Laser jammer Range Rover driver who gave police the finger is handed an eight-month prison sentence

The courts do not tend to look too fondly on those found to be perverting the course of justice.

The guy acted like he was entitled to ignore the rules everyone else has to follow and his contempt for those rules, then tried to hide the evidence of that. Seems he got exactly what he deserves in my opinion.
 
The courts do not tend to look too fondly on those found to be perverting the course of justice.

The guy acted like he was entitled to ignore the rules everyone else has to follow and his contempt for those rules, then tried to hide the evidence of that. Seems he got exactly what he deserves in my opinion.

Indeed, this will be what what attracted the custodial sentence, not the use of the jammer itself. He brought it entirely on himself. He'll never serve 8 months anyway.

As for the OP, I'm not sure why someone who doesn't even live here is getting worked up about our criminal justice system.
 
I just laughed out loud whilst reading this on the toilet. I'm now known as the chortling ****ter in the office.

Are your khazi walls made of paper or do you chortle really loud? Do you guys have set times where you go to the loo together? Were there many people on the khazi too? Man you shroud your stories in mystery :confused:
 
Are your khazi walls made of paper or do you chortle really loud? Do you guys have set times where you go to the loo together? Were there many people on the khazi too? Man you shroud your stories in mystery :confused:

You have to pass them to get to the kitchen so a bit of serendipity took place. It was more of a guffaw than a chortle too.
They're single rooms as the offices are essentially an old manor house and the toilets were once store cupboards and a pantry.
 
Quite silly that he would have got less than that for stealing the car. They need to sort their priorities out tbh.

In the end he was a prat but no one got hurt, so why is sending him to prison in the public interest? Just a fine would have been enough.
 
Last edited:
Whilst it’s clearly a ridiculous sentence, anybody with a brain knows that if you disrespect the police / authorities but aren’t from a “troubled background”, have a clearly identifiable car registered to you, a fixed address, etc etc, they’re going to throw the book at you as all you’ve done is make everything incredibly easy for them.

It’s far easier for them to solve crimes like this than waste time trying to trace some chav on a dodgy estate who’s crashed a 20 year old stolen Fiesta and run off, or the guy who nicked your sat nav last week. I guess you can’t really blame them for going after easy targets, it does make their crime stats look better after all.
 
Whilst it’s clearly a ridiculous sentence, anybody with a brain knows that if you disrespect the police / authorities but aren’t from a “troubled background”, have a clearly identifiable car registered to you, a fixed address, etc etc, they’re going to throw the book at you as all you’ve done is make everything incredibly easy for them.

It’s far easier for them to solve crimes like this than waste time trying to trace some chav on a dodgy estate who’s crashed a 20 year old stolen Fiesta and run off, or the guy who nicked your sat nav last week. I guess you can’t really blame them for going after easy targets, it does make their crime stats look better after all.

Yeah, they're too busy going after all the old guys in Range Rovers with jammers who lie about having one, where the vehicle is and who then try to destroy evidence. Definitely.

You do understand the difference between the police and the courts, surely?
 
Yeah, they're too busy going after all the old guys in Range Rovers with jammers who lie about having one, where the vehicle is and who then try to destroy evidence. Definitely.

You do understand the difference between the police and the courts, surely?

Do correct me if I’m wrong, but as far as I’m aware, the police provide evidence to the court, who then decide to prosecute based on such evidence.

Surely a man who was stupid enough to drive a car registered to him and make rude gestures at a police vehicle he knew was recording him is far easier to trace than someone in an unregistered vehicle with no fixed address?

I think you might have jumped to conclusions when reading my post - I wasn’t even criticising the police....
 
Do correct me if I’m wrong, but as far as I’m aware, the police provide evidence to the court, who then decide to prosecute based on such evidence.

Surely a man who was stupid enough to drive a car registered to him and make rude gestures at a police vehicle he knew was recording him is far easier to trace than someone in an unregistered vehicle with no fixed address?

I think you might have jumped to conclusions when reading my post - I wasn’t even criticising the police....

It read like you were sarcastically suggesting the police will go for easy targets and ignore anything requiring some work, apologies if that isn't the case.
 
It read like you were sarcastically suggesting the police will go for easy targets and ignore anything requiring some work, apologies if that isn't the case.

No, not the case at all. It was more that they do go after easy targets and you can’t blame them, so if you’re going to commit crime like this, don’t be stupid enough to make yourself an easy target.

I’m going out on a limb here, but you wouldn’t happen to work for the police by any chance, would you? I have 2 friends who are officers, after spending most of the day dealing with people who hate the police, they tend to think everybody who mentions anything police-related is criticising them :p
 
I think stats are the big driving force really. Easy wins and why they push people in to using 101 (which isn't freephone!) instead of 999. Which is a fob off and most people CBA with it.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom