The Tweeting driver is found guilty...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-norfolk-25000788


....of failing to stop after an accident and/or failing to report it.

But NOT guilty of driving without due care an attention.

IOW, the court did not find her to blame for the collision. That'll be
for the insurance companies (or probably company) to sort out.

On 19/11/2013 15:31, JNugent wrote:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-norfolk-25000788


...of failing to stop after an accident and/or failing to report it.

But NOT guilty of driving without due care an attention.

IOW, the court did not find her to blame for the collision. That'll be
for the insurance companies (or probably company) to sort out.


if only she had used a compo. cam. Then the truth could be seen.

On 19/11/13 16:31, JNugent wrote:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-norfolk-25000788


...of failing to stop after an accident and/or failing to report it.

But NOT guilty of driving without due care an attention.

IOW, the court did not find her to blame for the collision. That'll be
for the insurance companies (or probably company) to sort out.

But she lost her job, BWAAHAAAHAA!

On 19/11/2013 19:27, Tosspot wrote:

On 19/11/13 16:31, JNugent wrote:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-norfolk-25000788

...of failing to stop after an accident and/or failing to report it.

But NOT guilty of driving without due care an attention.

IOW, the court did not find her to blame for the collision. That'll be
for the insurance companies (or probably company) to sort out.

But she lost her job, BWAAHAAAHAA!

It's amazing the powers that magistrates have these days. Apparently,
even if they find that a defendant is not guilty, they can arrange that
he or she is sacked from their job.

On 19/11/13 20:38, JNugent wrote:
On 19/11/2013 19:27, Tosspot wrote:

On 19/11/13 16:31, JNugent wrote:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-norfolk-25000788

...of failing to stop after an accident and/or failing to report it.

But NOT guilty of driving without due care an attention.

IOW, the court did not find her to blame for the collision. That'll be
for the insurance companies (or probably company) to sort out.

But she lost her job, BWAAHAAAHAA!

It's amazing the powers that magistrates have these days. Apparently,
even if they find that a defendant is not guilty, they can arrange that
he or she is sacked from their job.

Oooh, I didn't know that, can you point to the legislation, my google
mojo has deserted me.

On 20/11/2013 06:23, Tosspot wrote:

On 19/11/13 20:38, JNugent wrote:
On 19/11/2013 19:27, Tosspot wrote:
On 19/11/13 16:31, JNugent wrote:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-norfolk-25000788

...of failing to stop after an accident and/or failing to report it.

But NOT guilty of driving without due care an attention.

IOW, the court did not find her to blame for the collision. That'll be
for the insurance companies (or probably company) to sort out.

But she lost her job, BWAAHAAAHAA!

It's amazing the powers that magistrates have these days. Apparently,
even if they find that a defendant is not guilty, they can arrange that
he or she is sacked from their job.

Oooh, I didn't know that, can you point to the legislation, my google
mojo has deserted me.

I didn't know it either, but you claimed it, so it must be true.

On 20/11/13 10:43, JNugent wrote:
On 20/11/2013 06:23, Tosspot wrote:

On 19/11/13 20:38, JNugent wrote:
On 19/11/2013 19:27, Tosspot wrote:
On 19/11/13 16:31, JNugent wrote:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-norfolk-25000788

...of failing to stop after an accident and/or failing to report it.

But NOT guilty of driving without due care an attention.

IOW, the court did not find her to blame for the collision. That'll be
for the insurance companies (or probably company) to sort out.

But she lost her job, BWAAHAAAHAA!

It's amazing the powers that magistrates have these days. Apparently,
even if they find that a defendant is not guilty, they can arrange that
he or she is sacked from their job.

Oooh, I didn't know that, can you point to the legislation, my google
mojo has deserted me.

I didn't know it either, but you claimed it, so it must be true.

Well you claimed they had the power up there ---^ I could find no
indication they had such power and assumed you knew something I didn't.

It seems you don't.

Inarticulate and no conscience, she'll make a fine accountant.

On 20/11/2013 15:45, Tosspot wrote:
On 20/11/13 10:43, JNugent wrote:
On 20/11/2013 06:23, Tosspot wrote:

On 19/11/13 20:38, JNugent wrote:
On 19/11/2013 19:27, Tosspot wrote:
On 19/11/13 16:31, JNugent wrote:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-norfolk-25000788

...of failing to stop after an accident and/or failing to report it.

But NOT guilty of driving without due care an attention.

IOW, the court did not find her to blame for the collision.
That'll be
for the insurance companies (or probably company) to sort out.

But she lost her job, BWAAHAAAHAA!

It's amazing the powers that magistrates have these days. Apparently,
even if they find that a defendant is not guilty, they can arrange that
he or she is sacked from their job.

Oooh, I didn't know that, can you point to the legislation, my google
mojo has deserted me.

I didn't know it either, but you claimed it, so it must be true.

Well you claimed they had the power up there ---^ I could find no
indication they had such power and assumed you knew something I didn't.

It seems you don't.

I was taking your word for it.

I now agree that that probably isn't, in general, a wise thing to do and
am impressed that you are honest enough to point it out, if a little
obliquely.

On 20/11/13 18:58, JNugent wrote:
On 20/11/2013 15:45, Tosspot wrote:
On 20/11/13 10:43, JNugent wrote:
On 20/11/2013 06:23, Tosspot wrote:

On 19/11/13 20:38, JNugent wrote:
On 19/11/2013 19:27, Tosspot wrote:
On 19/11/13 16:31, JNugent wrote:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-norfolk-25000788

...of failing to stop after an accident and/or failing to report it.

But NOT guilty of driving without due care an attention.

IOW, the court did not find her to blame for the collision.
That'll be
for the insurance companies (or probably company) to sort out.

But she lost her job, BWAAHAAAHAA!

It's amazing the powers that magistrates have these days. Apparently,
even if they find that a defendant is not guilty, they can arrange
that
he or she is sacked from their job.

Oooh, I didn't know that, can you point to the legislation, my google
mojo has deserted me.

I didn't know it either, but you claimed it, so it must be true.

Well you claimed they had the power up there ---^ I could find no
indication they had such power and assumed you knew something I didn't.

It seems you don't.

I was taking your word for it.


made no such assertion, *if* you can point it out, please do.

I now agree that that probably isn't, in general, a wise thing to do and
am impressed that you are honest enough to point it out, if a little
obliquely.

Well, it's quite clear taking your word for anything is a bit stupid,
but you are here to educate the masses and long may the entertainment
continue.