Disappointing

[WeeRussell]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Well that is all absolutely true, agreed. The example I gave earlier though, Henry Ruggs, Raiders Wide Receiver recently imprisoned and awaiting trial for killing an innocent woman doing 156mph through Las Vegas in his corvette with the mother of his child in the passenger seat twice over the limit… there is SOME daylight there between him and Newell, i think you’ll agree.

I would agree. But whats the point in your example HB?

I don’t think anyone’s pretending people haven’t been even more stupid than Joe in the past. I don’t see the need for trying to measure it against more ridiculous crimes.

Just like when Boyle did it. It was stupid and irresponsible and he deserves to be called out and punished for it. I think you got the reaction you did for suggesting it wasn’t reckless or life threatening (and then claiming to not have said that 😆) and have to admit it did strike me as an odd post in that you were offering mitigating factors and dismissing the first few mild posts with “pitchforks away” for a serious drink driving offence.

[greenlex]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Well that is all absolutely true, agreed. The example I gave earlier though, Henry Ruggs, Raiders Wide Receiver recently imprisoned and awaiting trial for killing an innocent woman doing 156mph through Las Vegas in his corvette with the mother of his child in the passenger seat twice over the limit… there is SOME daylight there between him and Newell, i think you’ll agree.

Absolutely. That’s why he’s awaiting trial and Joe was playing last night.

[Just_Jimmy]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I’m not condoning anything but I’m not sure what your definition of pissed is. The limit is so low now that 2-3 times over would be unlikely to have you anywhere near pissed.

He was 66mg per 100mg of breath in Scotland that's 3x. In England which has a higher limit he's still almost twice over.

It's inexcusable.

Sent from my SM-G991B using Tapatalk

[The Harp Awakes]

Thought he was completely off the pace 1st half on Wednesday. Improved in the 2nd.

Poor decision to play him. He should have been suspended by the club. Doesn't teach the right lesson.

[MWHIBBIES]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Absolutely. That’s why he’s awaiting trial and Joe was playing last night.

Joe got lucky. All it takes is someone walking a dog or out for a run and he's up for trial too. That's the point.

[tamig]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

He was 66mg per 100mg of breath in Scotland that's 3x. In England which has a higher limit he's still almost twice over.

It's inexcusable.

Sent from my SM-G991B using Tapatalk

That wasn’t the point. It could have been 2-3 pints. People using terms like pissed and hammered which paints a different picture. And as said previously I’m not condoning it for a minute. The sensationlist language is unnecessary though.

[Slim Shady]

31st of October just after midnight.

So after the game at Ross County was postponed due to covid, he’s deemed it okay to go out and get pished then jump in his motor.

Would’ve thought the club had issued strict guidelines given the reason for postponement?

Then we have an outbreak in the club causing another postponement.

Very poor choices.

[The dalmeny]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

6766393[/URL]]Two mitigating factors; first, hes in a very rural location, second, he's caught according to the cops he's driving at a 'very slow speed'. A stupid mistake but its not reckless or endangering life. Pitchforks away please.

there can never be a Mitigating factor, Wallyford, rural ffs

[Sir David Gray]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

31st of October just after midnight.

So after the game at Ross County was postponed due to covid, he’s deemed it okay to go out and get pished then jump in his motor.

Would’ve thought the club had issued strict guidelines given the reason for postponement?

Then we have an outbreak in the club causing another postponement.

Very poor choices.

That's actually a really good point and just makes it even worse for me.

I would imagine Hibs will have taken that into account when handing him "the maximum possible fine".

[Crunchie]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Funny I thought he was great, as was JDH.

I thought it was one of his best performances for us, opinions are weird. Him Porto and JDH were standouts for me, as was Campbell.

[Crunchie]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I never said it wasn’t reckless or life threatening. I think it’s utter bollocks trying to pretend every version of the same crime is the same. You may as well say every theft or manslaughter is equally severe so should carry the same sentence. Nonsense.

Give up, you're having a mare. Anyone who gets in a car drunk or after a drink is an idiot full stop and could easily end in loss of life. FYI driving slowly can also cause accidents.
I'm sure Joe won't be trying to excuse his behaviour, and nor should he.

[WhileTheChief..]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Give up, you're having a mare. Anyone who gets in a car drunk or after a drink is an idiot full stop and could easily end in loss of life. FYI driving slowly can also cause accidents.
I'm sure Joe won't be trying to excuse his behaviour, and nor should he.

He's not making excuses - he's saying there are different levels to drink driving - which there clearly are.

Everyone knows they shouldn't do it, but there is a world of difference between driving home smashed out your head or being slightly over the limit one morning after a few pints.

Both stupid, both illegal, but the courts would deal them entirely differently, as they should.

[Crunchie]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

He's not making excuses - he's saying there are different levels to drink driving - which there clearly are.

Everyone knows they shouldn't do it, but there is a world of difference between driving home smashed out your head or being slightly over the limit one morning after a few pints.

Both stupid, both illegal, but the courts would deal them entirely differently, as they should.

By all accounts he was more than slightly over the limit, and I'm aware there are different levels to any crime, as everyone is, it doesn't need pointing out to anyone.
I would personally ban anyone substantially over the limit for life, end off, no exceptions.

[hibsbollah]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I would agree. But whats the point in your example HB?

I don’t think anyone’s pretending people haven’t been even more stupid than Joe in the past. I don’t see the need for trying to measure it against more ridiculous crimes.

Just like when Boyle did it. It was stupid and irresponsible and he deserves to be called out and punished for it. I think you got the reaction you did for suggesting it wasn’t reckless or life threatening (and then claiming to not have said that ��) and have to admit it did strike me as an odd post in that you were offering mitigating factors and dismissing the first few mild posts with “pitchforks away” for a serious drink driving offence.

The point I was making was there are varying degrees of dangerous behaviour that you can exhibit while drink driving. IMO Speed is the main ingredient in how life threatening the behaviour is. So ergo its obvious that Newell going so slow as to be commented on by the officer at the scene is less egregious and dangerous than a 'steaming' laddie driving fast and recklessly, as in the Ruggs case. Some folk are clutching their pearls and saying that means i'm saying drink drivings OK? Give me peace.

I'll hold up my hands to admittedly getting confused as to where exactly Wallyford was, which may have ruined the point i was trying to make somewhat

As Joe can attest, We all have bad days.

[wookie70]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

By all accounts he was more than slightly over the limit, and I'm aware there are different levels to any crime, as everyone is, it doesn't need pointing out to anyone.
I would personally ban anyone substantially over the limit for life, end off, no exceptions.

He was wrong, probably had a couple of pints or a couple of glasses of wine and made a terrible decision. Driving slowly likely says he knew he was in the wrong but also that he wasn't wanting to cause harm. No-one was hurt and by some of the thinking on here you should be banned for life for a bald tyre, jumping a red light or being involved in an accident due to you not having your full attention on the road. Those could also have all resulted in death and to me the law deals with drink driving correctly and Joe is rightly being punished with a massive loss of liberty for a year. He also never refused the test or tried to get out of it or get a lesser punishment by delaying and doing blood tests etc. He was caught and has taken his punishment, which was proportionate, the way he should have. Boyle did similar a few years back and he has came back stronger than ever. Newell knows he did wrong imo and I hope he works as hard as Boyler has after committing his crime.