No surprise then...

[Cliphead]

Texting peer released from prison.

The Court of Appeal has released a Labour peer who was jailed for 12 weeks for sending and receiving text messages while driving minutes before he was involved in a fatal motorway crash.

Lord Ahmed, 51, was charged with dangerous driving after using his mobile phone shortly before hitting a stationary car in the fast lane of the M1, killing Martyn Gombar, 28, from Leigh, Greater Manchester.

Ahmed pleaded guilty to the charge and was handed a 12-week jail term by sentencing judge Mr Justice Wilkie last month.

Linky

[Lockhouse]

I'm not surprised but I am appalled.

[shaunbhoy]

Texting peer released from prison.

O Gr8

LOL

[TykeMerc]

Let's see:-

Labour Party
Seat in the House of Lords
Muslim "community leader"
Kills some ordinary, unimportant white non muslim person as a result of careless driving

It appears to be a completely fair and proportionate punishment.

[expat]

Let's see:-

Labour Party
Seat in the House of Lords
Muslim "community leader"
Kills some ordinary, unimportant white non muslim person as a result of careless driving

It appears to be a completely fair and proportionate punishment.

WRONG! Read the news reports. The 2 items are completely unconnected:

1. he texted while driving, and for that was done for dangerous driving.

2. some time later, the car he was driving crashed into a car that was stationary in the fast lane after its driver (who had been drinking) crashed into the central reservation.

The only connection is that it was the second incident, for which he was not to blame, that led to the normal automatic research into his mobile phone record, which uncovered the first incident.

So get your facts right before opening the mouth, and lay off the racist falsified claptrap please.

[TykeMerc]

WRONG! Read the news reports. The 2 items are completely unconnected:

1. he texted while driving, and for that was done for dangerous driving.

2. some time later, the car he was driving crashed into a car that was stationary in the fast lane after its driver (who had been drinking) crashed into the central reservation.

The only connection is that it was the second incident, for which he was not to blame, that led to the normal automatic research into his mobile phone record, which uncovered the first incident.

So get your facts right before opening the mouth, and lay off the racist falsified claptrap please.

I have read the reports.

1. If he had been texting while driving there's no proof that he wasn't reading/browsing his texts at the time of the "accident", any kind of texting activity is clearly not paying due care and attention while driving.
2. If he had been paying attention he would not had crashed into the stationary vehicle and caused the other persons death. The fact that the other person had been drinking is irrelevant to the Labour Peers inability to see and avoid the other car.
3. Causing death in avoidable circumstances (by paying proper attention to the road for instance) should carry a sensible and proportionate penalty and typically does. In this case the offender is a Labour Muslim Peer who according to the BBC local reporting yesterday was released early because his imprisonment was affecting his "community work" and amazingly his penalty was remarkably low in the first place.
4. Yes I am cynical about his treatment as a result of him being a Labour Politician with a peerage and the muslim card to play.

As someone who lives in West Yorkshire seeing the muslim population being treated differently by the Police and law is a daily occurence, it's not in any way surprising to me that a Muslim Peer has received preferential treatment.

Incidentally I made no mention of the ethnicity of the Labour Muslim Peer who killed someone else because of his careless driving, shove your racist claims in your orifice of personal preference.

[sasguru]

I have read the reports.

1. If he had been texting while driving there's no proof that he wasn't reading/browsing his texts at the time of the "accident", any kind of texting activity is clearly not paying due care and attention while driving.
.

Surely the presumption must be one of innocence i.e. there was no evidence he was doing anything with his phone at the time of the accident.
The pardon seems to a be a little too much; however I have very little sympathy with the drunk guy who crashed his car on the central reservation.

[denver2k]

As someone who lives in West Yorkshire seeing the muslim population being treated differently by the Police and law is a daily occurence.

Ohh i feel sorry for you then.

Your comments would be completely different if you were in the world of Boris Johnson, the true multiculturism where everyone live together with eternal love and harmony......

[sasguru]

Ohh i feel sorry for you then.

Your comments would be completely different if you were in the world of Boris Johnson, the true multiculturism where everyone live together with eternal love and harmony......

You say that for a joke but I think London is far more integrated than some areas of the north which seem to be ghettoised. This is not because people are somehow "better" but because the over-crowding in London means people have to live cheek-by-jowl and interact whether they like it or not. The ever-changing nature of London means ghettoes don't last long.

[expat]

The Dangerous Driving charge was for texting while driving. It was not connected to the accident, which was not found to be connected, and for which he was not found to blame.

Of course there is no proof that he wasn't reading his texts at the time of the accident. Where does that stand in an English court? "There is no proof that you weren't........"