O/T If it were me or you?

[NorthShoreEel]

So, if this was me, I think I would probably be given jail time, if the previous offences were taken into account.

Carney should thank his lucky stars that he is a footballer, with a high profile.....

http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/...sentence-for-drinkdriving-20110406-1d3na.html

Todd Carney given suspended jail sentence for drink-driving

Chris Barrett

April 6, 2011 - 11:46AM
Sydney Roosters star Todd Carney has avoided going to prison after being given a six-month suspended jail term for drink-driving.
Carney recorded a blood alcohol level of .052 early in the morning of Saturday, February 26.
He pleaded guilty to a drink-driving charge on March 16.

He told Waverley Local Court today he had consumed "eight or 10 beers" the night before.
As a P-Plater, he was not allowed any alcohol in his blood.
Carney, 24, had two previous drink-driving convictions before this one. He also has a string of other driving offences against his name.
Magistrate Jacqueline Milledge said Carney had come within a hair's breadth of going to jail.
"I look at your driving record and it says to me you need to be taught a lesson. If you come back to me on any driving matter ... your feet won't hit the floor and you'll be out that door."
Ms Milledge also disqualified Carney's licence for 10 months.

 

[muzby]

you know what, i believe that the judge missed a golden opportunity..

the kid has a history of misbehaving, and even now after his sabattical to northern qld he's still doesn't get it..

6 months in the slammer would sort him out...

even if he did it part time, like wes naqama did..

 

[TiggaPlease]

Yep that's soft.

He gets his licence back early after a what 5 year (?) disqualification then reoffends. If there was ever a time throw the book at someone....

 

[spiderdan]

very soft.

i wonder how much he actually had to drink. .52 at 7.30 the following morning after having 8-10 beers still seems pretty high. me thinks there was more than that amount or the night before stretched until a few hours before he was actually driving.

that magistrate is full of sh*t. if carney's record told her he needed to be taught a lesson than he should have been taught a lesson and not just told he would if something happened again. drink driving is a dangerous crime. if you do it once you can claim an honest mistake but carney is a serial offender and it is lucky his actions haven't led to the serious injury or death of someone else.

 

[Gronk]

The punishment should be that he plays for the Eels. The curse of the No.7 jumper would sort him out and be far worse than 6 months in Lithgow jail.

 

[Twizzle]

probably more to do with his legal representation

 

[born an eel]

you would be surprised how many people get similar treatment for re-offending with DUI.

I believe the NRL should step in and add a couple of weeks suspension to his fine from the roosters.
The raiders did the right thing by the NRL, only for him to be picked up by the roosters and since he has re-offended they should pay some sort of price. If Watmough is ever sacked by the eagles, watch the clubs fall over themselves trying to sign him. Set an example if you pick up a sacked player for discipline reason and he re-offends, your club will pay a price.

 

[NorthShoreEel]

Apparently both he & his solicitor were 15 minutes late as well.

He is lucky that Alan Jones was not the magistrate! (then again.....:sarcasm::sarcasm::lol

 

[Eels Dude]

The punishment is fair. It was a low range DUI and you cannot go slapping people in jail for that kind of thing. FFS if he lived in the US he wouldn't even have got charged. Complete non issue in my opinion and could have happened to anybody.

 

[The Parrot]

Apparently both he & his solicitor were 15 minutes late as well.

He is lucky that Alan Jones was not the magistrate! (then again.....:sarcasm::sarcasm::lol

OK THAT was uncalled for ! :roll:

 

[spiderdan]

The punishment is fair. It was a low range DUI and you cannot go slapping people in jail for that kind of thing. FFS if he lived in the US he wouldn't even have got charged. Complete non issue in my opinion and could have happened to anybody.

it was low range for someone with a non-restricted licence that wasn't a repeat offender. he was .052 over which for someone on a full licence would be blowing .102. he pretty much walked out of there with no punishment. same as previously.

carney isn't the smartest bloke around but what would it take for it to sink into his head that it is not ok to do this? i hope that for the sake of some innocent bystander this is the last time he does something like this. and you are right that maybe this instance jail is too harsh but at the same time i think the ruling was way too leniant.

 

[NorthShoreEel]

Um, anyone defending a drink driver needs to speak to families that have lost innocent family members to drunk drivers.

This was not his first offence. He has been done before. He lost his licence for 5 years, appealed, and had it reduced. He was driving on a licence with zero tolerance.

How can anyone defend that?

I pose the question again, if it were Joe Bloggs, of the general public, do you think they would have been treated as kindly as this dope?

Zero tolerance means zero. Not .01, not.02 - ZERO!

If he was living in the states,under the same law, of course he would have been charged. ZERO tolerance. Not under.08

 

[Eels Dude]

it was low range for someone with a non-restricted licence that wasn't a repeat offender. he was .052 over which for someone on a full licence would be blowing .102. he pretty much walked out of there with no punishment. same as previously.

carney isn't the smartest bloke around but what would it take for it to sink into his head that it is not ok to do this? i hope that for the sake of some innocent bystander this is the last time he does something like this. and you are right that maybe this instance jail is too harsh but at the same time i think the ruling was way too leniant.

Not really. If you're a P plater and blow between 0 and .0.49 you're just charged with what's called 'special range' drink driving which carries a much lower punishment than low range. Keep in mind Carney here was just into the low range limit. I'm sure most of us have had a few beers the night before and not realised we were over the limit the next morning and gone for a drive when we actually were over.

So while Carney made an error of judgement it was just that and he doesn't deserve to be chastised for it. A lengthy ban which he has been given, and a suspended sentence is more than appropriate.

 

[Freak2]

Tall Poppy syndrome at it's finest....

Love him or hate him Carney actually attempted to do the right thing and picked up his car the following morning. He would have had no clue he was still over the limit.

I actually think the sentence is a little on the severe side to be perfectly honest, but am happy to live with the judges ruling.

 

[Eels Dude]

]Um, anyone defending a drink driver needs to speak to families that have lost innocent family members to drunk drivers.[/B]

This was not his first offence. He has been done before. He lost his licence for 5 years, appealed, and had it reduced. He was driving on a licence with zero tolerance.

How can anyone defend that?

I pose the question again, if it were Joe Bloggs, of the general public, do you think they would have been treated as kindly as this dope?

Zero tolerance means zero. Not .01, not.02 - ZERO!

If he was living in the states,under the same law, of course he would have been charged. ZERO tolerance. Not under.08

I think that argument is a silly one, unless you take zero tolerance on any road law. Say even exceeding the speed limit by 4 or 5 km/hr even because that kills people too. So unless you're willing to take that attitude for violating EVERY road law then it's a double standard and qwuite hypocritical.

And on your second point unless you install official breathalysers in every single motor vehicle then it's not something you can police and not something the average joe can definately know they're under.

 

[Gazzamatta]

Its never been mentioned how he actually got home the night before he was arrested.
Maybe Im just suspicious by nature?

 

[spiderdan]

Not really. If you're a P plater and blow between 0 and .0.49 you're just charged with what's called 'special range' drink driving which carries a much lower punishment than low range. Keep in mind Carney here was just into the low range limit. I'm sure most of us have had a few beers the night before and not realised we were over the limit the next morning and gone for a drive when we actually were over.

So while Carney made an error of judgement it was just that and he doesn't deserve to be chastised for it. A lengthy ban which he has been given, and a suspended sentence is more than appropriate.

wasn't aware of the special range but stand by my thoughts. the line is drawn at .05. we'll have to agree to disagree on what is the appropriate punishment. i just think he must have had a hell of a lot more than 8-10 beers the night before to have blown .052.

 

[born an eel]

I pose the question again, if it were Joe Bloggs, of the general public, do you think they would have been treated as kindly as this dope?

and I will answer your question again,

this is not uncommon for any driver to be given second, third, even sometimes fourth chances when caught PCA. The judges look favourably on alcoholics trying to get treatment of their disease and will only use incarceration as a final resort.

Not arguing the rights and wrongs of this, just answering your question about your false claim of favourable treatment.

Ms Milledge said there is no provision for a period of incarceration on the low range drink drive charge.
http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/...s-sentence-on-todd-carney-20110406-1d3na.html

 

[lingard]

I just hope he`s pissed when we play the Roosters.

 

[Maroubra Eel]

Would be a hard decision if the magistrate at Waverley followed the roosters. I'm not saying she does.