I can never understand why the courts’ imposed driving ban runs out at the approximate same time as the ‘theoretical’ jail sentence. Whatever use is a driving ban upon someone while they are still in jail? The driving ban should start upon release.
All we should be concerned about on here in the wider community, is his job up for a new full timer, or is it going to be another “natural wastage” job put on “perm temp contract” - that old oxymoron if ever there was one…
If I was a client at the haulier employing this guy, I’d cancel my contract if the firm attempted in any way to hold this bloke’s job open for him, until he gets out.
What’s the point of a driving disqualification that’s entirely served over the prison sentence? 
If I was a client at the haulier employing this guy, I’d cancel my contract if the firm attempted in any way to hold this bloke’s job open for him, until he gets out
No you wouldn’t!
if you were a client of the company you would simply look at the bottom line of ££££££’s
Winseer:
All we should be concerned about on here in the wider community, is his job up for a new full timer, or is it going to be another “natural wastage” job put on “perm temp contract” - that old oxymoron if ever there was one…
You might only be ‘concerned’ about that but I doubt it’s the first thing at the forefront of most normal people reading this thread’s minds.
On that note can you either stop posting entirely or CHANGE THE ■■■■■■■ RECORD as I am sick of your never-ending jabber about agencies, full timers, politicians, conspiracy theories and all the other Lizard-esque garbage you continually spew infesting every other thread on here. 
limeyphil:
A lorry driver who was either reading or writing a text on his phone
I talk some tripe? Or just don’t jump on the whiter than white band wagon.
He was either reading or writing a text. Surely he can’t be doing both. That’s guess work and an assumption, It isn’t evidence. If you got a summons saying you was doing 40 or 50 in a 30 zone it would be laughed out of court.There are two sides to every story, and usually several alternatives to a newspaper article.
It’s a terrible shame that the car driver and his wife are not here to tell their side. I bet most of you lot would have a very different attitude.
Your attitudes would also change if it was a tipper, a stobart lorry, an irish lorry, and god forbid an irish lorry driven by a pole, that poor sod would be looking at 500 years on a trucknet trial.
I honestly cannot get my head around your point of view. I’m lost for words.
Does it matter whether he was reading or writing a text? Both are illegal and his phone records prove he was doing one or the other.
Then there’s the deleted text, and the fact he tried to blame the deceased driver and the fact he has a history of texting while driving (as per tacho data).
There’s been no assumption, just plenty of evidence against him.
switchlogic:
limeyphil:
There is no evidence he was texting at the time of the accident. The press have made a meal of it as usual.
For all we know the texting was done 30 minutes before the crash.
The car driver drove up the inside into his blind spot. That should carry points and a fine.Good idea, then the dead driver could have been fined and had points applied.
You talk some tripe. Sometimes, just sometimes truck drivers deserve what they get. The way you go on no truck driver is ever at fault. Texting or not, his actions killed two people, and that’s what he was jailed for.
Spot on there luke,no wonder the jobs got a bad image with the general public when you have incidents like this.To the couple killed R.I.P. to the driver,you got off light 5yrs nowere near long enough.
regards dave.
cav551:
I can never understand why the courts’ imposed driving ban runs out at the approximate same time as the ‘theoretical’ jail sentence. Whatever use is a driving ban upon someone while they are still in jail? The driving ban should start upon release.
He’s not likely to serve the full 5 years in jail. Probably serve just over half at best. Therefore he could, in theory, start driving in less than 5 years.
Disqualification must take effect upon sentence and cannot be postponed until e.g. release (R v McNeill [2008] EWCA Crim. 553). It should be noted that s. 137 and schedule 16 the Coroners and Justice Act 2009 contain powers to extend a period of disqualification so that it takes effect only after the end of a custodial term. However, this has not yet been brought into effect.
RoadsRat:
cav551:
I can never understand why the courts’ imposed driving ban runs out at the approximate same time as the ‘theoretical’ jail sentence. Whatever use is a driving ban upon someone while they are still in jail? The driving ban should start upon release.He’s not likely to serve the full 5 years in jail. Probably serve just over half at best. Therefore he could, in theory, start driving in less than 5 years.
Disqualification must take effect upon sentence and cannot be postponed until e.g. release (R v McNeill [2008] EWCA Crim. 553). It should be noted that s. 137 and schedule 16 the Coroners and Justice Act 2009 contain powers to extend a period of disqualification so that it takes effect only after the end of a custodial term. However, this has not yet been brought into effect.
Thanks for that mate I have always wondered how the law worked in a case like this.
regards dave.
I suppose it depends on whether you regard a driving ban as being a safety measure or a punishment in itself.
Who works for a company that’s got gps trackers but still call you when you’re driving?
RoadsRat:
cav551:
I can never understand why the courts’ imposed driving ban runs out at the approximate same time as the ‘theoretical’ jail sentence. Whatever use is a driving ban upon someone while they are still in jail? The driving ban should start upon release.He’s not likely to serve the full 5 years in jail. Probably serve just over half at best. Therefore he could, in theory, start driving in less than 5 years.
Disqualification must take effect upon sentence and cannot be postponed until e.g. release (R v McNeill [2008] EWCA Crim. 553). It should be noted that s. 137 and schedule 16 the Coroners and Justice Act 2009 contain powers to extend a period of disqualification so that it takes effect only after the end of a custodial term. However, this has not yet been brought into effect.
5 years = 3 years 9 months minimum, including anytime spent on remand although the last 6 month will include day & weekend release, and the area TC will decide when he gets his LGV entitlement back.
limeyphil:
There is no evidence he was texting at the time of the accident. The press have made a meal of it as usual.
For all we know the texting was done 30 minutes before the crash.
The car driver drove up the inside into his blind spot. That should carry points and a fine.
that hitler wasnt that bad either was he !!!
And some on here still moan when angus is out in the tractor unit catching truck drivers.
mark haywood:
limeyphil:
There is no evidence he was texting at the time of the accident. The press have made a meal of it as usual.
For all we know the texting was done 30 minutes before the crash.
The car driver drove up the inside into his blind spot. That should carry points and a fine.that hitler wasnt that bad either was he !!!
He was just misunderstood.
limeyphil:
The car driver drove up the inside into his blind spot. That should carry points and a fine.
I agree with you there phil but what ever way you look at it the truck driver on this occasion was in the wrong he should never have been texting or making any sort of phone calls unless the phone call was hands free when he wasn’t stationary with the engine off and handbrake on.
I do think though that the sentence handed down to the driver wasn’t long enough at all it should of been as someone said 5 years for each text sent while that vehicle was moving and a life sentence (that means life) for each of the lives that he snuff out that day with his wreck less attitude to the responsibility of driving that vehicle
The car driver drove up the inside into his blind spot
Did it stay in the blind spot or did it move through it at a reasonable pace?
Truck Driver Ethen Roberts got 5 years 3 months in the slammer.
.
.
The last text was sent 1m 16s before the collision…
How far did both vehicles travel in those 76 seconds?
I am not condoning the drivers actions, nor am I slating the car driver…just making the observation that 76 seconds is a long time at 50 mph and wondering how much of a direct consequence the texting actually was in this incident?
I think the real issue is that he failed to see a vehicle in his blind spot…that is what caused the collision…not the texts. The texts just make it sexier for the media to report!
One of the reasons why companies are installing cctv on the driver.
I reckon the reason he didnt see the car driver move into his blindspot was because he was to busy with his phone.
The truck driver is/was a pr*ck who killed 2 people, end off, imo.