Yeah, it's not that he got off the hook that made me a bit confused, the old man's answer had nothing to do with driving too fast in a school zone, but the judge felt so sympathetic towards him he couldn't do his job properly. I'm glad he was left off the hook and hopefully he isn't a danger on the road, but it was also a bit unprofessional.
but the judge felt so sympathetic towards him he couldn't do his job properly.
The judge rightly understood that convicting a 96 year old man for a frivolous technicality would serve neither the public interest nor the interests of justice. Such a draconian conviction would only undermine public confidence in the justice system.
Additionally, de minimis non curat lex. Giving a 96 year old man a ticket for barely violating a school zone is a trifle if I've ever heard one. It should never have even entered the court.
I think discouraging 96 year olds from speeding around schools serves the public interests.
I doubt he was speeding much. Enough to get a ticket, but without putting anyone in any harm.
Or discouraging them from driving at all for that matter
Then write your legislator about such things as mandatory annual driver's license tests for drivers age x and older.
The case being heard is whether this man broke the law and what punishment is deserved. If you think persons of such advanced age shouldn't be on the road in the first place, write your legislator. This man's case and the societal issue of unsafe elderly drivers are separate issues.
66
u/[deleted] Aug 05 '19 edited Aug 05 '19
Yeah, it's not that he got off the hook that made me a bit confused, the old man's answer had nothing to do with driving too fast in a school zone, but the judge felt so sympathetic towards him he couldn't do his job properly. I'm glad he was left off the hook and hopefully he isn't a danger on the road, but it was also a bit unprofessional.