Driver undertook police at 105mph -Got off lightly?

**Brocks** · 22nd March 2006, 13:09

Taken from BBC website:

A motorist who undertook an unmarked police car at 105mph in heavy rain has been banned from driving.
Daniel Holmes, 21, of Stokesby, Norfolk, used the inside lane to pass the force car on Trowse bypass, Norwich Crown Court heard.

Holmes, who admitted dangerous driving, was banned for a year.

He was also fined £500 and given a two-month overnight curfew order by Judge Peter Jacobs, who said his actions were "total madness".

Holmes was also ordered to pay £180 costs.

Personally I think he's got off lightly...What do ya think?

**Duncan** · 22nd March 2006, 13:14

'12 month ban and two month overnight curfew' - given the sentences we've seen in the past, I think it should be applauded. Total madness I agree, but I think a fairly stiff sentence given what's been handed out in the past for other offences.

Definitely a step in the right direction in my opinion.

D

**Steven** · 22nd March 2006, 13:20

given the conditions and the speed i think he was quite lucky but hopefully he will have learned from this which will be the main thing

**kitchpoo** · 22nd March 2006, 13:21

it wasnt me!!

You can get to some quite interesting speeds on the Norwich Southern Bypass and not really realise (125mph is not impossible), but doing it in heavy rain, undertaking and saying you were speeding because you were late for the cinema is a bit rich.

picture taken on Norwich S Bypass -

The police knew the road is the best in the county, and prior to the bypass being fully opened they commissioned the series of pictures to 'scare' motorists to the speed limit - the lotus was never used in persuit or in active service - the light units would have fallen off.

Also - the police are having a bit of a clamp down on the A47/A11 interchange...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main...portaltop.html

The police at the time were tailing someone doing 85 mph.

He was lucky he got away with it, initially given a 6 month ban - then pleaded down to the terms above. But I cant understand what a night time curfew has to do with speeding - does he only speed in the dark?

**Harry** · 22nd March 2006, 13:22

I agree Duncan.

the £500 fine and £180 cost would've been a blow to the wallet.

**Brocks** · 22nd March 2006, 13:25

Personally I would like to see such bods loose the liscence period and start again from scratch with a provisional and taking lessons etc. Then make pay the sort of insurance all newbys pay. It lets em live a "normal" life but the cost of over the years would give em food for thought about being a pratt again. But then again maybe not. Still as you've said it is a step in the right direction.

**AJA** · 22nd March 2006, 13:40

Sounds about right to me.

**Tim2100** · 22nd March 2006, 13:51

One thing that makes me thing about this....

why was the police car sitting in the 2nd lane when there must of been room to pull over into the 1st lane?

I am not excusing what he did, he was going far to fast for the conditions.

**Ian** · 22nd March 2006, 13:57

I reckon the sentence was just right. the conditions were bad, but what level of traffic was there? Folk who do it when its really busy never seem to get caught imo.

like I say, if the roads were quiet, the sentence seem about right.

**Brocks** · 22nd March 2006, 13:58

Originally Posted by Tim2100

One thing that makes me thing about this....

why was the police car sitting in the 2nd lane when there must of been room to pull over into the 1st lane?

I am not excusing what he did, he was going far to fast for the conditions.

As Kitchpoo said above they were after some one else at 85mph.