Now that I am retired having been many years a magistrate with a long awareness of the declining freedoms enjoyed by the ordinary citizen and a corresponding fear of the big brother state`s ever increasing encroachment on civil liberties I hope that my personal observations within these general parameters will be of interest to those with an open mind. Having been blogging with this title for many years against the rules of the Ministry of Justice my new found freedom should allow me to be less inhibited in these observations.

Comments are usually moderated. However, I do not accept any legal responsibility for the content of any comment. If any comment seems submitted just to advertise a website it will not be published.

Friday, 24 January 2014


FACT: It has been raining a lot over most of the country in the last couple of months.

FACT: To undertake the backlog of road maintenance required in the U.K. would cost almost £13 billion.

FACT: Essex County Council HighwayMaintenance is a masterpiece of the policy of “overwhelm by verbiage”.

FACT: s.3 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 has the provision, “if a person drives a mechanically propelled vehicle on a road or other public place without due care and attention, or without reasonable consideration for other persons using the road or place, he is guilty of an offence.”(my italics)

FACT: A motorist in Colchester  has been charged under the above provision of the Road Traffic Act with splashing schoolchildren by driving through a puddle.

OPINION:What a waste of public funds. 


  1. Can't agree there. Splashing passers-by is a legitimate and not unheard of use of the careless driving offence.

    Of course it depends on whether he could reasonably and safely avoid doing so, which is not necessarily the case.

  2. I bet the mothers and children who were splashed wouldn't agree that it was a waste of public funds to prosecute.

  3. Totally correct charge in the circumstances described and not at all a waste of public funds. JohnD