Driving Ban for Leadfoot....

[Always Sunny]

The one thing that I am wondering is how did the officer catch him at that speed. I don't believe that they are even allowed pursuing anyone at 210 for the safety of everyone.

Multiple officers, one heard him speeding and they caught him on the bridge as there was no where to turn http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-c ... -1.4189609

[Even Steven]

The one thing that I am wondering is how did the officer catch him at that speed. I don't believe that they are even allowed pursuing anyone at 210 for the safety of everyone.

Radar most likely.

[stuphoto]

The one thing that I am wondering is how did the officer catch him at that speed. I don't believe that they are even allowed pursuing anyone at 210 for the safety of everyone.

Multiple officers, one heard him speeding and they caught him on the bridge as there was no where to turn http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-c ... -1.4189609

I still don't see where they mention multiple officers in that news story.
I know that once a car like that gets pulled over once it's pretty much a marked target. So the police pretty much go straight to their house and known hangouts.
It's just the first time.

That's where photo radar is nice.

[Smurf]

One thing I also notice in the article is that besides being caught twice in the bridge recently he has also been caught twice in other jurisdictions. To me that means he is doing this deliberately knowing full well it is illegal. I would say there is no doubt he is guilty. Loose car and loose licence for life. If he ever is caught driving again some serious jail time. This not bad driving it is criminal as far as I'm concerned. Why do we have to wait till he kills someone?

[OkanaganGirl7]

What about the drunk guy who was three times over the legal limit and ran a red light and hit Const. Sarah Beckett's cruiser broadside, killing her. He's being sentenced today and they're asking for 3 years. What a joke!! Needed to be in the double digits I think.

[lesliepaul]

This is what you get when society glorifies alcohol and your governments profit from it hugely............fatalities are just collateral damage.

What about the drunk guy who was three times over the legal limit and ran a red light and hit Const. Sarah Beckett's cruiser broadside, killing her. He's being sentenced today and they're asking for 3 years. What a joke!! Needed to be in the double digits I think.

[seewood]

What about the drunk guy who was three times over the legal limit and ran a red light and hit Const. Sarah Beckett's cruiser broadside, killing her. He's being sentenced today and they're asking for 3 years. What a joke!! Needed to be in the double digits I think.

You and likely 99% of the province. It is a joke and a lousy precedent.

Personally, I thought crown would go for 15 + years at a minimum.... with no chance of parole for those 15 years. Headline a few sentience's like that and just might make an impact in some people's choice. One can hope anyway.

[mexi cali]

Lets get things moving here; anybody know his ethnicity?

[mexi cali]

The one thing that I am wondering is how did the officer catch him at that speed. I don't believe that they are even allowed pursuing anyone at 210 for the safety of everyone.

Doesn't matter what car you drive; none of them is faster than radar and a radio.

[my5cents]

Laws are the same for everybody. If you take away someone's license away for life for one count of speeding, be prepared to see hundreds of people caught every day for speeding lose their vehicles. Just because somebody drives a nice vehicle doesn't mean there should be extra penalty for them in terms of jail, or crashing their car, or losing DL forever.

Leaves one to wonder if you are intentionally misquoting/understanding the circumstances of this or just trying to stir things up...

"one count of speeding", not one and not speeding,,, he's been caught before and the offence is "Excessive Speeding" a completely different charge.
"just because somebody drives a nice vehicle.." I don't see anywhere, where the quality of the vehicle factored into this person being charged. The type of vehicle did come into the story because this vehicle was travelling at a phenomenal speed, at a rate that most vehicles on the road would take a lengthy distance to achieve or not achieve even if the driver wanted to. Nothing at all to do with discrimination because of the make/model of the vehicle.

I think the law is pretty clear on what charges can be thrown at somebody for doing 210 in 60. Police officers can't go around and arbitrary throw charges at people just because somebody is going very very fast as opposed to just fast and driving an expensive car instead of Yugo.

Law is the same for everybody.

Actually, no it's not all that clear. The minimum charge would be Excessive Speeding, on consultation with crown, perhaps Driving Without Due Care and Attention, or depending on circumstances bumped up to possibly a Criminal Charge, of Dangerous Driving or Criminal Negligence.
Police aren't "arbitrary(ily) throwing charges at people", and yes going very very fast is very very much worse than going fast or very fast.
The type of vehicle has no bearing on the charges, except for the fact the vehicle would have to be "special" to travel at that rate in that short a distance.

I still don't see where they mention multiple officers in that news story.
I know that once a car like that gets pulled over once it's pretty much a marked target. So the police pretty much go straight to their house and known hangouts.
It's just the first time.

That's where photo radar is nice.

Finding the vehicle after the fact, misses a LARGE component of the charge, IDENTITY. If the police can't prove the driver, all that's left if a charge against the registered owner. A charge against the registered owner can only be under the Motor Vehicle Act and only involves a fine with no sanctions against anyone in person.

"That's were photo radar is nice", actually, no, it isn't. If a driver can't be proven same as above. Pretty clear that money isn't the issue with this clown.

[my5cents]

You and likely 99% of the province. It is a joke and a lousy precedent.

Personally, I thought crown would go for 15 + years at a minimum.... with no chance of parole for those 15 years. Headline a few sentience's like that and just might make an impact in some people's choice. One can hope anyway.

(quote fixed)
Well for starters that's not the way sentencing works. Also there's a thing called "mandatory release". Maximum, once 2/3rd's of a sentence is served the accused must be released unless there is VERY unusual circumstances. In Canada I don't believe we have a sentence with "no chance of parole" (dangerous offender is an exception). Sometimes it's lengthy and impossible to achieve but it's there.

If a judge gave a sentence of 15 years for this. Yes there would be headlines, first headlines for the 15 years sentence, then the second set of headlines, the result of the appeal and the reduction of the sentence.

[Carrs Landing Viking]

There seems to be an out right refusal to name this 22 year old West Vancouver resident, by all media outlets.

Why is that?

[the truth]

There seems to be an out right refusal to name this 22 year old West Vancouver resident, by all media outlets.

Why is that?

i was thinking the same thing, gutless media

[jimmy4321]

Is it normal for drivers names of vehicles impounded be made public? Not defending it just wondering if it's the norm.

[JagXKR]

There seems to be an out right refusal to name this 22 year old West Vancouver resident, by all media outlets.

Why is that?

I don't think the name was released by the police. There are ways to find out without knowing the name but you need to know what court and the day the case will be heard. Daily court lists are available on the CSO website.

https://justice.gov.bc.ca/cso/esearch/esearchHome.do

Once you have a name you can then do a search. Even search your co-workers or neighbors name to see if they have convictions or traffic fines. It is public information after all.