Police appeal for victim of puddle drenching in Bedmond Road, Abbots Langley

Police appeal for victim of puddle drenching

Police appeal for victim of puddle drenching

First published in News Watford Observer: Photograph of the Author by , Reporter

Police are appealing to trace a woman who is a possible victim of a driving offence in Abbots Langley.

At around 10am on Friday, February 7 a woman was seen pushing a pram along Bedmond Road when a flatbed truck is believed to have swerved into a puddle drenching the woman in the process.

PC Roger Harper is investigating and said: "This was reported to police by a third party and I would be keen to trace the woman to see if she wishes to take the matter further. It may be that she did not realise this can be classed as an offence. If you believe this was you please call me."

Anyone with information should contact PC Roger Harper via the Herts police non-emergency number 101.

Comments (15)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

2:03pm Thu 27 Feb 14

Toshhorn2 says...

Really!!!!
Howwouldit be proved that it was deliberate not just simply swerving to miss a pothole/animal can etc
What a complete waste of time.
Really!!!! Howwouldit be proved that it was deliberate not just simply swerving to miss a pothole/animal can etc What a complete waste of time. Toshhorn2
  • Score: 3

3:01pm Thu 27 Feb 14

CaptainPC says...

Toshhorn2 wrote:
Really!!!!
Howwouldit be proved that it was deliberate not just simply swerving to miss a pothole/animal can etc
What a complete waste of time.
It doesn't have to be proved to be deliberate. It just has to be proved to have done it.

It is an offence to "drive through a puddle causing a pedestrian to be splashed".

That means the onus is on him to avoid doing so.

Hope they do find the lady and I hope the driver is prosecuted. THis is odious behaviour, just nasty. The blokes a scumbag.
[quote][p][bold]Toshhorn2[/bold] wrote: Really!!!! Howwouldit be proved that it was deliberate not just simply swerving to miss a pothole/animal can etc What a complete waste of time.[/p][/quote]It doesn't have to be proved to be deliberate. It just has to be proved to have done it. It is an offence to "drive through a puddle causing a pedestrian to be splashed". That means the onus is on him to avoid doing so. Hope they do find the lady and I hope the driver is prosecuted. THis is odious behaviour, just nasty. The blokes a scumbag. CaptainPC
  • Score: 11

3:10pm Thu 27 Feb 14

davidhornet says...

CaptainPC wrote:
Toshhorn2 wrote:
Really!!!!
Howwouldit be proved that it was deliberate not just simply swerving to miss a pothole/animal can etc
What a complete waste of time.
It doesn't have to be proved to be deliberate. It just has to be proved to have done it.

It is an offence to "drive through a puddle causing a pedestrian to be splashed".

That means the onus is on him to avoid doing so.

Hope they do find the lady and I hope the driver is prosecuted. THis is odious behaviour, just nasty. The blokes a scumbag.
1. Is this newsworthy. No.
2. Is there a victim? As the "victim" did not report it but a third party did then probably no.
3. Has an offence been committed? Perhaps, but how can we be sure. To call the driver a scumbag and call their behaviour odious and nasty without being aware of the facts is pathetic.
4. Dr Foster went to Gloucester in a shower of rain, he fell in puddle right up to his middle and never went there again. I blame global warming, but where there is blame there's a claim. Perhaps we should issue an appeal for Dr Foster to get in touch with the local constabulary to establish if a crime has been committed.
[quote][p][bold]CaptainPC[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Toshhorn2[/bold] wrote: Really!!!! Howwouldit be proved that it was deliberate not just simply swerving to miss a pothole/animal can etc What a complete waste of time.[/p][/quote]It doesn't have to be proved to be deliberate. It just has to be proved to have done it. It is an offence to "drive through a puddle causing a pedestrian to be splashed". That means the onus is on him to avoid doing so. Hope they do find the lady and I hope the driver is prosecuted. THis is odious behaviour, just nasty. The blokes a scumbag.[/p][/quote]1. Is this newsworthy. No. 2. Is there a victim? As the "victim" did not report it but a third party did then probably no. 3. Has an offence been committed? Perhaps, but how can we be sure. To call the driver a scumbag and call their behaviour odious and nasty without being aware of the facts is pathetic. 4. Dr Foster went to Gloucester in a shower of rain, he fell in puddle right up to his middle and never went there again. I blame global warming, but where there is blame there's a claim. Perhaps we should issue an appeal for Dr Foster to get in touch with the local constabulary to establish if a crime has been committed. davidhornet
  • Score: 1

3:23pm Thu 27 Feb 14

CaptainPC says...

davidhornet wrote:
CaptainPC wrote:
Toshhorn2 wrote:
Really!!!!
Howwouldit be proved that it was deliberate not just simply swerving to miss a pothole/animal can etc
What a complete waste of time.
It doesn't have to be proved to be deliberate. It just has to be proved to have done it.

It is an offence to "drive through a puddle causing a pedestrian to be splashed".

That means the onus is on him to avoid doing so.

Hope they do find the lady and I hope the driver is prosecuted. THis is odious behaviour, just nasty. The blokes a scumbag.
1. Is this newsworthy. No.
2. Is there a victim? As the "victim" did not report it but a third party did then probably no.
3. Has an offence been committed? Perhaps, but how can we be sure. To call the driver a scumbag and call their behaviour odious and nasty without being aware of the facts is pathetic.
4. Dr Foster went to Gloucester in a shower of rain, he fell in puddle right up to his middle and never went there again. I blame global warming, but where there is blame there's a claim. Perhaps we should issue an appeal for Dr Foster to get in touch with the local constabulary to establish if a crime has been committed.
Yawn.

Someone saw him/her splash the lady. So he did splash the lady. THis is , IMO, the behaviour of an odious scumbag.

Loads of crimes aren't reported, that doesn't mean they are victimless.

Congratulations on you thorogh knowledge of nursey rhymes, though. Very good.
[quote][p][bold]davidhornet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]CaptainPC[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Toshhorn2[/bold] wrote: Really!!!! Howwouldit be proved that it was deliberate not just simply swerving to miss a pothole/animal can etc What a complete waste of time.[/p][/quote]It doesn't have to be proved to be deliberate. It just has to be proved to have done it. It is an offence to "drive through a puddle causing a pedestrian to be splashed". That means the onus is on him to avoid doing so. Hope they do find the lady and I hope the driver is prosecuted. THis is odious behaviour, just nasty. The blokes a scumbag.[/p][/quote]1. Is this newsworthy. No. 2. Is there a victim? As the "victim" did not report it but a third party did then probably no. 3. Has an offence been committed? Perhaps, but how can we be sure. To call the driver a scumbag and call their behaviour odious and nasty without being aware of the facts is pathetic. 4. Dr Foster went to Gloucester in a shower of rain, he fell in puddle right up to his middle and never went there again. I blame global warming, but where there is blame there's a claim. Perhaps we should issue an appeal for Dr Foster to get in touch with the local constabulary to establish if a crime has been committed.[/p][/quote]Yawn. Someone saw him/her splash the lady. So he did splash the lady. THis is , IMO, the behaviour of an odious scumbag. Loads of crimes aren't reported, that doesn't mean they are victimless. Congratulations on you thorogh knowledge of nursey rhymes, though. Very good. CaptainPC
  • Score: 4

3:29pm Thu 27 Feb 14

francowatford says...

Ireckon it was the girl escaping from Somerset after walking in toa co opera, scoffing scotch eggs with paying and walking out
Ireckon it was the girl escaping from Somerset after walking in toa co opera, scoffing scotch eggs with paying and walking out francowatford
  • Score: -9

3:33pm Thu 27 Feb 14

gusgreen says...

CaptainPC wrote:
Toshhorn2 wrote:
Really!!!!
Howwouldit be proved that it was deliberate not just simply swerving to miss a pothole/animal can etc
What a complete waste of time.
It doesn't have to be proved to be deliberate. It just has to be proved to have done it.

It is an offence to "drive through a puddle causing a pedestrian to be splashed".

That means the onus is on him to avoid doing so.

Hope they do find the lady and I hope the driver is prosecuted. THis is odious behaviour, just nasty. The blokes a scumbag.
What planet are you on?
I don't know if you have noticed but when it rains there is more water on our roads than in the Atlantic!
Due mainly to potholes,blocked gully drains,poor maintenance and oh, water falling from the sky.

Maybe we should insist that when it rains all traffic stops until its dry in case someone gets splashed

What a total waste of police time- no surprise there then!
[quote][p][bold]CaptainPC[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Toshhorn2[/bold] wrote: Really!!!! Howwouldit be proved that it was deliberate not just simply swerving to miss a pothole/animal can etc What a complete waste of time.[/p][/quote]It doesn't have to be proved to be deliberate. It just has to be proved to have done it. It is an offence to "drive through a puddle causing a pedestrian to be splashed". That means the onus is on him to avoid doing so. Hope they do find the lady and I hope the driver is prosecuted. THis is odious behaviour, just nasty. The blokes a scumbag.[/p][/quote]What planet are you on? I don't know if you have noticed but when it rains there is more water on our roads than in the Atlantic! Due mainly to potholes,blocked gully drains,poor maintenance and oh, water falling from the sky. Maybe we should insist that when it rains all traffic stops until its dry in case someone gets splashed What a total waste of police time- no surprise there then! gusgreen
  • Score: 0

3:41pm Thu 27 Feb 14

davidhornet says...

CaptainPC wrote:
davidhornet wrote:
CaptainPC wrote:
Toshhorn2 wrote:
Really!!!!
Howwouldit be proved that it was deliberate not just simply swerving to miss a pothole/animal can etc
What a complete waste of time.
It doesn't have to be proved to be deliberate. It just has to be proved to have done it.

It is an offence to "drive through a puddle causing a pedestrian to be splashed".

That means the onus is on him to avoid doing so.

Hope they do find the lady and I hope the driver is prosecuted. THis is odious behaviour, just nasty. The blokes a scumbag.
1. Is this newsworthy. No.
2. Is there a victim? As the "victim" did not report it but a third party did then probably no.
3. Has an offence been committed? Perhaps, but how can we be sure. To call the driver a scumbag and call their behaviour odious and nasty without being aware of the facts is pathetic.
4. Dr Foster went to Gloucester in a shower of rain, he fell in puddle right up to his middle and never went there again. I blame global warming, but where there is blame there's a claim. Perhaps we should issue an appeal for Dr Foster to get in touch with the local constabulary to establish if a crime has been committed.
Yawn.

Someone saw him/her splash the lady. So he did splash the lady. THis is , IMO, the behaviour of an odious scumbag.

Loads of crimes aren't reported, that doesn't mean they are victimless.

Congratulations on you thorogh knowledge of nursey rhymes, though. Very good.
Just saw your racist post on another story which has been reported, so do one. You are the odious scumbag my friend.
[quote][p][bold]CaptainPC[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]davidhornet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]CaptainPC[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Toshhorn2[/bold] wrote: Really!!!! Howwouldit be proved that it was deliberate not just simply swerving to miss a pothole/animal can etc What a complete waste of time.[/p][/quote]It doesn't have to be proved to be deliberate. It just has to be proved to have done it. It is an offence to "drive through a puddle causing a pedestrian to be splashed". That means the onus is on him to avoid doing so. Hope they do find the lady and I hope the driver is prosecuted. THis is odious behaviour, just nasty. The blokes a scumbag.[/p][/quote]1. Is this newsworthy. No. 2. Is there a victim? As the "victim" did not report it but a third party did then probably no. 3. Has an offence been committed? Perhaps, but how can we be sure. To call the driver a scumbag and call their behaviour odious and nasty without being aware of the facts is pathetic. 4. Dr Foster went to Gloucester in a shower of rain, he fell in puddle right up to his middle and never went there again. I blame global warming, but where there is blame there's a claim. Perhaps we should issue an appeal for Dr Foster to get in touch with the local constabulary to establish if a crime has been committed.[/p][/quote]Yawn. Someone saw him/her splash the lady. So he did splash the lady. THis is , IMO, the behaviour of an odious scumbag. Loads of crimes aren't reported, that doesn't mean they are victimless. Congratulations on you thorogh knowledge of nursey rhymes, though. Very good.[/p][/quote]Just saw your racist post on another story which has been reported, so do one. You are the odious scumbag my friend. davidhornet
  • Score: 3

3:55pm Thu 27 Feb 14

CaptainPC says...

davidhornet wrote:
CaptainPC wrote:
davidhornet wrote:
CaptainPC wrote:
Toshhorn2 wrote:
Really!!!!
Howwouldit be proved that it was deliberate not just simply swerving to miss a pothole/animal can etc
What a complete waste of time.
It doesn't have to be proved to be deliberate. It just has to be proved to have done it.

It is an offence to "drive through a puddle causing a pedestrian to be splashed".

That means the onus is on him to avoid doing so.

Hope they do find the lady and I hope the driver is prosecuted. THis is odious behaviour, just nasty. The blokes a scumbag.
1. Is this newsworthy. No.
2. Is there a victim? As the "victim" did not report it but a third party did then probably no.
3. Has an offence been committed? Perhaps, but how can we be sure. To call the driver a scumbag and call their behaviour odious and nasty without being aware of the facts is pathetic.
4. Dr Foster went to Gloucester in a shower of rain, he fell in puddle right up to his middle and never went there again. I blame global warming, but where there is blame there's a claim. Perhaps we should issue an appeal for Dr Foster to get in touch with the local constabulary to establish if a crime has been committed.
Yawn.

Someone saw him/her splash the lady. So he did splash the lady. THis is , IMO, the behaviour of an odious scumbag.

Loads of crimes aren't reported, that doesn't mean they are victimless.

Congratulations on you thorogh knowledge of nursey rhymes, though. Very good.
Just saw your racist post on another story which has been reported, so do one. You are the odious scumbag my friend.
So if this was you/your wife/child you would think "Oh OK, there was a pothole, so I'm soaked. Bit disappointing" Cos I would be angry and I think it's in the same category as littering.

Was it you?
[quote][p][bold]davidhornet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]CaptainPC[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]davidhornet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]CaptainPC[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Toshhorn2[/bold] wrote: Really!!!! Howwouldit be proved that it was deliberate not just simply swerving to miss a pothole/animal can etc What a complete waste of time.[/p][/quote]It doesn't have to be proved to be deliberate. It just has to be proved to have done it. It is an offence to "drive through a puddle causing a pedestrian to be splashed". That means the onus is on him to avoid doing so. Hope they do find the lady and I hope the driver is prosecuted. THis is odious behaviour, just nasty. The blokes a scumbag.[/p][/quote]1. Is this newsworthy. No. 2. Is there a victim? As the "victim" did not report it but a third party did then probably no. 3. Has an offence been committed? Perhaps, but how can we be sure. To call the driver a scumbag and call their behaviour odious and nasty without being aware of the facts is pathetic. 4. Dr Foster went to Gloucester in a shower of rain, he fell in puddle right up to his middle and never went there again. I blame global warming, but where there is blame there's a claim. Perhaps we should issue an appeal for Dr Foster to get in touch with the local constabulary to establish if a crime has been committed.[/p][/quote]Yawn. Someone saw him/her splash the lady. So he did splash the lady. THis is , IMO, the behaviour of an odious scumbag. Loads of crimes aren't reported, that doesn't mean they are victimless. Congratulations on you thorogh knowledge of nursey rhymes, though. Very good.[/p][/quote]Just saw your racist post on another story which has been reported, so do one. You are the odious scumbag my friend.[/p][/quote]So if this was you/your wife/child you would think "Oh OK, there was a pothole, so I'm soaked. Bit disappointing" Cos I would be angry and I think it's in the same category as littering. Was it you? CaptainPC
  • Score: 4

4:02pm Thu 27 Feb 14

CaptainPC says...

gusgreen wrote:
CaptainPC wrote:
Toshhorn2 wrote:
Really!!!!
Howwouldit be proved that it was deliberate not just simply swerving to miss a pothole/animal can etc
What a complete waste of time.
It doesn't have to be proved to be deliberate. It just has to be proved to have done it.

It is an offence to "drive through a puddle causing a pedestrian to be splashed".

That means the onus is on him to avoid doing so.

Hope they do find the lady and I hope the driver is prosecuted. THis is odious behaviour, just nasty. The blokes a scumbag.
What planet are you on?
I don't know if you have noticed but when it rains there is more water on our roads than in the Atlantic!
Due mainly to potholes,blocked gully drains,poor maintenance and oh, water falling from the sky.

Maybe we should insist that when it rains all traffic stops until its dry in case someone gets splashed

What a total waste of police time- no surprise there then!
There can be a lot of water on the roads, I'm treating your compariuson to the Atlantic as hyperbole, but that doesn't mean you have to splash pedestrians.

Lived in Bushey for years and walking through the Water Lane tunnel was Russian roulette but considerate drivers were able to avoid splashing anyone.

Also if you are driving in conditions that are unsuitable and you are unable to fully control your car then maybe you really shouldn't be driving.

Was it you?
[quote][p][bold]gusgreen[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]CaptainPC[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Toshhorn2[/bold] wrote: Really!!!! Howwouldit be proved that it was deliberate not just simply swerving to miss a pothole/animal can etc What a complete waste of time.[/p][/quote]It doesn't have to be proved to be deliberate. It just has to be proved to have done it. It is an offence to "drive through a puddle causing a pedestrian to be splashed". That means the onus is on him to avoid doing so. Hope they do find the lady and I hope the driver is prosecuted. THis is odious behaviour, just nasty. The blokes a scumbag.[/p][/quote]What planet are you on? I don't know if you have noticed but when it rains there is more water on our roads than in the Atlantic! Due mainly to potholes,blocked gully drains,poor maintenance and oh, water falling from the sky. Maybe we should insist that when it rains all traffic stops until its dry in case someone gets splashed What a total waste of police time- no surprise there then![/p][/quote]There can be a lot of water on the roads, I'm treating your compariuson to the Atlantic as hyperbole, but that doesn't mean you have to splash pedestrians. Lived in Bushey for years and walking through the Water Lane tunnel was Russian roulette but considerate drivers were able to avoid splashing anyone. Also if you are driving in conditions that are unsuitable and you are unable to fully control your car then maybe you really shouldn't be driving. Was it you? CaptainPC
  • Score: 2

9:22pm Thu 27 Feb 14

tiger bay says...

CaptainPC wrote:
gusgreen wrote:
CaptainPC wrote:
Toshhorn2 wrote:
Really!!!!
Howwouldit be proved that it was deliberate not just simply swerving to miss a pothole/animal can etc
What a complete waste of time.
It doesn't have to be proved to be deliberate. It just has to be proved to have done it.

It is an offence to "drive through a puddle causing a pedestrian to be splashed".

That means the onus is on him to avoid doing so.

Hope they do find the lady and I hope the driver is prosecuted. THis is odious behaviour, just nasty. The blokes a scumbag.
What planet are you on?
I don't know if you have noticed but when it rains there is more water on our roads than in the Atlantic!
Due mainly to potholes,blocked gully drains,poor maintenance and oh, water falling from the sky.

Maybe we should insist that when it rains all traffic stops until its dry in case someone gets splashed

What a total waste of police time- no surprise there then!
There can be a lot of water on the roads, I'm treating your compariuson to the Atlantic as hyperbole, but that doesn't mean you have to splash pedestrians.

Lived in Bushey for years and walking through the Water Lane tunnel was Russian roulette but considerate drivers were able to avoid splashing anyone.

Also if you are driving in conditions that are unsuitable and you are unable to fully control your car then maybe you really shouldn't be driving.

Was it you?
Splashing AND littering!! What a violent, uncivilised society we live in!! Think I'll stay indoors from now on.....but oh no....that's fraught with danger too!!
[quote][p][bold]CaptainPC[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]gusgreen[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]CaptainPC[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Toshhorn2[/bold] wrote: Really!!!! Howwouldit be proved that it was deliberate not just simply swerving to miss a pothole/animal can etc What a complete waste of time.[/p][/quote]It doesn't have to be proved to be deliberate. It just has to be proved to have done it. It is an offence to "drive through a puddle causing a pedestrian to be splashed". That means the onus is on him to avoid doing so. Hope they do find the lady and I hope the driver is prosecuted. THis is odious behaviour, just nasty. The blokes a scumbag.[/p][/quote]What planet are you on? I don't know if you have noticed but when it rains there is more water on our roads than in the Atlantic! Due mainly to potholes,blocked gully drains,poor maintenance and oh, water falling from the sky. Maybe we should insist that when it rains all traffic stops until its dry in case someone gets splashed What a total waste of police time- no surprise there then![/p][/quote]There can be a lot of water on the roads, I'm treating your compariuson to the Atlantic as hyperbole, but that doesn't mean you have to splash pedestrians. Lived in Bushey for years and walking through the Water Lane tunnel was Russian roulette but considerate drivers were able to avoid splashing anyone. Also if you are driving in conditions that are unsuitable and you are unable to fully control your car then maybe you really shouldn't be driving. Was it you?[/p][/quote]Splashing AND littering!! What a violent, uncivilised society we live in!! Think I'll stay indoors from now on.....but oh no....that's fraught with danger too!! tiger bay
  • Score: -1

8:22am Fri 28 Feb 14

Toshhorn2 says...

I thought the whole idea of a coat was to stop any splashes making you wet.
Seriously, if this is all we have to worry about life can't be too bad.
Mr Plod, stopp wasting time and go and find some real trouble makers, there are plenty of them about.
Capatain PC grow up and get a life.
I thought the whole idea of a coat was to stop any splashes making you wet. Seriously, if this is all we have to worry about life can't be too bad. Mr Plod, stopp wasting time and go and find some real trouble makers, there are plenty of them about. Capatain PC grow up and get a life. Toshhorn2
  • Score: -1

11:20am Fri 28 Feb 14

CaptainPC says...

Toshhorn2 wrote:
I thought the whole idea of a coat was to stop any splashes making you wet.
Seriously, if this is all we have to worry about life can't be too bad.
Mr Plod, stopp wasting time and go and find some real trouble makers, there are plenty of them about.
Capatain PC grow up and get a life.
So if someone threw a bucket of water over your wife/kids you'd laugh it off?

As to growing up-I think your belitlling of antisocial behaviour shows that it may be you that needs to grow up.

Get a life- Does this mean anything at all or is it just a sign to your fellow morons that you have watched too much American TV?
[quote][p][bold]Toshhorn2[/bold] wrote: I thought the whole idea of a coat was to stop any splashes making you wet. Seriously, if this is all we have to worry about life can't be too bad. Mr Plod, stopp wasting time and go and find some real trouble makers, there are plenty of them about. Capatain PC grow up and get a life.[/p][/quote]So if someone threw a bucket of water over your wife/kids you'd laugh it off? As to growing up-I think your belitlling of antisocial behaviour shows that it may be you that needs to grow up. Get a life- Does this mean anything at all or is it just a sign to your fellow morons that you have watched too much American TV? CaptainPC
  • Score: 1

9:51pm Fri 28 Feb 14

Hairy Hornet says...

Can you imagine walking into a police station and complaining about the soaking? Have the police really got the resources even consider investigating?
Astounding, sounds like a case for Chief Wiggum though,
Can you imagine walking into a police station and complaining about the soaking? Have the police really got the resources even consider investigating? Astounding, sounds like a case for Chief Wiggum though, Hairy Hornet
  • Score: 0

11:56am Sun 2 Mar 14

LocalBoy1 says...

Hairy Hornet wrote:
Can you imagine walking into a police station and complaining about the soaking? Have the police really got the resources even consider investigating?
Astounding, sounds like a case for Chief Wiggum though,
Read the article properly.... "This was reported to police by a third party" not the victim, pity the third party didn't get the registration........
.... To all of you who scoff at this article, a point to remember should you decide to have fun and try it..... "Driving without reasonable consideration" "driving through a puddle causing pedestrians to be splashed"....... The maximum penalty is a level 5 fine. The court must also either endorse the drivers licence with between 3 and 9 penalty points (unless there are "special reasons" not to do so), or impose disqualification for a fixed period and/or until a driving test has been passed. The penalty is the same as for driving without due care and attention......... Something to think about isn't it???
[quote][p][bold]Hairy Hornet[/bold] wrote: Can you imagine walking into a police station and complaining about the soaking? Have the police really got the resources even consider investigating? Astounding, sounds like a case for Chief Wiggum though,[/p][/quote]Read the article properly.... "This was reported to police by a third party" not the victim, pity the third party didn't get the registration........ .... To all of you who scoff at this article, a point to remember should you decide to have fun and try it..... "Driving without reasonable consideration" "driving through a puddle causing pedestrians to be splashed"....... The maximum penalty is a level 5 fine. The court must also either endorse the drivers licence with between 3 and 9 penalty points (unless there are "special reasons" not to do so), or impose disqualification for a fixed period and/or until a driving test has been passed. The penalty is the same as for driving without due care and attention......... Something to think about isn't it??? LocalBoy1
  • Score: 0

2:55pm Sun 2 Mar 14

HermanGoering says...

Hairy Hornet wrote:
Can you imagine walking into a police station and complaining about the soaking? Have the police really got the resources even consider investigating?
Astounding, sounds like a case for Chief Wiggum though,
If I had my way I would execute the splasher. No back answers.
[quote][p][bold]Hairy Hornet[/bold] wrote: Can you imagine walking into a police station and complaining about the soaking? Have the police really got the resources even consider investigating? Astounding, sounds like a case for Chief Wiggum though,[/p][/quote]If I had my way I would execute the splasher. No back answers. HermanGoering
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree