The appropriately name Mr Pratt took a fairing view video of himself speeding and doing up to 100mph in a 30mph zone in Somerset, and then posted it to YouTube. Irresponsible without a doubt (though Geeklawyer has a sneaking admiration for his nerve) and posting it to YouTube was pure braggadocio. What beggars belief is that he filmed his own number plate and house, and omitted to delete it from the published film!
He must have had an IQ of at least 136.5.
Hilariously after being interviewed by the police, he said to the press;
“I wasn’t the rider of the bike necessarily,” … “I’m not saying it’s me.”
The Clue Dude says: should have done a ‘No comment’ interview. Yes, Geeklawyer knows that this can be used against one - one of the innovations of Micheal Howard in 1994 was to remove the effective right of silence - but it was still his best bet of getting away with it. In the absence of a confession the evidence was sufficiently thin to get the CPS to ponder whether or not to prosecute. Geeklawyer suspects they might have done so anyway, just to make an example of such stupidity, the posting on YouTube rather than the speeding that is, but his best bet was silence. But of course that he blabbed to the cops is a dead cert.
Sucker.
Ah…if everyone in the world was clever, polite and responsible the world would be a much duller place, and more to the point, Ruthie would be out of a job.
Remember folks, be good.
But if you can’t be good be careful.
And if you are neither good nor careful, at least have the sense to speak to your lawyer before making any admissions.
Whether to comment or not, is not an easy decision, and the law on this point is now quite complex. But since thats the kind of advice I get paid for, I’m afraid I’m not about to dish it out here for free…
I’m certainly not versed in criminal law, but is that YouTube video admissible as evidence in court?
Incidentally, is there a link to this story?
(I know it costs money to host a blog, by the way G, but Google ads in the middle of the post (forgetting the ones at the end for a second) are a bit much, IMHO.)
Its a self incriminating document, rather like a confession, so, yes. Although if he’d kept his mouth shut there may have been difficulties in actually proving he was the rider.
Ah you see, you can get Ruthie to give advice - just feign utter ignorance (or genuine ignorance in my case), flutter your eyelashes and she’ll let you have it.
No worries, G; I must admit, I can’t see the ads anyway:
http://martingeorge.files.wordpress.com/2007/02/geeklawyer-no-ads.JPG
I have been sorely tempted to implement Google ads on conflictoflaws.net, but have thus far resisted. If I remember, the average click through rate is about 3%?
Hey Martin.
Dont push your luck sunshine.
Sorry…I’ve just been berated by Geeklawyer for being overly aggressive. I’ve had a tough day dealing with a difficult case
It is good to see that the Police are able to mount a prosecution of a biker by using YouTube - somewhat ironic. Yeah the guy was a bit dumb… and the speed was not even that impressive…. an amateur.
Thankfully - no-one has been stupid enough to post a video on YouTube about getting a peerage in return for cash / loans etc etc … that would have been most inconvenient.
Nor me, Geeklawyer - daft. best left to the track - but, sadly, those days, for me, are over.
Apologies, Ruthie, if my poor attempt at humour caused offence.
And thats just the people who comment on this blog….
@geeklawyer: I’m testing out Google ads on conflictoflaws.net. As a Google ad afficionado, I’d be interested to know what you think. There’s a one line text link running across the top, below the header, and text links at the bottom of every post.
(Glad to hear it wasn’t me that made you mardy, ruthie; I manage to do that with my wife too much as it is.)
It may well surprise your readers, Geeklawyer - but I have just attended a quiz nite - They were very pleasant… did not question me under caution and understood why I wanted to help the Labour party by offering a bit of dosh for honours. I am told, by a man calling himself ‘The Commissioner’ - that I will not be questioned again.
I find that - a very satisfactory result. Apparently - I was seen by a congestion charge camera wondering down Chiswick High Street in baronial robes and came to the attention of the police. Pity that I resiled some months ago when I saw people being ‘collared’ - because otherwise I could be Lord Charon - or…possibly… Senator Charon if Jack Straw ever works out how to put reform of The Lords before The Commons.