Ashley Cole banned from driving for doing more than 100mph in a 50mph zone

 

 

By Daily Mail Reporter

Last updated at 11:23 AM on 29th January 2010

 

• Comments (0)
  
• Add to My Stories
  

 

England footballer Ashley Cole has been banned from driving for doing 104mph in a 50mph zone

 

England footballer Ashley Cole was today banned from driving for doing more than 100mph in a 50mph zone.

The Chelsea star claimed he was being chased by paparazzi when a speed gun recorded him driving his black Lamborghini Gallardo at 104mph.

 

Magistrates at Kingston today imposed a four-month ban and £1,000 fine.

 

However, Cole's legal team immediately launched a bid against the ban which will be considered later.

 

Cole, who is married to singer and presenter Cheryl Cole, was on the A3 in Kingston, Surrey, when he was clocked speeding.

 

Despite denying the charge, he was convicted at an earlier hearing.

 

Today chairwoman Patricia Baskerville said: 'We have taken into account Mr Cole's clean licence however this was an incident of excessive speed, over twice the speed limit on the road and these were exceptional circumstances which we need to mark.

'For the offence of speeding, Mr Cole will be disqualified for a period of four months and will pay a fine of £1,000.'

 

He was also ordered to pay a £15 victim surcharge and £300 costs to reflect his income and the seriousness of the offence.

Cole, who was not present, was warned if he did drive while disqualified, he could face prison.

His defence barrister asked for 21 days to pay, which magistrates laughed at but granted.

 

Cole's lawyer Katherine Hodson said her client was 'regrettably' unable to attend the hearing because he was playing a match tomorrow night and would be travelling today.

An attempt by her to get sentencing adjourned was rejected.

 

Her application on the driving ban was expected to be considered later.

 

 

Cole was driving a black Lamborghini Gallardo when he was clocked driving at over 100mph. The footballer told police he thought he was driving at 80mph

 

At the earlier hearing, Richard Lomax, prosecuting, described the events of November 17 2008.

He said: 'The defendant was stopped and spoken to and the words he said at the time, when it became plain that somebody was pointing a speed camera at him, were "Can't you do anything about those idiots who keep chasing me?".'

Cole told police he thought he was driving at 80mph when he was stopped just after midday.

 

Mr Lomax said: 'The Crown says there can be no other sensible construction of the words uttered by Mr Cole at the time than that he was conceding he was driving at a speed more than 50mph.

'It is plain that he found the attention of persons with cameras unwelcome and he was trying to get away from them.

 

'The only sensible inference, therefore, is that he was going too quickly.'

 

He added: 'It cannot be a defence to the offence of speeding that one is trying to get away in the circumstances of members of the press showing excessive attention.'

Traffic officer John Wills, of Surrey Police, who was carrying out speed checks on Robin Hood Way that day, said he noticed Cole's car because 'it seemed to be travelling considerably faster' than any other vehicle.

PC Wills and a colleague got into a police car after recording his speed and Cole pulled over in a nearby bus stop.

Cole was asked to get out of the car by PC Wills, who told the court: 'I asked him if he knew what the speed limit was on that stretch of road, and he replied 50.

 

'Then I asked him what speed he was doing, and he said 80mph. I pointed out he was doing considerably more than that and showed him the laser device.'

 

The officer said that after being cautioned, Cole complained about photographers.

PC Wills said: 'He pointed out that there was a man with a camera some distance further down the road.

'I saw him (the photographer) at that time, but I had no idea when he turned up. He was certainly not in evidence when I first saw the Lamborghini.'

 

The 29-year-old, of Godalming, Surrey, did not attend court for his trial earlier this month.

 

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1247008/Ashley-Cole-banned-driving-doing-100mph-50mph-zone.html#ixzz0e0FFCZrV

I don't think he should have been banned, and as it was obviously clear as he could get up to 104 MPH I don't really consider to have done much wrong, he wasn't endangering anyone, and a Lamborghini Gallardo is capable of stopping much faster than those stupid highway code stopping distances from about 1726.

Driving at DOUBLE the speed limit is extremely dangerous, and therefore he should have no complaints.:dozey:

Driving at DOUBLE the speed limit is extremely dangerous, and therefore he should have no complaints.:dozey:

 

No it isn't driving too fast for the conditions is dangerous, doing 104 MPH on a clear stretch of a 3 lane motorway in my view isn't dangerous at all, doing 104 MPH when it's foggy,raining and past a school would be dangerous. I bet that Lamborghini could go from 104-0 MPH more quickly than an average hatchback could brake from 50-0, that's what they do supercars and superbikes are designed to go very fast but their also designed to stop very very fast too.

No it isn't driving too fast for the conditions is dangerous, doing 104 MPH on a clear stretch of a 3 lane motorway in my view isn't dangerous at all, doing 104 MPH when it's foggy,raining and past a school would be dangerous. I bet that Lamborghini could go from 104-0 MPH more quickly than an average hatchback could brake from 50-0, that's what they do supercars and superbikes are designed to go very fast but their also designed to stop very very fast too.

 

Maybe, but this wasn't on a motorway, in which case his speed wouldn't have been over twice the limit anyway.

Furthermore, just because he's in the extremely privileged position of being able to afford a "supercar" shouldn't mean he should be allowed to do what he likes.:dozey:

 

Also, as a £1,000 fine is chicken-feed to him, he should have been ordered to do some kind of community service instead.

Maybe, but this wasn't on a motorway, in which case his speed wouldn't have been over twice the limit anyway.

Furthermore, just because he's in the extremely privileged position of being able to afford a "supercar" shouldn't mean he should be allowed to do what he likes.:dozey:

 

It was on a 3 lane A road that used to be 70 MPH apparantly but this was before I could drive, as you don't actually know the stretch of road you haven't really got much to go on other than what the Daily Wail says, people go up there faster than 104 too but surprisingly that isn't news worthy because their not a footballer.

I'm not saying he can do what he likes I'm saying that he wasn't being dangerous and shouldn't have been banned.

I think he should have been given a fine and allowed to continue to drive, I don't even particularly like the guy or football but this is just a retarded frenzy about nothing, it's an absolute non story.

It was on a 3 lane A road that used to be 70 MPH apparantly but this was before I could drive, as you don't actually know the stretch of road you haven't really got much to go on other than what the Daily Wail says, people go up there faster than 104 too but surprisingly that isn't news worthy because their not a footballer.

I'm not saying he can do what he likes I'm saying that he wasn't being dangerous and shouldn't have been banned.

I think he should have been given a fine and allowed to continue to drive, I don't even particularly like the guy or football but this is just a retarded frenzy about nothing, it's an absolute non story.

 

Well whatever the speed limit (and presumably it was lowered to 50 for a good reason), there's no excuse for driving over double it, whoever you are. If he wants to drive that fast he should go and use a race-track, as he could probably afford to rent one out for his own private use if he wanted.;)

I am of the opinion that the UK motorway speed limit is too low on many stretches, but that doesn't change anything.

It was on a 3 lane A road that used to be 70 MPH apparantly but this was before I could drive, as you don't actually know the stretch of road you haven't really got much to go on other than what the Daily Wail says, people go up there faster than 104 too but surprisingly that isn't news worthy because their not a footballer.

I'm not saying he can do what he likes I'm saying that he wasn't being dangerous and shouldn't have been banned.

I think he should have been given a fine and allowed to continue to drive, I don't even particularly like the guy or football but this is just a retarded frenzy about nothing, it's an absolute non story.

 

^Woop woop.

 

You won't come across more blatant dickheads then Ashley Cole, but he shouldn't have been banned for 4 months. I don't think whether or not it was a supercar should matter, but for once, being famous seems to have worked against a person in court, that doesn't mean we should revel in it, it's still injustice.

 

Well whatever the speed limit (and presumably it was lowered to 50 for a good reason), there's no excuse for driving over double it, whoever you are. If he wants to drive that fast he should go and use a race-track, as he could probably afford to rent one out for his own private use if he wanted.;)

 

You're doing exactly what the courts did, going much harder on him because he's very wealthy.

 

Why do you want to see him do community service? Do you just need to see him humiliated for some reason? He's banned for 4 months, which is ridiculous. It would take an incredibly unreasonable fine to make money an issue in terms of how he's been charged.

^Woop woop.

 

You won't come across more blatant dickheads then Ashley Cole, but he shouldn't have been banned for 4 months. I don't think whether or not it was a supercar should matter, but for once, being famous seems to have worked against a person in court, that doesn't mean we should revel in it, it's still injustice.

 

I disagree. It's probably the only way you're going to make people in his position take notice, as fines aren't going to work unless they're in the region of 50k or something, which is impossible.

 

It would take an incredibly unreasonable fine to make money an issue in terms of how he's been charged.

 

Exactly, which is why a ban and/or community service are the only realistic punishments in his case. Otherwise he'll think he's "untouchable".:dozey:

For someone with a clean license, who hasn't had any convictions for speeding or dangerous driving, and he's in his late 20s. Hardly a menace to society because he went way over the limit on one road.

 

The fact is that the law should be equal towards everyone, and you are revelling in how a rich footballer is being treated unfairly (Bitter much?).

 

Re-read your posts, in every one there is a remark about how privileged he is, what financial position he is, how he can afford to rent a track, how it shouldn't matter who he is, assuming he'll think he's "untouchable" (Ridiculous) and try and cut all that crap out and look at him as just a UK citizen and you will hopefully see just how wrong you are.

 

But you won't, so I'm done with trying to hammer sense into your insanely biased viewpoint.

 

The fact is that the law should be equal towards everyone

 

OK, then in that case anyone that drives over double the speed limit should be banned for a set period, no matter who it is. That would make it fair, as fines are never going to deter the "super-rich", whatever way you look at it.

Anyway, what makes you think he's the only one that has been banned for such an offence?

You're only assuming that's the case, which could be seen as bias on your part.:smug:

 

So if you think the ban was too long, what should it be for a first offence of driving over double the speed limit?

One day, a week, a month? You have to start somewhere.

There's a massive difference between being a few miles over the limit, and double the limit, and this needs to be recognised.

 

Anyone can accidentally find themselves a few miles an hour over the speed limit, and if they're unlucky, end up with a fine and points. You can maybe sympathise with someone in that situation.

However, driving at over double the speed limit has to be pre-meditated, and therefore should be treated accordingly.

Unless you are blind (in which case you shouldn't be driving in the first place) you should be aware of the speed limit at all times.

 

If the limits aren't going to be enforced in a way that's going to act as a deterrent, you might as well not have them and just allow driving anarchy, which would be ridiculous. Or maybe that's what you would prefer?:dozey:

OK, then in that case anyone that drives over double the speed limit should be banned for a set period, no matter who it is. That would make it fair, as fines are never going to deter the "super-rich", whatever way you look at it.

 

Was that supposed to be in response to my quote? Keep it somewhat relevant please.

 

I never said he's the only person who's been banned. I've known quite a few people who've been caught at these kinds of speeds, the longest ban was 7 weeks, and I know one person who did around 120mph on a motorway and got 28 days (Which, from people I've known in N.I, Rep of Ire and England, has been the standard ban). I'm well aware that people get banned for speeding, I'm not assuming anything.

 

To answer your question, he should've been given a month.

 

But let's not quibble. I want you to stop leaving out the parts of my argument which are more specific:

 

For someone with a clean license' date=' who hasn't had any convictions for speeding or dangerous driving, and he's in his late 20s. Hardly a menace to society because he went way over the limit on one road.[/quote']

 

You keep painting this picture of him as this rich ignorant type who will never learn unless he is severely punished, it's his 1st offence! Your attitude towards him is persecuting, calling his actions pre-meditated, he made a mistake.

 

Not to take away from the focus that he did indeed drive like an idiot, and he got caught out, so he deserves a fine/points/ban. Fair enough. But 4 months? Why are you so adamant that because money has nothing to do with it, he's suddenly a demon behind the wheel and will persistently do it unless we crack down on it with a huge ban? You didn't have this "We've got to start somewhere" attitude earlier, it's as if you wanted him hung.

 

If it was the 2nd or 3rd time he's done it, and he displayed the attitude of a person who wasn't being influenced by the intervention of justice, that's when equality in the courtroom begins to go out the window.

 

He's been driving over 10 years and has had no points on his licence up until now, 4 months is excessive.

Ashley is a boy? :lol:

 

I don't think he should necessarily be banned from driving, just fined or have his license taken for a bit. :thinking: :uhoh:

 

To answer your question, he should've been given a month.

 

Well at least you now admit he deserved some sort of ban for his idiotic behaviour, which is something, at least.

 

You keep painting this picture of him as this rich ignorant type who will never learn unless he is severely punished, it's his 1st offence! Your attitude towards him is persecuting, calling his actions pre-meditated, he made a mistake.

 

I disagree. If you drive at over double the speed limit, you must be aware of that unless you're not paying attention to the road, therefore it can't simply be "by mistake", whoever you are.

 

Not to take away from the focus that he did indeed drive like an idiot, and he got caught out, so he deserves a fine/points/ban. Fair enough. But 4 months? Why are you so adamant that because money has nothing to do with it, he's suddenly a demon behind the wheels and will persistently do it unless we crack down on it with a huge ban? You didn't have this "We've got to start somewhere" attitude earlier, it's as if you wanted him hung.

 

That's just your mistaken perception. I was merely saying that I felt a ban was justified, when it seemed that others were suggesting it was harsh.

I would even go as far as saying that driving at double the speed limit should be automatically regarded as "careless driving", and treated accordingly.

 

He's been driving over 10 years and has had no points on his licence up until now, 4 months is excessive.

 

Fair enough. Maybe his ban will be reduced on appeal, then.

Ashley is a boy? :lol:

 

I don't think he should necessarily be banned from driving, just fined or have his license taken for a bit. :thinking: :uhoh:

 

Well at the moment he's going to lose his licence for four months. It's just a question of whether you think that's excessive or not.

Fining him is a waste of time, as he's one of the highest-paid footballers in Britain.

Well at the moment he's going to lose his licence for four months. It's just a question of whether you think that's excessive or not.

Fining him is a waste of time, as he's one of the highest-paid footballers in Britain.

 

I say 2-3 months then. :pleased:

I say 2-3 months then. :pleased:

 

Fair enough. I wouldn't have a problem with that.

Fair enough. I wouldn't have a problem with that.

 

Have you had your license taken away before? :P

Have you had your license taken away before? :P

 

Nope. I realise that driving is a privilege, not a right.:smug:

Nope. I realise that driving is a privilege, not a right.:smug:

 

:surprised:

Not the first stupid thing he's done, the fact that he's able to still cheat when married to someone like Cheryl Tweedy speaks for itself.

Well at least you now admit he deserved some sort of ban for his idiotic behaviour, which is something, at least.

 

I didn't "admit" anything, I never said he didn't deserve a ban, and that was the first time you asked, from the start I said it was simply over the top.

 

I disagree. If you drive at over double the speed limit, you must be aware of that unless you're not paying attention to the road, therefore it can't simply be "by mistake", whoever you are.

 

Your hardliner vision of what constitutes a mistake is pretty sick. Fine, to be pedantic about it, it wasn't a "mistake" literally, it was a bad decision which he made within a few moments of thinking. My point was that for a minute or two he made a bad decision and wasn't thinking clearly, no need for demonizing him.

 

That's just your mistaken perception. I was merely saying that I felt a ban was justified, when it seemed that others were suggesting it was harsh.

 

Actually you wanted him to do community service, for some bizarre, degrading reason.

Not the first stupid thing he's done, the fact that he's able to still cheat when married to someone like Cheryl Tweedy speaks for itself.

 

Irrelevant, but true!:P

no need for demonizing him.

 

I don't believe anyone is.

 

Actually you wanted him to do community service, for some bizarre, degrading reason.

 

Well it would make more sense than fining him, even if he was just ordered to go and take part in a football coaching session for children in a deprived area for a few hours.