Springbourne man admits to drink-driving (From Thisisdorset)
When news happens send us your pictures, video and views. Text BE to 80360 or contact us by email
Springbourne man admits to drink-driving
12:30pm Friday 10th February 2012 in Latest
A driver admitted drink driving a Volkswagen Passat in Southcote Road in Springbourne without insurance and while disqualified on January 16.
Douglas Liddell, 34, was appearing before Bournemouth Magistrates Court on Tuesday.
Prosecutor Roger Hall told the court: “He was seen driving on the wrong side of the carriageway at speed with no headlights.
“A police vehicle had to break heavily to avoid a collision.”
Liddell, of Holdenhurst Road in Springbourne, was already banned from driving for a previous drink driving offence in September.
Liddell told the court: “I don’t believe I have a drink problem but when I do drink, I do have a problem.”
District Judge Roger House gave Liddell a four-month jail sentence, suspended for one year.
He also ordered Liddell to pay £85 costs, attend an alcohol education course and disqualified him from driving for three years.
Comments(15)
ebagum
says...
12:48pm Fri 10 Feb 12
I'm confused!!!! Obviously he is and needs some urgent help.
Oldalbanian
says...
12:59pm Fri 10 Feb 12
Elsewhere this week someone found guilty of nicking a few bikes is given 12 months in jail.
Do these cretinous judges live on the same planet as the rest of us?
The Renegade Master
says...
1:01pm Fri 10 Feb 12
Scoty2hotty
says...
1:20pm Fri 10 Feb 12
The Renegade Master
says...
1:31pm Fri 10 Feb 12
Scoty2hotty wrote:Not all drink drivers are quite as blatantly moronic as the culprit in this case, which is why his actions have been reported.
Is this really headline news... dont drink drivers appear in court daily?
dontpupmybackandtellmeitsraining
says...
4:05pm Fri 10 Feb 12
Bob49
says...
4:31pm Fri 10 Feb 12
Oldalbanian wrote:Try telling the owners of those bikes the thief was 'only nicking' them. Only, eh ?
4 months suspended for endangering life and driving drunk whilst disqualified - ie he walks free.
Elsewhere this week someone found guilty of nicking a few bikes is given 12 months in jail.
Do these cretinous judges live on the same planet as the rest of us?
The bike thief had 'similar previous convictions' and after 'he was arrested' he 'went on to commit more offences', Which suggests previously he 'had walked free'.
Also the bike thief was not 'given 12 months in jail'. His case was referred to the Crown Court, as the Magistrates Court did not have sufficient sentencing powers.
And before you try a misrepresent what I have said, I don't condone or am in anyway attempting to justify the drunk drivers criminal actions. What I am saying is that if you are going to pontificate on stuff such as this then at least have to curtesy to check your facts first.
I doubt you, or anyone else, would wish to be prosecuted or defended on the basis of such casual disregard for accuracy.
Lord Spring
says...
5:39pm Fri 10 Feb 12
Trevor Dykes
says...
6:19pm Fri 10 Feb 12
Lord Spring wrote:You are of course correct, your Lordship. However, the peasant concerned resides in one of the hovels along Holdenhurst Road. The incident happened outside of the Ancient Parish. Why they should of ventured so far over the border is a mystery to me. As Sammy Johnson once said: "... when a man is tired of Springbourne, he is tired of life..."
The Ancient Parish of Springbourne does not extend to the otherside of the railway line to include Southcote Road.
The Liberal
says...
6:34pm Fri 10 Feb 12
IMHO it should be a mandatory prison sentence for driving while disqualified, never mind being drunk or driving recklessly.
Oldalbanian
says...
7:27pm Fri 10 Feb 12
Bob49 wrote:The case to which I was refering was at Winchester Crown Court a few weeks ago when a 29 year old man was sentenced to 12 months for a number of bike thefts. The clue was in my reference to "elsewhere".
Oldalbanian wrote:Try telling the owners of those bikes the thief was 'only nicking' them. Only, eh ?
4 months suspended for endangering life and driving drunk whilst disqualified - ie he walks free.
Elsewhere this week someone found guilty of nicking a few bikes is given 12 months in jail.
Do these cretinous judges live on the same planet as the rest of us?
The bike thief had 'similar previous convictions' and after 'he was arrested' he 'went on to commit more offences', Which suggests previously he 'had walked free'.
Also the bike thief was not 'given 12 months in jail'. His case was referred to the Crown Court, as the Magistrates Court did not have sufficient sentencing powers.
And before you try a misrepresent what I have said, I don't condone or am in anyway attempting to justify the drunk drivers criminal actions. What I am saying is that if you are going to pontificate on stuff such as this then at least have to curtesy to check your facts first.
I doubt you, or anyone else, would wish to be prosecuted or defended on the basis of such casual disregard for accuracy.
I have no idea of the case you are talking about.
gameon
says...
7:47pm Fri 10 Feb 12
mansak_hunt
says...
11:26pm Fri 10 Feb 12
He could have killed any one of us/
Jail him PLEASE.
This has to be regarded as a violent crime IMO
s-pb2
says...
4:38pm Sat 11 Feb 12
Scoty2hotty wrote:Yes and every time a case like this comes up, names address and photos should be printed as well
Is this really headline news... dont drink drivers appear in court daily?
Huey says...
12:46pm Fri 10 Feb 12
What a jerk.
Should be locked up.
He could so easily have caused a casualty or fatality.
Behaving like that can ruin lives of totally innocent folk.