Still the driving ban isn't as hard for him as for most as I am sure he can afford a chauffeur for a couple of years
What happened to the fine system where your fine is linked to your wages £85 dunt seem a lot for someone on 100k a week
Yes about as painful as an 85p fine would be for me. He might find the community service a bit harder than the average working man though
It's a pity the idiot couldn't afford the £15 taxi fare home when he was pi55ed. Wasn't that for speeding?
Reported that Everton fined hin 2 yes 2 weeks wages which was to cost him 300k. Doubt he will miss it. Wonder what the others on the work program will feel about that.
And yet my mate blew 83 and got a 3 year ban and £400 fine. That's someone on a minimum wage job but multimillionaire Wayne Rooney gets a fraction of the ban and a fraction of the fine
It's for both. For Rooney's offence: (104 in 100) 90 – 119 microgrammes in 100 millilitres of breath. Starting point: Medium level community order Range: Low level community order – High level community order Ban period 23 – 28 months Suitable requirements might include: Any appropriate rehabilitative requirement(s) 80 – 150 hours of unpaid work Curfew requirement for example up to 16 hours for 2 – 3 months Exclusion requirement lasting in the region of 6 months Prohibited activity requirement * If order does not contain a punitive requirement, suggested fine levels are indicated below: BAND B FINE Starting point: 100% of relevant weekly income Range: 75 – 125% of relevant weekly income "The court should then consider further adjustment for any aggravating or mitigating factors" Carrying passengers Looks to me like the judge ignored all the sentencing guidelines and gave the minimum he could get away with. £50 says the community service is football coaching
In Finland if you're caught speeding over a certain percentage of the limit, you're fined the equivalent of a fortnight's wages. One of the directors where my friend worked got hit with €160,000 after being caught on his motorbike. He was a director at Nokia (before they went tits up!). Obviously he could afford it, but €160,000 must still sting!
That seems fair enough to me. A fine is supposed to be a punishment, or part of a punishment, and the level of fine should take salary into account. Rooney seems to have been treated very leniently indeed.
I agree completely. The Finnish way of thinking is that the fine should still be within your means to pay, while being large enough to sting. Having said that, some would argue that such a system still disproportionately affects the less well off, as the Nokian guy still probably had no bother coughing up his £160k. A fine of two weeks wages for a middle class person is going to mean dipping into savings or taking a serious lifestyle hit for a couple of months. For a factory worker it could cause them not being able to eat properly. No system is perfect though, and the easiest way to solve to problem is not to exceed the speed limit by 40 mph or more! If you do that in my opinion you deserve to be stung no matter what your income, so you have very little grounds to complain. As for Rooney - to be honest I didn't know that we had an income related system in the UK, but he seems to have been extremely leniently treated. I'm not really sure what sort of a message that sends out, as England's "role model" to kids everywhere gets caught behaving like a complete dick. Again.
The hierarchy of sentencing in terms of seriousness is generally 1. Fines or discharges 2. Community sentences 3. Custody. Once you elevate an offence to 2. you are not usually also dealing with a fine. The levels you quote above are the recommended range of sentences. In law, Rooney could have been given a 12 month driving ban, and a 40 hour unpaid work requirement. In the event he has been given a 24 month ban (lowest recommended = 23 months) and a 120 hour UPW requirement (lowest recommended 80 hours). It seems to me that he has been dealt with appropriately therefore. You can't sentence him more severely just because he's Wayne Rooney!
Aggravating factor: carrying passengers. Yet still given pretty much the minimum ban. As I said before my mate had no passengers, had driven approximately 200 yards and was givea longer ban and higher fine.
Agreed. Not sure what case I'm thinking of recently but somebody has been imprisoned for 6 years and banned for 5 years. I'm really glad they're not allowed to drive round C wing