It says in the story that he told the court, surely that means intent to disobey, which is contempt? Heres the american way:- Watch Judge Doesn't Take Crap From Clueless Girl Video | Break.com
So you have implicit faith in the complete accuracy of the story as published in the Daily Mail, do you? And why would that be? If the guy said the remark at all, and the journalist didn't just make up the whole thing, he may have said it somewhere outside the court. If it had been said at the trial in the hearing of the judge, it could have been dealt with as contempt. By the way if I remember correctly Magistrates Courts cannot imprison for contempt directly - the matter has to be referred up to the Crown Court for action.
Indeed, presumably he forgot to take his driving licence when he hired said vehicle but remembered how to drive it once behind the wheel!! Brain injury not withstanding. Congratulations the DM, another crock of right wing nazi bullshit.
Good, I'm glad to see we're getting to the bottom of the story. Quite why people still read newspapers is utterly beyond me.
I have to take it as stated having no access to any other account. "I’m still going to drive... catch me if you can: What defiant motorist told court" He may well have said it outside, under his breath etc etc, so what do the court records state he said?
Magistrates Courts do not keep verbatim transcripts of proceedings (unlike higher courts). There are notes kept of appearances, charges, pleas, convictions, acquittals, sentences, costs orders, etc but not of every word that's said. Details of who said what can thus be made up by journalists, and usually are.
It's a bit surprising with his record that he was able to hire such a car. You have to wonder if it wasn't lent by a friend or his but registered in some other name so as to avoid it being confiscated, if that happens in the UK (as it does in France and here).
