Clarkson?

On 11 Mar, 19:19, "John Clayton" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

My lady wife telsme today that this truly awful bloke was today caught
driving at 70 - while on his mobile.

Doubtless he'll respond with "humour".

Shame really, I'd prefer contrition and a flogging by sadistic lesbian
cyclists.

Nice.

John

Some people would pay good money for such a flogging

John Clayton said:

My lady wife telsme today that this truly awful bloke was today caught
driving at 70 - while on his mobile.

Doubtless he'll respond with "humour".

Shame really, I'd prefer contrition and a flogging by sadistic lesbian
cyclists.

Nice.

John

can't see it on bbc etc, are you sure? he is high proflie can't belive
it wouldn't be news worthy.

roger
--
www.rogermerriman.com

On Mar 11, 7:19 pm, "John Clayton" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

My lady wife telsme today that this truly awful bloke was today caught
driving at 70 - while on his mobile.

Doubtless he'll respond with "humour".

Shame really, I'd prefer contrition and a flogging by sadistic lesbian
cyclists.

....and so may he!

"Roger Merriman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

John Clayton said:

My lady wife telsme today that this truly awful bloke was today caught
driving at 70 - while on his mobile.

Doubtless he'll respond with "humour".

Shame really, I'd prefer contrition and a flogging by sadistic lesbian
cyclists.

Nice.

John

can't see it on bbc etc, are you sure? he is high proflie can't belive
it wouldn't be news worthy.

It's all over the place...

<http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/topstories/2008/03/11/jeremy-clarkson-caught-doing-70mph-on-the-m40-while-talking-on-his-mobile-phone-89520-20347501/>

<http://ukpress.google.com/article/ALeqM5jUh19H2yJBVsEcOOwLcxSrg7qLXw>

<http://www.metro.co.uk/news/article.html?in_article_id=115220&in_page_id=34>

<http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=530330&in_page_id=1770>

<http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/news/2008/03/calling_jeremy_clarkson.html>

To give but a few...

Sir Jeremy said:

On 11 Mar, 19:19, "John Clayton" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

My lady wife telsme today that this truly awful bloke was today caught
driving at 70 - while on his mobile.

Doubtless he'll respond with "humour".

Shame really, I'd prefer contrition and a flogging by sadistic lesbian
cyclists.

Nice.

John

Some people would pay good money for such a flogging

Yes I pay to see him get such a flogging. Shall we start a collection.

In article said:

John Clayton said:

My lady wife telsme today that this truly awful bloke was today caught
driving at 70 - while on his mobile.

can't see it on bbc etc, are you sure? he is high proflie can't belive
it wouldn't be news worthy.

http://ukpress.google.com/article/ALeqM5jUh19H2yJBVsEcOOwLcxSrg7qLXw
"A spokeswoman for the BBC's Top Gear programme said this was not a BBC
matter and therefore offered no comment."

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/topstories/2008/03/11/jeremy-clarkson-caught-doing-70mph-on-the-m40-while-talking-on-his-mobile-phone-89520-20347501/

Just how many people in this country drive huge Mercedes green
coloured retro cars? It must run into - well not many - personally I
think he is innocent and he will no doubt explain that this is a
travesty of injustice in a forthcoming article.

I hate to say this but I rather like Mr Clarkson - he is over the
top - he speaks his mind, even though his bigotry is just that he is
amusing with it. Perhaps a just punishment will be for him to ride a
bike for a month and perhaps appreciate the other point of view,
though I wouldnt bet on that.

"John Clayton" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
My lady wife telsme today that this truly awful bloke was today caught
driving at 70 - while on his mobile.

Doubtless he'll respond with "humour".

Shame really, I'd prefer contrition and a flogging by sadistic lesbian
cyclists.

Nice.

John

archierob said:

Just how many people in this country drive huge Mercedes green
coloured retro cars? It must run into - well not many - personally I
think he is innocent and he will no doubt explain that this is a
travesty of injustice in a forthcoming article.

He will employ Mr Loophole to assist in his defence, like his speeding
charge last year.

Martin Dann said:

archierob wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Just how many people in this country drive huge Mercedes green
coloured retro cars? It must run into - well not many - personally I
think he is innocent and he will no doubt explain that this is a
travesty of injustice in a forthcoming article.

Quoted message said:

He will employ Mr Loophole to assist in his defence, like his speeding
charge last year.

The loophole will be that there is no proof that he was making a phone
call. Photographing drivers with objects which *might* be phones in
their hands isn't "good" enough. Defence is trivially easy, as anyone
who has two phones has already worked out. But it wouldn't work if
stopped by a patrol car.

archierob said the following on 12/03/2008 00:44:

Quoted message said:

I hate to say this but I rather like Mr Clarkson - he is over the
top - he speaks his mind, even though his bigotry is just that he is
amusing with it.

You can't say that on this group - you'll be hung, drawn and quartered!

His books are quite good as well ;-)

--
Paul Boyd
http://www.paul-boyd.co.uk/

On Wed, 12 Mar 2008 00:44:44 GMT someone who may be "archierob"
<[email hidden]> wrote this:-

Quoted message said:

personally I think he is innocent

Personally I have no idea if he is or not.

Quoted message said:

and he will no doubt explain that this is a
travesty of injustice in a forthcoming article.

Probably.

Quoted message said:

I hate to say this but I rather like Mr Clarkson - he is over the
top - he speaks his mind,

I'm not sure those two things go together.

Quoted message said:

even though his bigotry is just that he is
amusing with it.

Can't make this bit out.

Quoted message said:

Perhaps a just punishment will be for him to ride a
bike for a month and perhaps appreciate the other point of view,
though I wouldnt bet on that.

IIRC he was outed as a cyclist by his wife many years ago.

--
David Hansen, Edinburgh
I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54

JNugent said:

The loophole will be that there is no proof that he was making a phone
call.

His phone records could shed some light on that.

calum said:

JNugent <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

The loophole will be that there is no proof that he was making a phone
call.

Quoted message said:

His phone records could shed some light on that.

Read the rest of the post.

JNugent said:

calum said:

JNugent said:

The loophole will be that there is no proof that he was making a phone
call.

His phone records could shed some light on that.

Read the rest of the post.

I read it. Could you be more explicit on what you're trying to point
out?

calum said:

JNugent said:

calum said:

JNugent <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> The loophole will be that there is no proof that he was making a phone
> call.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

His phone records could shed some light on that.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Read the rest of the post.

Quoted message said:

I read it. Could you be more explicit on what you're trying to point
out?

Unless one is caught in the act and *stopped*, there can be no certainty
of "proof" that a phone call was being made. Anyone can produce a phone
whose records show that it was not being used at that moment.

And in the instant case, the picture looks more as though it was taken
in a supermarket car-park than on the M40.

JNugent said:

Martin Dann said:

archierob wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Just how many people in this country drive huge Mercedes green
coloured retro cars? It must run into - well not many - personally I
think he is innocent and he will no doubt explain that this is a
travesty of injustice in a forthcoming article.

Quoted message said:

He will employ Mr Loophole to assist in his defence, like his speeding
charge last year.

The loophole will be that there is no proof that he was making a phone
call. Photographing drivers with objects which *might* be phones in
their hands isn't "good" enough. Defence is trivially easy, as anyone
who has two phones has already worked out. But it wouldn't work if
stopped by a patrol car.

The photographer though has admitted and provided photographic
evidence that they were using a camera while driving a moving vehicle.

JNugent said:

Unless one is caught in the act and *stopped*, there can be no certainty
of "proof" that a phone call was being made. Anyone can produce a phone
whose records show that it was not being used at that moment.

And in the instant case, the picture looks more as though it was taken
in a supermarket car-park than on the M40.

Kiera Coultas wasn't "caught in the act". It was subsequent
investigation that showed that her phone was in use in the time
leading up to her killing a cyclist.

I suppose anyone could attempt to pervert the course of justice by
showing a phone record as you describe but I'd suggest there's every
likelihood that Mr Clarkson has a contract phone listed in his own
name and not some anonymous PAYG.

The picture is pretty [censored] though and it's difficult to be sure what
it is in his hand.

(Shaun) said:

JNugent said:

Martin Dann said:

archierob wrote:

Quoted message said:

> Just how many people in this country drive huge Mercedes green
> coloured retro cars? It must run into - well not many - personally I
> think he is innocent and he will no doubt explain that this is a
> travesty of injustice in a forthcoming article.

Quoted message said:

He will employ Mr Loophole to assist in his defence, like his speeding
charge last year.

The loophole will be that there is no proof that he was making a phone
call. Photographing drivers with objects which *might* be phones in
their hands isn't "good" enough. Defence is trivially easy, as anyone
who has two phones has already worked out. But it wouldn't work if
stopped by a patrol car.

The photographer though has admitted and provided photographic
evidence that they were using a camera while driving a moving vehicle.

Really? The report on the beeb news website says that it was a passenger
who took the picture.

calum said:

JNugent <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Unless one is caught in the act and *stopped*, there can be no certainty
of "proof" that a phone call was being made. Anyone can produce a phone
whose records show that it was not being used at that moment.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

And in the instant case, the picture looks more as though it was taken
in a supermarket car-park than on the M40.

Quoted message said:

Kiera Coultas wasn't "caught in the act". It was subsequent
investigation that showed that her phone was in use in the time
leading up to her killing a cyclist.

Did she leave the scene?

Quoted message said:

I suppose anyone could attempt to pervert the course of justice by
showing a phone record as you describe but I'd suggest there's every
likelihood that Mr Clarkson has a contract phone listed in his own
name and not some anonymous PAYG.

I have both. I bet a lot of people do.

Quoted message said:

The picture is pretty [censored] though and it's difficult to be sure what
it is in his hand.

Even more to the point.