Drink Driving not a crime if you're skinny

Bargain Hunter

Bargain Hunter

Although NSW has zero tolarance for P platers, a Sydney judge allowed a youth who returned 0.8 to be released without conviction.

Not only was she drunk, she did not display her P plates and she went through a red light. This is insanity, when are these judges going to be brought into line.

http://www.news.com.au/sundaytelegraph/story/0,22049,20661804-5001021,00.html

The public keeps calling for tougher penalties for P platers, something I don't agree with.

What needs to happen is that the existing laws be enforced and judges who make ridiculous rulings be sacked.

Andrew
 
G'day BH,

I couldn't agree more....
Bargain Hunter said:
What needs to happen is that the existing laws be enforced and judges who make ridiculous rulings be sacked
Click to expand...
Your comment brought back to me one of the stories in a John Laws book (was it the "Book of Uncommon Sense" - or something like that).

One story that sticks in my mind from that book related to a circus owner who was charged and fined when a lion escaped and terrorised a town. He was warned by the judge that he would face a jail term if he ever allowed this to recur.

John Laws then drew a parallel, saying that judges who release "wild animals" should themselves be detained if the "wild animal" they release ever re-offends.

My paraphrase doesn't do it justice (apologies to John Laws) but the story is a great read - and (if I recall correctly) the moral of the story was that judges would think twice before "hand-smacking" serial offenders.

I know this doesn't necessarily relate to this young lady (we don't know if she is a serial offender) - but, sheesh, we hear enough news of offenders who re-offend even while on bail over an earlier offence. Problem is, the more our judges let us down, the harder it becomes to retain law and order.

Regards,
 
I read things like this and it makes my blood boil! :mad:

Hows this for justice - 16 years ago I was 2 weeks off my wedding and just waved my fiance goodbye for a night out with his mates - 100 metres down the road he got slammed into a power pole by an 18 year old drunk P plater driver. My fiance died...court case for drunk teenager came up and despite the fact that he killed an innocent 22 year old and he got no jail time and only lost his license for 6 months, despite this being his 2nd offence!!!!

The guy walked out of court and the look of 'hahaha I beat it' is one I'll never forget, no apology, jack all except for his parents who did apologise profusely.

16 years later and I still read in the news how teenagers get let off and I just can't believe that nothing much has changed in our justice system. The judges have the power to send a powerful message to drunk drivers/ p platers etc and they're still hesitant for gosh knows what reason to do so.

Sack them all I say and bring judges in who aren't scared to use the full extent of the law which is at their disposal.

Kate
 
This is absolutely disgusting.

These offenders should not only go behind bars for a while, but they should be forced to, say, work in the morgue, and see first-hand what their stupidity can cause...

As for these Magistrates, they have too much power. This power needs to be taken away from them, and given to the people, in the form of more juries. It is much harder for a randomly-selected jury to be "bought out", unlike a single Magistrate...
 
Merovingian said:
This is absolutely disgusting.

These offenders should not only go behind bars for a while, but they should be forced to, say, work in the morgue, and see first-hand what their stupidity can cause...

As for these Magistrates, they have too much power. This power needs to be taken away from them, and given to the people, in the form of more juries. It is much harder for a randomly-selected jury to be "bought out", unlike a single Magistrate...
Click to expand...

Yes, I agree...the jury system definitely has some advantages. I don't think these young people who deliberately flaunt the law, should be allowed a light penalty.
 
Rather then having serious offenders slunk around idly all day in the sick social system of a jail, where they are a further drain on society, I am a big believer in putting them in electronic chains and making them work in public view on socially beneficial projects, this would at least be some sort of contribution for the cost of their incarceration....


And I say this as someone who has gone DUI. Having to go to court was enough of an embarassment for me to never ever mess with drink and driving again. I also have to admit that I hadn't understood what a standard drink of wine was before I was caught.

I had a vague belief that restaurants served a std alcoholic drink.....to my surprise and horror, after being caught, I found out most restaurants serve up 1.5 to 2 std drinks per glass.

When I go out now, I always almost ask the bar staff or waiters how many std drinks they put into a glass of wine. Of the 30 odd I have asked, not one has known that a std alcoholic drink of 12.5% wine is only 100mls. And several went and asked all the other staff, managers, and publicans.

Here's a link for anyone interested.
http://www.alcohol.gov.au/internet/alcohol/publishing.nsf/Content/drinksguide-cnt/$File/drinksguide.pdf
 
Justkate said:
I read things like this and it makes my blood boil! :mad:

Hows this for justice - 16 years ago I was 2 weeks off my wedding and just waved my fiance goodbye for a night out with his mates - 100 metres down the road he got slammed into a power pole by an 18 year old drunk P plater driver. My fiance died...court case for drunk teenager came up and despite the fact that he killed an innocent 22 year old and he got no jail time and only lost his license for 6 months, despite this being his 2nd offence!!!!

The guy walked out of court and the look of 'hahaha I beat it' is one I'll never forget, no apology, jack all except for his parents who did apologise profusely.

16 years later and I still read in the news how teenagers get let off and I just can't believe that nothing much has changed in our justice system. The judges have the power to send a powerful message to drunk drivers/ p platers etc and they're still hesitant for gosh knows what reason to do so.

Sack them all I say and bring judges in who aren't scared to use the full extent of the law which is at their disposal.

Kate
Click to expand...

So sorry to hear this story Kate! This has really touched me, sounds like you have been through alot. I hope you have found peace in your life since then.
 
Oh Kate, that is just so sad. So hard to live with. And to see the person just walk away like that!

I dont think anything will change a judges mind until they are directly impacted personally by it.

And they wonder why kids are killing themselves (and others) on the road.

If the Govts were serious about the road toll they would not let P drivers drive with other P drivers! That is the law in NZ, why dont they do that here?? (and I am the mother of a 16 year old P driver who will not allow him to drive other P platers in his car, and will not allow him to be a passenger in other P driver's cars!)
 
Locally police and judges are clamping down on drunk and disorderly. A local girl was just put on a work based community order for 6 months for brawling outside night club. The judge said she wanted to see her cleaning spew off the pavement and shopfronts and picking up cigarette butts on the weekends. Fair call.
But the same weak rulings are being reported in the same paper for p-plater hoons getting done DUI. Know some real idiots who need to be locked up for a bit to learn the lesson, but it ain't happening over here either.

That is full on Kate, a sad story that is way to common in this country, all the best.

GJ
 
Perhaps the thread ought to be called -

Drink Driving Not a Crime if You're Wealthy / Well-Connected

The issue is alot bigger than some teenager getting off a drink-driving charge.

As much as we like to think that in Western societies there are fair trials and "one law for all", the reality is quite different.

Taken from the report linked in the first post:

Ms Rahe's barrister Chris Watson told the court of Ms Rahe's association with the Toppi family, who own Machiavelli restaurant, a favourite lunchtime haunt of Sydney's movers and shakers.

Ms Rahe is the partner of Walter Toppi and helps him run sister restaurant La Vecchia Cucina in Potts Point. She was driving home in a Mercedes van at 1.25am on Sunday, July 30 when she was caught going through a red light at New South Head Rd, Rose Bay.


She wasn't some pimply-faced teen driving home in a Subaru from working in her boyfriend's family's kebab shop in western sydney, who then gets defended by the cheapest lawyer available.

She quite obviously well-connected and those around her didn't want her forever soiled with a DUI charge. So they hired a Barrister who is very persuasive (and no doubt was very expensive) and maybe made a few phone calls. And just like magic, the problem dissapears.

Anyone else remember that Lady Sonia McMahon got off a similiar charge a few years back?

Or how John Singleton's barrister successfully argued that 160km/h on a motorway was safe because the Bentley he was in was capable of at least 260 km/h??

I'm not saying it is right or fair.

I'm just saying that is how it is.

M

ps. Kate, I'm sorry to read of your loss. :(
 
Last edited:
Pitt St said:
Perhaps the thread ought to be called -

Drink Driving Not a Crime if You're Wealthy / Well-Connected
Click to expand...

Hi Pitt St,

Yes, everyone is born equal... some are just more equal then others.

The point I was making is that there is a big outcry to introduce curfews, the number of passengers, more driver training... all to reduce the road toll from inexperienced drivers.

Yet there are plenty of laws and measures in place that if enforced would result in a reduction in the risk taking attitude of some drivers regardless of age.

There are laws that have no justification in being broken. I believe drink driving is one of those laws. If you drink don't drive. "I wasn't going to drink it just happened". Yeah right.

I personally believe that 3 years of driver training is plenty. When I got my licence it was 3 months on L's and a year of P's. There were however no penalty points, one conviction and it was gone, and yes I paid the price 3 months no licence. And no I wasn't tempted to drive with no licence, I relied on friends and public transport.

I've heard enough of bashing P platers. Not every hoon is a P plater, and not every P plater is a hoon. Don't punish everyone for the attitude of a few.

People should give young drivers a fair go, if they make a legitimate mistake on the road don't abuse them, lead by example be courteous and stick to the speed limit.

However if someone is caught breaking the law they shouldn't be treated with kid gloves. If it's a serious offence take their licence regardless of their personal influence.

If a judge cannot make this distinction then it's time to move them on.


Regards

Andrew
 
Agreed, my P driver son is an excellent driver. But laws arent made for excellent drivers they are made for the rest. And P drivers do appear markedly in the fatality rates (as do motor cyclists!) And when P drivers do things they do this in a big way.

My P driver son's car is in the crash repairs now. $5000 worth of damage! Why? My son parked his car, safely, and another P driver forgot his handbrake, on a hill, smashed into one car, crossed the road then smashed into my son's car. He had had it for 2 months! Big oops! Thankfully his insurance told me today they will cover it, in full!

The positive thing to be said about P drivers is that they will get better with experience and maturity. The opposite can be said of elderly drivers, but I guess that is a whole new question!

BTW, I am quite thin, and after 2 drinks, even with a meal and a 2 hour wait in between, I will blow close to .05. How do I know this - I was tested after a dinner with partner, where we shared a bottle of wine and 2 course meal. He usually has three drinks from the bottle, I have two if you know what I mean. On the way home I was pulled over and tested, and I had to wait with the Police for 15 minutes while they retested me! By which time the reading was lowered again. Scared me to death!
 
Pushka, you say above that you have two drinks from a wine bottle and your partner has three. Maybe you didn't check the link I posted above.


Hmmmmmmmm.....please indulge me here for a moment.....it might save you and hubby's driver's licence....



A standard alcoholic drink in Australia is defined as containing 10 grams of pure alcohol (ethyl alcohol). Doesn't matter whether it is scotch, beer, or wine, the std drink will contain 10 grams of ethyl alcohol. It is the number of 10 gram hits of ethyl alcohol that the police are measuring.

The specific gravity of ethyl alcohol, is 785grams/Litre = .785mg/ml.

Therefore, 10 grams of pure ethyl alcohol is always by volume, 10g /.785 mg/ml = 12.7mls

To find out how many mls in a standard drink of any alcoholic beverage, divide 12.7 mls by the alcoholic % of that drink....

Most wine is 12.5% alcohol. Therefore, 12.7mls / 12.5% = 101 mls...

Therefore a standard drink of wine is ~100mls

[For a full strength beer of 5.0%, 12.7mls/.05 = 254 mls.]

Now, there are 750 mls in a standard wine bottle.

If your partner and you share 5 drinks from a 750 ml bottle, you having 2, then you have had 2/5 * 750 mls = 300mls which is actually 3 standard drinks.

This is why you blow almost .05 2 hours after starting your drinking. You have had 1 more drink then recommended for a woman of median mass.

Now, most people I have met, including bar staff, publicans, and waiters of Brisbane's finer dining establishments, are hopelessly ignorant of what 100mls looks like, and therefore a standard alcoholic drink of wine.

I suggest everyone who likes a drop of wine measure out 100 mls using an accurately calibrated cooking cup.

Then put that 100mls into your favourite wine glass.... you'll be shocked...


Now, don't get me started on why it is almost impossible to lose weight when you are a moderate drinker.....well just briefly.......cos there are 100 Calories in 150 mls of wine..(1.5 std drinks)...and a woman must walk or jog 3.5 kms to burn that off.....men have to go 2.5km cos because they are heavier on average.
 
is there something we can do actively? i'm just bloody fed up with the system where justice is robbed from the vicitim! what the bloody hell wrong with our judges???

:mad:
 
Being only 5'2" and 50 kg...I also suffer from the "quickly inebriated syndrome". So I've solved the problem when I go out. I order a glass of wine, and a glass of ice. I put 1/2 the ice into the wine, and then pour 1/2 the wine into the ice glass. This means I can have 2 std drinks, albeit watered down...(hey! it's good for my skin), and still stay under the limit. All this whilst my friends can drink more if they choose. There's the added benefit of my wine not getting too warm in the tropics. Most of the wine Europeans give to their kids is also watered down.
 
So, in two hours, 2.5 drinks is still too much?

Crikeys, in the good old days, at 18 I could drive on a full licence and drink to .08! Guess we shouldnt be too tough on the youngies then!

Sailor - I think I would rather not drink than have watered down wine! Maybe I could add soda water to it instead - spritzer style. Bit hard to do with a bottle though! Worth a thought!
 
Pushka said:
Sailor - I think I would rather not drink than have watered down wine! Maybe I could add soda water to it instead - spritzer style. Bit hard to do with a bottle though! Worth a thought!
Click to expand...

Tis an acquired taste...takes about a week to adjust. Now I can't drink straight wine, as it tastes too strong.:)
 
Pushka, the publicised message is for women to have 1 standard drink per hour from the start. Men can have 2 in the first hour and 1 every hour after that....

Here's an informative link from Choice magazine explaining the gender difference.
http://www.choice.com.au/viewArticl...0563&tid=100008&p=3&title=Test:+Breathalysers

I think the whole matter of drinking limits has been very poorly communicated by authorities, as your response above confirms Pushka. :)

I spoke to a barrister before I went to court about at least not getting a DUI conviction recorded against me. The defence was to prove a majority of the reasonably minded public who drink are erroneous about what a standard drink is, as are most staff in alcohol serving establishments. Further, that it is unreasonably difficult to track one's intake of standard alcoholic drinks in establishments where the staff are ignorant about how much to pour, and glasses are not marked. He told me it was a valid argument, but would be an expensive avenue to go down. If I could afford it, I'd have considered it, as I think the authorities have failed to adequately educate, and licenced establishments are falling over in helping customers to track their alcoholic consumption.
 
Yes, you are right there Bruce. Actually, what scares me these days are the pre-mixed vodka/rum style drinks. In some of the sweeter ones (guava, watermelon, raspberry) there is no alcohol taste at all, yet they contain around 1.5 standard drinks I think. I can down one of these very quickly and wouldnt even think i'd had a drink. There is such a risk with these. I would give my teenage son one of these every so often (the vodka/cola ones, and before he got his licence) just so that he would know that they contain a great deal of alcohol but didnt taste that way, so at least he could make an educated decision.

So get together a group of late teen girls and they would be way over the limit in the first hour and not even realise.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top