 

Hope on appeal the sentence is deemed too lenient and increased (for the cheek of appealing) rather than any reduction.

 

Firstly the judge talked about a deterrent sentence because he was a public figure (Something I totally disagree with)

Secondly , if you ended up before a court, I assume you would want to be treated fairly and in line with others who pass through the court system for the same offence ?

if you can find many examples of anyone being jailed for 10 weeks for refusing or failing to provide a test , good luck

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, BobBobSuperBob said:

Firstly the judge talked about a deterrent sentence because he was a public figure (Something I totally disagree with)

Secondly , if you ended up before a court, I assume you would want to be treated fairly and in line with others who pass through the court system for the same offence ?

if you can find many examples of anyone being jailed for 10 weeks for refusing or failing to provide a test , good luck

The bloke was rat-arsed... If he hadn't been stopped who knows what might have happened, (probably got home, got away with it, and done the same thing again with a misguided belief that 'he can handle it') or maybe the first the police would have known about it was being called to a fatal road 'accident' …. How many families have been devastated by the drunken actions if 'nice' guys who have just gad one too many and taken a chance behind the wheel. 

His lucky day getting caught … & possibly lucky for an innocent family had his drive gone wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, WhistleHappy said:

The bloke was rat-arsed... If he hadn't been stopped who knows what might have happened, (probably got home, got away with it, and done the same thing again with a misguided belief that 'he can handle it') or maybe the first the police would have known about it was being called to a fatal road 'accident' …. How many families have been devastated by the drunken actions if 'nice' guys who have just gad one too many and taken a chance behind the wheel. 

His lucky day getting caught … & possibly lucky for an innocent family had his drive gone wrong.

You are missing the point 

You may well have valid points about sentencing for drink drive offences (And like it or not there is no evidence that he was ‘rat arsed’ though you and I may believe that is likely )

Lobbying MPs etc is the method to do so if you feel strongly 

Deam Saunders , the same as anyone , has the right to be treated and sentenced in a Fair way and in accordance with normal sentencing in these cases & circumstances ,

not go to jail,  because he’s Dean Saunders 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, BobBobSuperBob said:

You are missing the point 

You may well have valid points about sentencing for drink drive offences (And like it or not there is no evidence that he was ‘rat arsed’ though you and I may believe that is likely )

Lobbying MPs etc is the method to do so if you feel strongly 

Deam Saunders , the same as anyone , has the right to be treated and sentenced in a Fair way and in accordance with normal sentencing in these cases & circumstances ,

not go to jail,  because he’s Dean Saunders 

Think the offence comes under sentencing guidelines of Category 1:

(specimen - Deliberate refusal/failure) …

(High level of Impairment) …

(aggravating factor - Evidence of unacceptable standard of driving) ...

Cat 1 starting point 12weeks prison... 

Saunders got 10weeks (maybe reduced to 10 due to 'personal mitigating factors? 

https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/offences/magistrates-court/item/fail-to-provide-specimen-for-analysis-driveattempt-to-drive-revised-2017/ 

 

No I dont think someone in the public eye should suffer higher punishment (than Tom Dick or Harry) because of that. 

Sentencing should be a level playing field for everyone, looking the above guidelines around the offence of failing to provide a specimen  … it appears that under the law the sentence is in line with the guidelines for everyone..

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, WhistleHappy said:

Think the offence comes under sentencing guidelines of Category 1:

(specimen - Deliberate refusal/failure) …

(High level of Impairment) …

(aggravating factor - Evidence of unacceptable standard of driving) ...

Cat 1 starting point 12weeks prison... 

Saunders got 10weeks (maybe reduced to 10 due to 'personal mitigating factors? 

https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/offences/magistrates-court/item/fail-to-provide-specimen-for-analysis-driveattempt-to-drive-revised-2017/ 

 

No I dont think someone in the public eye should suffer higher punishment (than Tom Dick or Harry) because of that. 

Sentencing should be a level playing field for everyone, looking the above guidelines around the offence of failing to provide a specimen  … it appears that under the law the sentence is in line with the guidelines for everyone..

 

 

Without getting embroiled into a legal debate I’d submit that there is no evidence of high level of impairment as a sample was never obtained

You also need to go to ‘The approach to the imposition of a custodial sentence’

I’m not excusing Saunders in anyway but I think he’s got reasonable grounds for an appeal 

He was also disqualified for 2 1/2 yrs 

 

If you are going to jail somebody for drink driving fine , but be consistent and ensure custodial sentences for the burglars , street robbers and numerous other vermin

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, WhistleHappy said:

The bloke was rat-arsed... If he hadn't been stopped who knows what might have happened, (probably got home, got away with it, and done the same thing again with a misguided belief that 'he can handle it') or maybe the first the police would have known about it was being called to a fatal road 'accident' …. How many families have been devastated by the drunken actions if 'nice' guys who have just gad one too many and taken a chance behind the wheel. 

His lucky day getting caught … & possibly lucky for an innocent family had his drive gone wrong.

Spot on,it’s all fun until you kill someone,of course you will get the usual people saying he made a mistake and who hasn’t blah blah bollox 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, BobBobSuperBob said:

Without getting embroiled into a legal debate I’d submit that there is no evidence of high level of impairment as a sample was never obtained

You also need to go to ‘The approach to the imposition of a custodial sentence’

I’m not excusing Saunders in anyway but I think he’s got reasonable grounds for an appeal 

He was also disqualified for 2 1/2 yrs 

 

If you are going to jail somebody for drink driving fine , but be consistent and ensure custodial sentences for the burglars , street robbers and numerous other vermin

Burglars and robbers are not driving a ton of metal about that will kill you in a instant 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, joe jordans teeth said:

Simple answer is like Scotland no alcohol while driving,lock them all up

I was in Scotland last week for the Foos and hired a car to pop over to Edinborough (lovely city) and didnt even consider having a drink due to their stricter drink drive laws. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, WhistleHappy said:

Think the offence comes under sentencing guidelines of Category 1:

(specimen - Deliberate refusal/failure) …

(High level of Impairment) …

(aggravating factor - Evidence of unacceptable standard of driving) ...

Cat 1 starting point 12weeks prison... 

Saunders got 10weeks (maybe reduced to 10 due to 'personal mitigating factors? 

https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/offences/magistrates-court/item/fail-to-provide-specimen-for-analysis-driveattempt-to-drive-revised-2017/ 

 

No I dont think someone in the public eye should suffer higher punishment (than Tom Dick or Harry) because of that. 

Sentencing should be a level playing field for everyone, looking the above guidelines around the offence of failing to provide a specimen  … it appears that under the law the sentence is in line with the guidelines for everyone..

 

 

Always appreciative of a well evidenced argument. Thumbs up. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, WhistleHappy said:

Think the offence comes under sentencing guidelines of Category 1:

(specimen - Deliberate refusal/failure) …

(High level of Impairment) …

(aggravating factor - Evidence of unacceptable standard of driving) ...

Cat 1 starting point 12weeks prison... 

Saunders got 10weeks (maybe reduced to 10 due to 'personal mitigating factors? 

https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/offences/magistrates-court/item/fail-to-provide-specimen-for-analysis-driveattempt-to-drive-revised-2017/ 

 

No I dont think someone in the public eye should suffer higher punishment (than Tom Dick or Harry) because of that. 

Sentencing should be a level playing field for everyone, looking the above guidelines around the offence of failing to provide a specimen  … it appears that under the law the sentence is in line with the guidelines for everyone..

 

 

This

 

I dont care how famous or how much money someone has, if you to take away someones freedom for any period of time then it should be the same for everyone. I disagreed with the sentence Booker etc got for the same reason. I have never agreed with making examples and never will.  The law is supposed to be fair and in this case I dont think it is. Now if everyone got sent down for this I for one would not have a problem. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, BobBobSuperBob said:

Without getting embroiled into a legal debate I’d submit that there is no evidence of high level of impairment as a sample was never obtained

You also need to go to ‘The approach to the imposition of a custodial sentence’

I’m not excusing Saunders in anyway but I think he’s got reasonable grounds for an appeal 

He was also disqualified for 2 1/2 yrs 

 

If you are going to jail somebody for drink driving fine , but be consistent and ensure custodial sentences for the burglars , street robbers and numerous other vermin

Agree with your last point entirely, often dismays me when watching 'fly on the wall' tv progs with police (Intercepters/ Call The Police etc) . After witnessing reckless car chases often causing hundreds/thousands of pounds worth of damage in the process, peoples lives at risk, coppers risking their own lives trying to apprehend the toe rags etc etc, only to hear totally derisory sanctions imposed by the courts (and that's even if the offenders actually get charged at all) when the prog gives the outcome updates. Thats after watching this stuff and thinking 'they've done it now', sure to be looking at serious prison time, heavy fines etc for that, and the shits get away with next to nothing (or even nothing at all).  I'm amazed sometimes that coppers stay in the job when after risking life and limb catching the idiots next to f' all comes of it.

We're into the realms of contacting MP's etc now, as you referred to earlier, the law is often an inadequate arse, the starting point of any case involving costly damage to, police cars, street furniture, walls etc etc, plus the costs of getting the offender to court and medical treatment, I think should be totted up and an order to repay such costs issued, (payments stopped a source from wages, benefits etc, even if repayments take many years), why should insurance companies, councils, police, NHS, the public pick up the bill?  … then the offense itself should be dealt with and realistic sentences imposed on the guilty.

Maybe then, coppers will feel better supported, the public will be safer, money may be available to tackle the many crimes such as you've mentioned properly instead of going investigated due to lack of resources.. Anyone watching these programmes must be shocked at the depth of under resourcing  now being experienced by our emergency services, and how stretched and near to collapse the response system really is. 

When caught and found guilty, offenders really should 'pay the price' monetarily and through deprivation of liberty.. we'll all e better off then.

Theres something wrong when a minor traffic infringement, parking, straying into a bus lane briefly and accidentally (a few mins inside restricted hours) etc gets picked up on cctv and automatic fines land on doorsteps... While at the same time some of these proper criminals even when caught get away with minimal punishment (if any) of less than a standard parking ticket

Driving pissed - caught - 5weeks inside seems fairly minimal to me... & deserved.

While traditional crime and criminal activity I agree should carry tougher sanctions. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, WhistleHappy said:

Agree with your last point entirely, often dismays me when watching 'fly on the wall' tv progs with police (Intercepters/ Call The Police etc) . After witnessing reckless car chases often causing hundreds/thousands of pounds worth of damage in the process, peoples lives at risk, coppers risking their own lives trying to apprehend the toe rags etc etc, only to hear totally derisory sanctions imposed by the courts (and that's even if the offenders actually get charged at all) when the prog gives the outcome updates. Thats after watching this stuff and thinking 'they've done it now', sure to be looking at serious prison time, heavy fines etc for that, and the shits get away with next to nothing (or even nothing at all).  I'm amazed sometimes that coppers stay in the job when after risking life and limb catching the idiots next to f' all comes of it.

We're into the realms of contacting MP's etc now, as you referred to earlier, the law is often an inadequate arse, the starting point of any case involving costly damage to, police cars, street furniture, walls etc etc, plus the costs of getting the offender to court and medical treatment, I think should be totted up and an order to repay such costs issued, (payments stopped a source from wages, benefits etc, even if repayments take many years), why should insurance companies, councils, police, NHS, the public pick up the bill?  … then the offense itself should be dealt with and realistic sentences imposed on the guilty.

Maybe then, coppers will feel better supported, the public will be safer, money may be available to tackle the many crimes such as you've mentioned properly instead of going investigated due to lack of resources.. Anyone watching these programmes must be shocked at the depth of under resourcing  now being experienced by our emergency services, and how stretched and near to collapse the response system really is. 

When caught and found guilty, offenders really should 'pay the price' monetarily and through deprivation of liberty.. we'll all e better off then.

Theres something wrong when a minor traffic infringement, parking, straying into a bus lane briefly and accidentally (a few mins inside restricted hours) etc gets picked up on cctv and automatic fines land on doorsteps... While at the same time some of these proper criminals even when caught get away with minimal punishment (if any) of less than a standard parking ticket

Driving pissed - caught - 5weeks inside seems fairly minimal to me... & deserved.

While traditional crime and criminal activity I agree should carry tougher sanctions. 

Agreed

Though the cost of putting someone in prison is eye watering , plus there simply isn’t room to lock up all but the most prolific or violent offenders 

 

Returning to Saunders , I had a look at the latest cases at Bristol Mag Court 

This was one of the first I came too

 

**** *****.  **** in Chipping Sodbury. Age 25

Pleaded guilty to driving over the drink-drive limit (112 mcg of alcohol in 100ml of breath) on ****** Drive in Yate on July **. He also pleaded guilty to failing to stop for the police. He was fined £307 and given 100 hours of unpaid work as a community punishment order, and banned from driving for 26 months

—————-

Failed to stop for Police and nearly four times over the limit -

Fine , Community Service & ban 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, BobBobSuperBob said:

Agreed

Though the cost of putting someone in prison is eye watering , plus there simply isn’t room to lock up all but the most prolific or violent offenders 

 

Returning to Saunders , I had a look at the latest cases at Bristol Mag Court 

This was one of the first I came too

 

**** *****.  **** in Chipping Sodbury. Age 25

Pleaded guilty to driving over the drink-drive limit (112 mcg of alcohol in 100ml of breath) on ****** Drive in Yate on July **. He also pleaded guilty to failing to stop for the police. He was fined £307 and given 100 hours of unpaid work as a community punishment order, and banned from driving for 26 months

—————-

Failed to stop for Police and nearly four times over the limit -

Fine , Community Service & ban 

….disgrace,  the CPS should step in and appeal such cases/leniency … and judges/magistrates decisions should be scrutinised by their peers even when not officially appealed …. Time for Judicial VAR system? 

(in itself, failing to stop should carry a minimum of at least a week inside, tagging and curfews etc, make it a proper deterrent)  

That said, I hope the 100hrs unpaid entails a genuine bit of graft and community benefit, scrubbing graffiti, collecting bags of doggy doo's that have been left decorating branches of trees etc... scraping up the unbagged stuff!  Litter picking sweeping pavements in hi vis vests in their own area (what would the neighbours think? Oh shame!) Needs to be meaningful.

Hey we agree in some things eh. 

(well I've been too serious for far too long today, (I think I must be going down with something ..no pun intended) Hopefully a return to pointless and trivial WH bollocks will resume shortly .. :) ttfn )

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...