TA Podcast

Post by Chris
Anyone listen to it?
It lasted three sentences. False voice whipping up a storm of excitement.
Exactly why I hate podcasts written to be podcasts.
Disgruntled of Earley

Were you listening to the trailer?

--
Kosmo Richard W
www.travelswmw.whitnet.uk
https://tinyurl.com/KRWpics

Chris

2024-10-14 18:49:33 UTC

Post by Chris
Anyone listen to it?
It lasted three sentences. False voice whipping up a storm of excitement.
Exactly why I hate podcasts written to be podcasts.
Disgruntled of Earley

Were you listening to the trailer?

I heard the trailer, yes, and then began to listen to the podcast.

Mrs McT

john ashby

2024-10-13 10:49:33 UTC

Post by Chris
Anyone listen to it?
It lasted three sentences. False voice whipping up a storm of excitement.
Exactly why I hate podcasts written to be podcasts.
Disgruntled of Earley

The only interesting bit was Rob Rinder explaining why George should not
have pled guilty to the dangerous driving charge (without due care and
attention at worst - diminished by Alice's reckless actions) and why 2
years should have been the starting sentence but reduced for an early
guilty plea. Basically tearing into the Legal Advisor (they must surely
have had one, no?) in similar terms to KRW's views on the business
acumen of the script writers.

john

Kosmo

2024-10-13 14:55:20 UTC

Post by Chris
Anyone listen to it?
It lasted three sentences. False voice whipping up a storm of
excitement.
Exactly why I hate podcasts written to be podcasts.
Disgruntled of Earley

I am not sure I consider a celebrity judge as being a good source of
guidance but I would submit that George might have pleaded guilty at an
early stage but he wasted vast police resources by not telling the truth
originally and by his cock and bull story over someone like Harry being
seen - so seeking a reduction is unlikely. Given that he will serve
less than 10 months (and given the shortage of spaces maybe less given
that he did not directly injure anyone) it feels about right to me.

--
Kosmo Richard W
www.travelswmw.whitnet.uk
https://tinyurl.com/KRWpics

john ashby

2024-10-13 16:31:11 UTC

Post by Chris
Anyone listen to it?
It lasted three sentences. False voice whipping up a storm of
excitement.
Exactly why I hate podcasts written to be podcasts.
Disgruntled of Earley

The only interesting bit was Rob Rinder explaining why George should
not have pled guilty to the dangerous driving charge (without due care
and attention at worst - diminished by Alice's reckless actions) and
why 2 years should have been the starting sentence but reduced for an
early guilty plea. Basically tearing into the Legal Advisor (they must
surely have had one, no?) in similar terms to KRW's views on the
business acumen of the script writers.
john

One question that I (fortunately) don't know the answer to is what
impact a dangerous driving conviction vs DWDCAA would have on car
insurance rates when he gets out. Is it a blanket "any motoring
conviction" or do the insurers take the severity of the offence into
account?

john

john ashby

2024-10-13 16:51:07 UTC

Post by Chris
Anyone listen to it?
It lasted three sentences. False voice whipping up a storm of
excitement.
Exactly why I hate podcasts written to be podcasts.
Disgruntled of Earley

The only interesting bit was Rob Rinder explaining why George should
not have pled guilty to the dangerous driving charge (without due care
and attention at worst - diminished by Alice's reckless actions) and
why 2 years should have been the starting sentence but reduced for an
early guilty plea. Basically tearing into the Legal Advisor (they must
surely have had one, no?) in similar terms to KRW's views on the
business acumen of the script writers.
john

Looking at the sentencing guidelines for dangerous driving
https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/offences/magistrates-court/item/dangerous-driving/

the maximum custodial sentence should have been 36 weeks (I can't see
any of the culpability factors in George's case, and he only gets the
higher harm rating on damage to property and arguably distress to
victims (no physical harm, in spite of Harrison's baby).

Similalry for the perverting the course of justice charge the guidelines
https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/offences/crown-court/item/perverting-the-course-of-justice/
seem to me to suggest that he got the maximum sentence available
(culpability B, Harm 2) with no mitigation for a guilty plea.

john

Kosmo

2024-10-14 09:39:10 UTC

Post by Chris
Anyone listen to it?
It lasted three sentences. False voice whipping up a storm of
excitement.
Exactly why I hate podcasts written to be podcasts.
Disgruntled of Earley

The only interesting bit was Rob Rinder explaining why George should
not have pled guilty to the dangerous driving charge (without due
care and attention at worst - diminished by Alice's reckless actions)
and why 2 years should have been the starting sentence but reduced
for an early guilty plea. Basically tearing into the Legal Advisor
(they must surely have had one, no?) in similar terms to KRW's views
on the business acumen of the script writers.
john

I am not sure I consider a celebrity judge as being a good source of
guidance but I would submit that George might have pleaded guilty at
an early stage but he wasted vast police resources by not telling the
truth originally and by his cock and bull story over someone like
Harry being seen - so seeking a reduction is unlikely. Given that he
will serve less than 10 months (and given the shortage of spaces maybe
less given that he did not directly injure anyone) it feels about
right to me.

Looking at the sentencing guidelines for dangerous driving
https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/offences/magistrates-court/item/dangerous-driving/
the maximum custodial sentence should have been 36 weeks (I can't see
any of the culpability factors in George's case, and he only gets the
higher harm rating on damage to property and arguably distress to
victims (no physical harm, in spite of Harrison's baby).
Similalry for the perverting the course of justice charge the guidelines
https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/offences/crown-court/item/perverting-the-course-of-justice/
seem to me to suggest that he got the maximum sentence available
(culpability B, Harm 2) with no mitigation for a guilty plea.
john

I see you have used one magistrates court and one Crown court - was he
in a Crown court - I missed that?

--
Kosmo Richard W
www.travelswmw.whitnet.uk
https://tinyurl.com/KRWpics

DavidK

2024-10-14 09:50:18 UTC

Post by Chris
Anyone listen to it?
It lasted three sentences. False voice whipping up a storm of
excitement.
Exactly why I hate podcasts written to be podcasts.
Disgruntled of Earley

The only interesting bit was Rob Rinder explaining why George should
not have pled guilty to the dangerous driving charge (without due
care and attention at worst - diminished by Alice's reckless
actions) and why 2 years should have been the starting sentence but
reduced for an early guilty plea. Basically tearing into the Legal
Advisor (they must surely have had one, no?) in similar terms to
KRW's views on the business acumen of the script writers.
john

I am not sure I consider a celebrity judge as being a good source of
guidance but I would submit that George might have pleaded guilty at
an early stage but he wasted vast police resources by not telling the
truth originally and by his cock and bull story over someone like
Harry being seen - so seeking a reduction is unlikely. Given that he
will serve less than 10 months (and given the shortage of spaces
maybe less given that he did not directly injure anyone) it feels
about right to me.

Looking at the sentencing guidelines for dangerous driving
https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/offences/magistrates-court/item/dangerous-driving/
the maximum custodial sentence should have been 36 weeks (I can't see
any of the culpability factors in George's case, and he only gets the
higher harm rating on damage to property and arguably distress to
victims (no physical harm, in spite of Harrison's baby).
Similalry for the perverting the course of justice charge the
guidelines
https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/offences/crown-court/item/perverting-the-course-of-justice/
seem to me to suggest that he got the maximum sentence available
(culpability B, Harm 2) with no mitigation for a guilty plea.
john

I see you have used one magistrates court and one Crown court - was he
in a Crown court - I missed that?

I wondered if it was deliberate in order to give George the grounds for
appeal and prolong the angst.

john ashby

2024-10-14 10:19:06 UTC

Post by Chris
Anyone listen to it?
It lasted three sentences. False voice whipping up a storm of
excitement.
Exactly why I hate podcasts written to be podcasts.
Disgruntled of Earley

The only interesting bit was Rob Rinder explaining why George should
not have pled guilty to the dangerous driving charge (without due
care and attention at worst - diminished by Alice's reckless
actions) and why 2 years should have been the starting sentence but
reduced for an early guilty plea. Basically tearing into the Legal
Advisor (they must surely have had one, no?) in similar terms to
KRW's views on the business acumen of the script writers.
john

I am not sure I consider a celebrity judge as being a good source of
guidance but I would submit that George might have pleaded guilty at
an early stage but he wasted vast police resources by not telling the
truth originally and by his cock and bull story over someone like
Harry being seen - so seeking a reduction is unlikely. Given that he
will serve less than 10 months (and given the shortage of spaces
maybe less given that he did not directly injure anyone) it feels
about right to me.

Looking at the sentencing guidelines for dangerous driving https://
www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/offences/magistrates-court/item/
dangerous-driving/
the maximum custodial sentence should have been 36 weeks (I can't see
any of the culpability factors in George's case, and he only gets the
higher harm rating on damage to property and arguably distress to
victims (no physical harm, in spite of Harrison's baby).
Similalry for the perverting the course of justice charge the
guidelines https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/offences/crown-court/
item/perverting-the-course-of-justice/
seem to me to suggest that he got the maximum sentence available
(culpability B, Harm 2) with no mitigation for a guilty plea.
john

I see you have used one magistrates court and one Crown court - was he
in a Crown court - I missed that?

According to RInder he was in The High Court because the judge was
addressed as My Lord instead of Your Honour (though there are some
Circuit Judges who might be so addressed, the examples given are The
Recorder of Liverpool and Central Criminal Court judges, but probably
not Felpersham.

john.

john

Kosmo

2024-10-14 11:59:38 UTC

Post by Chris
Anyone listen to it?
It lasted three sentences. False voice whipping up a storm of
excitement.
Exactly why I hate podcasts written to be podcasts.
Disgruntled of Earley

The only interesting bit was Rob Rinder explaining why George
should not have pled guilty to the dangerous driving charge
(without due care and attention at worst - diminished by Alice's
reckless actions) and why 2 years should have been the starting
sentence but reduced for an early guilty plea. Basically tearing
into the Legal Advisor (they must surely have had one, no?) in
similar terms to KRW's views on the business acumen of the script
writers.
john

I am not sure I consider a celebrity judge as being a good source of
guidance but I would submit that George might have pleaded guilty at
an early stage but he wasted vast police resources by not telling
the truth originally and by his cock and bull story over someone
like Harry being seen - so seeking a reduction is unlikely. Given
that he will serve less than 10 months (and given the shortage of
spaces maybe less given that he did not directly injure anyone) it
feels about right to me.

Looking at the sentencing guidelines for dangerous driving https://
www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/offences/magistrates-court/item/
dangerous-driving/
the maximum custodial sentence should have been 36 weeks (I can't see
any of the culpability factors in George's case, and he only gets the
higher harm rating on damage to property and arguably distress to
victims (no physical harm, in spite of Harrison's baby).
Similalry for the perverting the course of justice charge the
guidelines https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/offences/crown-court/
item/perverting-the-course-of-justice/
seem to me to suggest that he got the maximum sentence available
(culpability B, Harm 2) with no mitigation for a guilty plea.
john

I see you have used one magistrates court and one Crown court - was he
in a Crown court - I missed that?

Thank you.

--
Kosmo Richard W
www.travelswmw.whitnet.uk
https://tinyurl.com/KRWpics

nick

2024-10-16 08:30:25 UTC

Post by Chris
Anyone listen to it?
It lasted three sentences. False voice whipping up a storm of
excitement.
Exactly why I hate podcasts written to be podcasts.
Disgruntled of Earley

Jasper Rees from The Daily Telegraph didn't like it much either:

<https://www.telegraph.co.uk/radio/what-to-listen-to/radio-4-the-archers-podcast-bbc-review/>

(Probably archived at https://archive.ph/wip/btrWy but archive.today
seems to be playing up this morning)

Nick

Kate B

2024-10-16 10:01:02 UTC