Naz last night

[Adoniss]

oh yeh i forgot to add..HE RAN AWAY FROM THE SCENE OF THE CRIME!!!

wow that's unusual, nobody runs away from the scenes of a crime

There are more than enough mitigating circumstances to explain why he ran away from the scene of the crime (e.g. I was afraid of being arrested given that I'm a family man so I was worried for my liberty because I have to support my wife and children, and I ran away from the scene in a state of panic, etc, etc). Running away from the scene of an accident isn't an automatic custodial sentence.

I've seen people who killed pedestrians who got away with a community sentence, they've had various arguments, e.g. I wasn't negligent, there was an item on the road which caused me to swerve, or the other driver or a pedestrian was negligent and I tried my best to avoid them, etc.

Running away from the scene of an accident after you just f**ked someone up from crashing into them at 90mph is wrong.

'Going to get help', he drives one of the most expensive cars in the world- doesnt me have a mobile phone?

Face it, hes a cocky bastard and deserves to go away. What if that was a member of your family he just ploughed into! :(

I hope he doesnt get off just because of who he is and how much money hes got!

[knockout]

oh yeh i forgot to add..HE RAN AWAY FROM THE SCENE OF THE CRIME!!!

wow that's unusual, nobody runs away from the scenes of a crime

There are more than enough mitigating circumstances to explain why he ran away from the scene of the crime (e.g. I was afraid of being arrested given that I'm a family man so I was worried for my liberty because I have to support my wife and children, and I ran away from the scene in a state of panic, etc, etc). Running away from the scene of an accident isn't an automatic custodial sentence.

I've seen people who killed pedestrians who got away with a community sentence, they've had various arguments, e.g. I wasn't negligent, there was an item on the road which caused me to swerve, or the other driver or a pedestrian was negligent and I tried my best to avoid them, etc.

Running away from the scene of an accident after you just f**ked someone up from crashing into them at 90mph is wrong.

'Going to get help', he drives one of the most expensive cars in the world- doesnt me have a mobile phone?

Face it, hes a cocky bastard and deserves to go away. What if that was a member of your family he just ploughed into! :(

I hope he doesnt get off just because of who he is and how much money hes got!

Adoniss, you are barking up the wrong tree mate.... no one is saying that it wasnt a stupid and wreckless thing to do...
We are just suggesting that a custodial seems unlikely.

[The Law]

Running away from the scene of an accident after you just f**ked someone up from crashing into them at 90mph is wrong.

'Going to get help', he drives one of the most expensive cars in the world- doesnt me have a mobile phone?

Face it, hes a cocky bastard and deserves to go away. What if that was a member of your family he just ploughed into! :(

I hope he doesnt get off just because of who he is and how much money hes got!

The fact remains that you have NO idea why he ran away from the scene, and he could easily have a good excuse. Nor do you know who was negligent during the crash (maybe no-one was negligent and it was an item on the ground that caused him to swerve, or maybe he was trying to avoid a pedestrian or another car). These are all mitigating arguments he can use.

Like I said earlier, he may argue that he ran away from the scene because he was afraid of being arrested given that he's a family man and was worried for his liberty. Furthermore, he has to support his wife and children and that he ran away from the scene in a state of panic, he was worried for his family's well-being. These mitigating arguments have been used thousands of times in court and they do have a genuine effect on the sentence.

As 'Knockout' pointed out he can also argue that he was looking for immediate help. He may have already phoned for an ambulance, but he was also looking for immediate help, so he left the scene.

There are so many potential arguments and mitigating statements he can use. We have no accurate details of the offence in question so we can't really say one way or another what really happened. You can't blame him for the offence until he has been tried in a court of law, he may carry no blame. We must let the courts make the judgement.

One thing I do know is that it is unlikely that he will be sent to prison.

[knockout]

Running away from the scene of an accident after you just f**ked someone up from crashing into them at 90mph is wrong.

'Going to get help', he drives one of the most expensive cars in the world- doesnt me have a mobile phone?

Face it, hes a cocky bastard and deserves to go away. What if that was a member of your family he just ploughed into! :(

I hope he doesnt get off just because of who he is and how much money hes got!

The fact remains that you have NO idea why he ran away from the scene, and he could easily have a good excuse. Nor do you know who was negligent during the crash (maybe no-one was negligent and it was an item on the ground that caused him to swerve, or maybe he was trying to avoid a pedestrian or another car). These are all mitigating arguments he can use.

Like I said earlier, he may argue that he ran away from the scene because he was afraid of being arrested given that he's a family man and was worried for his liberty. Furthermore, he has to support his wife and children and that he ran away from the scene in a state of panic, he was worried for his family's well-being. These mitigating arguments have been used thousands of times in court and they do have a genuine effect on the sentence.

As 'Knockout' pointed out he can also argue that he was looking for immediate help. He may have already phoned for an ambulance, but he was also looking for immediate help, so he left the scene.

There are so many potential arguments and mitigating statements he can use. We have no accurate details of the offence in question so we can't really say one way or another what really happened. You can't blame him for the offence until he has been tried in a court of law, he may carry no blame. We must let the courts make the judgement.

One thing I do know is that it is unlikely that he will be sent to prison.

fornicate me, that was better than any of my Law coursework at university hahahaha

[My T Sharp]

Running away from the scene of an accident after you just f**ked someone up from crashing into them at 90mph is wrong.

'Going to get help', he drives one of the most expensive cars in the world- doesnt me have a mobile phone?

Face it, hes a cocky bastard and deserves to go away. What if that was a member of your family he just ploughed into! :(

I hope he doesnt get off just because of who he is and how much money hes got!

The fact remains that you have NO idea why he ran away from the scene, and he could easily have a good excuse. Nor do you know who was negligent during the crash (maybe no-one was negligent and it was an item on the ground that caused him to swerve, or maybe he was trying to avoid a pedestrian or another car). These are all mitigating arguments he can use.

Like I said earlier, he may argue that he ran away from the scene because he was afraid of being arrested given that he's a family man and was worried for his liberty. Furthermore, he has to support his wife and children and that he ran away from the scene in a state of panic, he was worried for his family's well-being. These mitigating arguments have been used thousands of times in court and they do have a genuine effect on the sentence.

As 'Knockout' pointed out he can also argue that he was looking for immediate help. He may have already phoned for an ambulance, but he was also looking for immediate help, so he left the scene.

There are so many potential arguments and mitigating statements he can use. We have no accurate details of the offence in question so we can't really say one way or another what really happened. You can't blame him for the offence until he has been tried in a court of law, he may carry no blame. We must let the courts make the judgement.

One thing I do know is that it is unlikely that he will be sent to prison.

smeg me, that was better than any of my Law coursework at university hahahaha

I love this forum

Currently there are various threads on the go ranging from law to history to health and fitness to Newtons law. I think there's a bit of boxing being discussed aswell, quality.

[jamesmcdonnell]

Yes, its amazing what you pick up on here.

[fist]

A few other points regarding sentencing - if Naseem is found guilty of the offence, the court will adjourn for two weeks to allow him to be interviewed by the probation service whom will construct a pre-sentence report to aid the bench in deciding upon the most suitable sentence. This will involve assessment of his risk, the causal factors behind the offence and his suitability for a Community sentence, along with consideration of a custodial sentence.

In additon to the possible mitigating factors already mentioned in this thread, will be the level of remorse he shows, level of culpability and insight into his own risk in terms of re-offending. If Naz is sufficiently remorseful and seemingly highly motivated to comply with a Community Order he will undoubtedly be assessed as suitable, which will most probably form the PSR author's sentencing proposal. The judiciary will take this into account and have to decide whether a Community sentence will provide proportionate punishment as well as rehabilitation.

In my opinion, I think he will be given a lengthy Community Order with maximum Unpaid Work hours (aka Community Service), Supervison and probably a requirement to carry out an accredited probation programme on problem solving / consequential thinking. Additonally, he will be banned from driving and will recieve a hefty fine. As someone has already said, he may be encouraged to use his skills / achievements to payback society in a constructive way, which may be encorporated into his Unpaid Work.

[mattyp151]

Look up "Ted Kennedy and Chappaquiddick" on google.com and see what having money does for you when you leave the scene....

[fist]

Look up "Ted Kennedy and Chappaquiddick" on google.com and see what having money does for you when you leave the scene....

As has been explained by quite a few people on this thread already, Naz alledgedly running away from the scene is a potential aggravating factor that will be taken into consideration with other aggravating and mitigating factors. Money has nothing to do with the outcome, in that Naz will undoubtedly be assessed as suitable for a Community Order, which is unquestionably more constructive that prison. Not going to go through everything again, but this is not like O J Simpson getting off a murder charge! A Community penalty is a legal and probable possibility for the offence in question.

[mattyp151]

Look up "Ted Kennedy and Chappaquiddick" on google.com and see what having money does for you when you leave the scene....

As has been explained by quite a few people on this thread already, Naz alledgedly running away from the scene is a potential aggravating factor that will be taken into consideration with other aggravating and mitigating factors. Money has nothing to do with the outcome, in that Naz will undoubtedly be assessed as suitable for a Community Order, which is unquestionably more constructive that prison. Not going to go through everything again, but this is not like O J Simpson getting off a murder charge! A Community penalty is a legal and probable possibility for the offence in question.

Very true, but just for the fact that no one was killed...Kennedy basically left a girl to die, not drown, but she wasbelieved to have died by asphixiation, and he got off because of his last name, and went on to become a Senator of my "wonderful" state....Taxachusetts!!!

[Adoniss]

Law student, ha! He swerved to miss an object in the road??? He was going 90mph down a country lane. What isn't negligent about that.

Not only did he flee from the scene of the crime but he also lied to the police about where he went! Now im no expert, but he has broken alot of serious laws!

Does anyone even know what state the guy is in that he hit? The bloke is almost paraplegic now and suffered massive injures in the crash...All because Naz was goin way to freakin fast!

Family to support or not, hes goin away for around 8months, will have community service and get fined. I will bet with anyone!

lawllb, i suggested u get all ur facts before u start makin pitches (i would have assumed that was the first lessopn u was taught at uni )

[mattyp151]

Law student, ha! He swerved to miss an object in the road??? He was going 90mph down a country lane. What isn't negligent about that.

Not only did he flee from the scene of the crime but he also lied to the police about where he went! Now im no expert, but he has broken alot of serious laws!

Does anyone even know what state the guy is in that he hit? The bloke is almost paraplegic now and suffered massive injures in the crash...All because Naz was goin way to freakin fast!

Family to support or not, hes goin away for around 8months, will have community service and get fined. I will bet with anyone!

lawllb, i suggested u get all ur facts before u start makin pitches (i would have assumed that was the first lessopn u was taught at uni )

He gets fined, i guarantee he comes out of the pokey and fights again...NAZ coming back 2007...fo' sho'!

[coneye]

First of all they will say can't give him a sentence cos he's a sporting hero,if that don't work, its will be cos he has too support his familly he only has 40 million left.

After that one it will be your only picking on me cos i'm a muslim, throw them all together and i bet he gets knighted for bravery , after all he did run and run till he could'nt run no more.

I mean in his overweight condition the running for help was a seriosly brave thing to do , Whats the world coming too the fat pleb was doing 90 miles an hour in his sports car hit an innocent bystander and fackin run away .

Put him in jail or give him the choice of standing in the road while the guys father comes at him in a 90 mile dash to get a curry

[The Law]

Law student, ha! He swerved to miss an object in the road??? He was going 90mph down a country lane. What isn't negligent about that.

Not only did he flee from the scene of the crime but he also lied to the police about where he went! Now im no expert, but he has broken alot of serious laws!

Does anyone even know what state the guy is in that he hit? The bloke is almost paraplegic now and suffered massive injures in the crash...All because Naz was goin way to freakin fast!

Family to support or not, hes goin away for around 8months, will have community service and get fined. I will bet with anyone!

lawllb, i suggested u get all ur facts before u start makin pitches (i would have assumed that was the first lessopn u was taught at uni )

The fact remains it is very very unlikely that he will get a custodial sentence, and you will have egg on your face when it comes to sentencing

The only law he seems to have broken is the speed limit from the facts that you know. It just emphasises your ignorance. In regards to why he left the scene and what he said to the police he can argue many mitigating factors, as stated before. A top lawyer will come out with many more compelling arguments and mitigating factors that we haven't even considered, and believe me Naz can afford the best lawyers.

You have no idea how the other 2 drivers involved in the crash were driving, were they also speeding? were they driving negligently? How did the crash occur? Have you read the witness statements? Have you read the police officers' notebooks? You have no idea of the facts, so the last thing you should be doing is dabbling your limited knowledge into the legal system

It is unlikely in this situation that he'll get a custodial sentence, take it from a trainee solicitor (i.e. me) and a law student (i.e. knockout).

Like I said earlier I've seen drivers who've killed people in a car crash getting away with a community sentence or a very short custodial sentence (e.g. 6 months to 12 months). You will need to put Naz's offence in proportion with that and maybe, just maybe you will finally work out that he will not get a custodial sentence

If he has committed similar offences in the past then he will get a custodial sentence, e.g. like Jermain Pennant (who had committed drink driving on a previous occasion prior to his custodial sentence). If this is Naz's first offence of this sort then it is very unlikely that he will be sent to prison. Mark my words matey.

[Adoniss]

Law student, ha! He swerved to miss an object in the road??? He was going 90mph down a country lane. What isn't negligent about that.

Not only did he flee from the scene of the crime but he also lied to the police about where he went! Now im no expert, but he has broken alot of serious laws!

Does anyone even know what state the guy is in that he hit? The bloke is almost paraplegic now and suffered massive injures in the crash...All because Naz was goin way to freakin fast!

Family to support or not, hes goin away for around 8months, will have community service and get fined. I will bet with anyone!

lawllb, i suggested u get all ur facts before u start makin pitches (i would have assumed that was the first lessopn u was taught at uni )

The fact remains it is very very unlikely that he will get a custodial sentence, and you will have egg on your face when it comes to sentencing

The only law he seems to have broken is the speed limit from the facts that you know. It just emphasises your ignorance. In regards to why he left the scene and what he said to the police he can argue many mitigating factors, as stated before. A top lawyer will come out with many more compelling arguments and mitigating factors that we haven't even considered, and believe me Naz can afford the best lawyers.

You have no idea how the other 2 drivers involved in the crash were driving, were they also speeding? were they driving negligently? How did the crash occur? Have you read the witness statements? Have you read the police officers' notebooks? You have no idea of the facts, so the last thing you should be doing is dabbling your limited knowledge into the legal system

It is unlikely in this situation that he'll get a custodial sentence, take it from a trainee solicitor (i.e. me) and a law student (i.e. knockout).

Like I said earlier I've seen drivers who've killed people in a car crash getting away with a community sentence or a very short custodial sentence (e.g. 6 months to 12 months). You will need to put Naz's offence in proportion with that and maybe, just maybe you will finally work out that he will not get a custodial sentence

If he has committed similar offences in the past then he will get a custodial sentence, e.g. like Jermain Pennant (who had committed drink driving on a previous occasion prior to his custodial sentence). If this is Naz's first offence of this sort then it is very unlikely that he will be sent to prison. Mark my words matey.

whatever, we will see very soon the outcome of his actions. And i will make u eat ur humble words! All i can say is i wouldnt want u representing me!

[WayoftheCass]

Naz was fun but sadly he blew it ( in terms of fullfilling his potential) when he ditched Brendan Ingle. Ingle had perfected Naz's style. Then Manny Steward comes in and tries to teach him how to fight like Tommy Hearns. Well Manny it turns out that after 30 pro fights it is pretty hard to change a guys style completely.
I have little respect for Hamed as a man. He played the religion card too much. Near the end he was banging on about Islam every 2 mins whilst being sponsored by Budweiser and going out clubbing every weekend in Sheffield. The whole display before the Barrera fight was ridiculous and wreaked of Hamed shitting himself. Suddenly the playfull boxer was gone and was replaced by some Islamic warrior intent on proving that 'Allah will never let me be beat." I had to smile when Barrera said at the prefight press conference " Naseem , Allah won't be in the ring fighting for you. It will be just you and me." Thankfully Barrera , a devout Catholic, didn't turn it into some religious war and conducted himself with the kind of class Hamed always lacked. Of course after his drubbing Hamed claimed "I knew Allah would never let me get knocked out." Yeah right Naz. It was all predestined.
I heard that Naseem claims should he come back he would never fight Amir Khan on the basis of Khan being a "fellow Muslim brother."
Well gee wiz Naz all the infidels better watch out.
Whats the bet that if he did come back Khan would be saying to his father "But Dad I want to knock the little fat git out. Especially for a million pounds."
I don't buy that Hamed is considering coming back due to boredom. I sense skintness. I always knew he'd blow his dough. Though if he ever gets desperate he'll probably find half of his career purses under his brother's bed.

[JimmyJamJerusalem]

Naz was fun but sadly he blew it ( in terms of fullfilling his potential) when he ditched Brendan Ingle. Ingle had perfected Naz's style. Then Manny Steward comes in and tries to teach him how to fight like Tommy Hearns. Well Manny it turns out that after 30 pro fights it is pretty hard to change a guys style completely.
I have little respect for Hamed as a man. He played the religion card too much. Near the end he was banging on about Islam every 2 mins whilst being sponsored by Budweiser and going out clubbing every weekend in Sheffield. The whole display before the Barrera fight was ridiculous and wreaked of Hamed shitting himself. Suddenly the playfull boxer was gone and was replaced by some Islamic warrior intent on proving that 'Allah will never let me be beat." I had to smile when Barrera said at the prefight press conference " Naseem , Allah won't be in the ring fighting for you. It will be just you and me." Thankfully Barrera , a devout Catholic, didn't turn it into some religious war and conducted himself with the kind of class Hamed always lacked. Of course after his drubbing Hamed claimed "I knew Allah would never let me get knocked out." Yeah right Naz. It was all predestined.
I heard that Naseem claims should he come back he would never fight Amir Khan on the basis of Khan being a "fellow Muslim brother."
Well gee wiz Naz all the infidels better watch out.
Whats the bet that if he did come back Khan would be saying to his father "But Dad I want to knock the little fat git out. Especially for a million pounds."
I don't buy that Hamed is considering coming back due to boredom. I sense skintness. I always knew he'd blow his dough. Though if he ever gets desperate he'll probably find half of his carrer purses under his brother's bed.

You a Naz fan then shag??

[Coconut]

He will get a good lawyer....

He wasnt running from the scene (allegedly) he was running for help

If Naz claims he was running for anything then any decent prosecution lawyer will be able to pick out key flaws in his argument...

[The Law]

If Naz claims he was running for anything then any decent prosecution lawyer will be able to pick out key flaws in his argument...

........... and a better defence laywer will be fully prepared for that and will inform Naz what he should do/say when he's asked any potential questions about the incident


Remember Naz is the multi-millionaire and he will be able to afford the top lawyers, most probably a QC (if necessary) 8)

[Coconut]

That was more pointing to the fact that Naz doesn't look like he's done any running for five years...

[MightyWarrior]

Hope it wasn't another Muslim in the car he hit - not sure he could live with himself if that was the case :(

[The Law]

That was more pointing to the fact that Naz doesn't look like he's done any running for five years...

Does running after the ice cream van count?