Garda driving question

letter2

If someone is stopped by Gardai and then receives three separate summons for dangerous driving within a two kilometer distance but wasnt told at the time he was being prosecuted,what is the situation and likely punishment (a first offence)

Paulw

letter2 wrote: »

If someone is stopped by Gardai and then receives three separate summons for dangerous driving within a two kilometer distance but wasnt told at the time he was being prosecuted,what is the situation and likely punishment (a first offence)

The situation is that he is a very stupid person, to have three counts of dangerous driving within 2km.

Hard to say what the punishment will be, but it could include suspension of license and a large fine.

Reloc8

The law used to say this

(RTA 1961):-


104.—Where a person is charged with an offence under section 47 , 52 or 53 of this Act, he shall not be convicted of the offence unless either—

(a) he was warned at the time at which the offence is alleged to have been committed, or within twenty-four hours thereafter, that the question of prosecuting him for an offence under some one of those sections would be considered, or

(b) within fourteen days after the commission of the offence, a summons for the offence was served on him, or

(c) within those fourteen days a notice in writing stating the time and place at which the offence is alleged to have been committed and stating briefly the act or acts alleged to constitute the offence and stating the inten- tion to prosecute him therefor was served personally or by registered post on him or (in the case of a mechanically propelled vehicle) on the registered owner of the vehicle in relation to which the offence is alleged to have been committed:

Provided that—

(i) failure to comply with this requirement shall not be a bar to conviction in a case in which the court is satisfied that—

(I) the accused by his own conduct contributed to the failure, or

(II) in case the offence alleged to have been committed is in relation to a mechanically propelled vehicle, neither the name and address of the accused nor the name and address of the registered owner of the vehicle could with reasonable diligence have been ascertained in time for a summons to be served or for a notice to be served as aforesaid, or

(III) in case the offence alleged to have been committed is not in relation to a mechanically propelled vehicle, the name and address of the accused could not with reasonable diligence have been ascertained in time for a summons to be served or a notice to be sent as aforesaid, and

(ii) it shall be presumed, until the contrary is shown by the defendant, that the requirement of this section has been complied with.

But then it said this

(RTA 2002) :-

25.—(1) Sections 97(1)(b), 102, 107, 110, 111, 115, 125 and 126 of the Principal Act are amended by the deletion, in each place where it occurs of “Road Traffic Acts, 1961 to 1994,” and the substitution of “this Act”.

(2) Subsections (1) and (2) of section 36 and sections 86, 104 and 105 of the Principal Act and section 64 of the Act of 1968 are repealed as respects offences committed after the commencement of this section.

So, failure to tell you something at the time of being stopped is immaterial

Penalties are imprisonment for up to 6 months and/or a big old fine (can't remember the current figure but its in the low 000's. It would be normal for a Judge to impose a disqualification period of up to 12 months as well

But for a first time offence, the penalties are likely to be much less, and imprisonment is rare, especially if a person takes legal advice from a good solicitor

ResearchWill

letter2 wrote: »

If someone is stopped by Gardai and then receives three separate summons for dangerous driving within a two kilometer distance but wasnt told at the time he was being prosecuted,what is the situation and likely punishment (a first offence)

If what you are saying is that he was stopped 3 separate times over a 2km distance and now has received 3 separate summons for dangerous driving. If that is what happened tell him get a good solicitor, have plenty of cash in court and a good independent person to offer bail, so he may appeal. As a lot of DJ's will throw the book at him. Expect at the very least a ban and big fine.

BTW you could sell tickets to that case, I know a few DJ's who's heads would latterly explode.

Reloc8

Think he was stopped once and spoken to, but later received three summons for his driving over a 2km stretch while observed by the garda who stopped him but not that he was stopped once, then did something again and was stopped, and so on...

...presumably just over the humpback bridge connecting hazzard county to er whatever is beside hazzard county...or at least that would be what the OP says to me.

Bloodwing

Are all three summons for the same offence? It's possible he has been summoned for three different offences.

MagicSean

Reloc8 wrote: »

Think he was stopped once and spoken to, but later received three summons for his driving over a 2km stretch while observed by the garda who stopped him but not that he was stopped once, then did something again and was stopped, and so on...

...presumably just over the humpback bridge connecting hazzard county to er whatever is beside hazzard county...or at least that would be what the OP says to me.

Sounds more like a chase to be honest. Three counts of dangerous driving is a bit excessive for simply following someone unless they were joyriding.

Reloc8

I don't disagree it might well have been a pursuit (hence clumsy reference to Dukes of Hazzrd) - just saying that I didn't think it sounded like he was stopped individually three time, driving off each time only to be subsequently stopped again.

letter2

He was stopped once and the garda didnt tell him what he was stopped for,nor was he chased by a garda car with lights or siren on,they did stop another car and he got three summons as well

Reloc8

Sure look, he's got a solicitor according to your other thread and you now know they don't have to tell you they're prosecuting you, and what the possible penalties are. Leave him deal with his solicitor at this stage.

(or brace yourself to be cross-examined on why what you just said is complete nonsense and/or why he was CLEARLY racing another car and why he shouldn't be gaoled and poked with sticks and/or that you are your brother :pac: nb I don't think any of that I'm just giving you a heads up)

ResearchWill

letter2 wrote: »

He was stopped once and the garda didnt tell him what he was stopped for,nor was he chased by a garda car with lights or siren on,they did stop another car and he got three summons as well

Then the summons must be for 3 different thing, more than likely the first is dangerous driving, the second is more than likely non production on demand driving licence and the third could be anything like no insurances, or tax or non production within 10 days. It's important to read each summons carefully.

Reloc8

ResearchWill wrote: »

Then the summons must be for 3 different thing, more than likely the first is dangerous driving, the second is more than likely non production on demand driving licence and the third could be anything like no insurances, or tax or non production within 10 days. It's important to read each summons carefully.

The summons could easily be for 3 separate instances of dangerous driving over the 2km (cut a corner, wrong way round a roundabout 500 metres later then jumped the humpback bridge doing 90 a km down the road).

Sure, you'd think the sirens and blue lights would go on after the first but err sometimes not...

...in the closed thread it would seem an Garda Siochana are indicating a willingness to deal with it without requiring pleas to all three summons...

letter2

The three summons are for dangerous driving in three different townlands not insurance or licence!

ResearchWill

Reloc8 wrote: »

The summons could easily be for 3 separate instances of dangerous driving over the 2km (cut a corner, wrong way round a roundabout 500 metres later then jumped the humpback bridge doing 90).

Usually only if he left one townland and and went into another, if I had a euro every time a person said the summons said x or y only to read them and they say something totally different. It may be 3 for the same thing but I would not be surprised if its 3 different things.

Reloc8

letter2 wrote: »

The three summons are for dangerous driving in three different townlands not insurance or licence!

Now I'm just a bit curious - being a local yourself, can you say does the 2 km cover three townlands, or in your view is one or more of the townland description inaccurate/wrong ?

nuac

letter2 wrote: »

The three summons are for dangerous driving in three different townlands not insurance or licence!

You really do need to talk to a solicitor

ResearchWill

Reloc8 wrote: »

Now I'm just a bit curious - being a local yourself, can you say does the 2 km cover three townlands, or in your view is one or more of the townland description inaccurate/wrong ?

Considering Ireland has the most townlands for its size, it's possible, I like you would re enquiring of a good Eng or geographer to check out that issue.

letter2

No the townlands are accurate and within a 2km area

Reloc8

letter2 wrote: »

No the townlands are accurate and within a 2km area

Thanks - it wouldn't have had any effect on criminal liability if there was indeed evidence of 3 separate instances of dangerous driving but they got the place wrong (District Court Rules permit amendment for this) but I was just curious for irrelevant reasons - appreciate the answer.

ResearchWill wrote: »

Considering Ireland has the most townlands for its size, it's possible, I like you would re enquiring of a good Eng or geographer to check out that issue.

No I wasn't going down that road Order 38 DSC and all that.

ResearchWill

Reloc8 wrote: »

Thanks - it wouldn't have had any effect on criminal liability if there was indeed evidence of 3 separate instances of dangerous driving but they got the place wrong (District Court Rules permit amendment for this) but I was just curious for irrelevant reasons - appreciate the answer.




No I wasn't going down that road Order 38 DSC and all that.

While there are two views on this, my own view is that the State must fix their hand before they close the case.

Reloc8

I wouldn't fall out with you over that as a matter of basic fairness, but there again where did that ever get anyone in a court case :pac:

ResearchWill

Reloc8 wrote: »

I wouldn't fall out with you over that as a matter of basic fairness, but there again where did that ever get anyone in a court case :pac:

Well if the incorrect town land was not in the District Court area it could go very far.