Man of Honour
While that may be true, being known for taking a car onto a racetrack in this situation definitely cant help
Brands Hatch rogue driver Jack Cottle jailed for eight months
- Thread starter shiver
- Start date
While that may be true, being known for taking a car onto a racetrack in this situation definitely cant help
Soldato
While that may be true, being known for taking a car onto a racetrack in this situation definitely cant help
Except it won't affect his insurance in any way since unless insurance companies start asking "have you ever been jailed for illegally driving onto a private racetrack" they won't know
Soldato
- Joined
- 12 Oct 2007
- Posts
- 2,647
Except it won't affect his insurance in any way since unless insurance companies start asking "have you ever been jailed for illegally driving onto a private racetrack" they won't know
Some insurance companies require you to declare whether or not you have any criminal convictions. In that context it could well have a bearing on his future insurance premiums?
Given his now high and notorious profile, not declaring might cause him some difficulties.
Last edited:
Soldato
That's true, not sure what sort of specifics they go into with that, so I guess maybe it could have some implications.
Man of Honour
Screwed his life up for a bit of bants, oi oi!
Associate
- Joined
- 26 Jul 2014
- Posts
- 300
He drove through a garage and into a live pit lane.
In most events there will be cars in the garage, but seeing as this was an endurance event there will be large amounts of time where the garages are open and free to go through, the gate cannot simply be closed as this pit lane is still a part of a live race circuit.
In the video you also see the marshal in the pit lane signal for him to stop which he ignored and continued. Or do you expect people to stand in front of a moving vehicle that has shown no intention on stopping?
Associate
- Joined
- 26 Jul 2014
- Posts
- 300
A vehicle that the FIA/MSA would say is NOT safe enough to be on a circuit during a race.
It doesn't matter, cars going too slowly are very dangerous, never mind those driven by people who are unpredictable.
Slow moving cars are dangerous, hence why most race series impose a minimum qualifying time in order to be able to compete in a race.
Mainly amateur racers,
Thankfully you are not a race director, and they were good enough to respond quickly to get the race stopped.
It was stupid and reckless, totally unaware of the dangers of a live race track. While racers do take the risk, they are taking risks up to a certain point, not many would agree to race with people with no race license, experience, and knowledge.
Add in to this, that the offender also stated that he would do it again, he deserves this sentence.
Man of Honour
It is clear lemonade has never done a track day or doesn't really know much about track driving and its dangers. Let's not be too harsh on him.
Soldato
Neither have I, but you don't really need anything other than a basic knowledge of physics to realise what a stupid thing it was to do...
Soldato
Too many assumptions and hypothetical situations being given as example, you might as well stop people from driving in general since it is really dangerous too and such and such can happen, fact of the matter is no one was hurt here and the risks were far lower than a lot that happens on the road.
I probably won't get my point across here, not that i'm that bothered, but those over blowing this, him getting 8 months for a type of 'crime' that has probably never happened before and probably wont ever happen again, try telling the family who lost their heart and soul because some idiot thought doing 60 in a 30 would be fun before smashing into a car and killing the people inside it and then only having to do 8 months of luxury jail sentence and boasting about it, at least this guy didn't do it on the public road which would have had a far higher risk and danger potential, yet most sentences are lenient and there is no proper deterrence for something that is quite common.
I probably won't get my point across here, not that i'm that bothered, but those over blowing this, him getting 8 months for a type of 'crime' that has probably never happened before and probably wont ever happen again, try telling the family who lost their heart and soul because some idiot thought doing 60 in a 30 would be fun before smashing into a car and killing the people inside it and then only having to do 8 months of luxury jail sentence and boasting about it, at least this guy didn't do it on the public road which would have had a far higher risk and danger potential, yet most sentences are lenient and there is no proper deterrence for something that is quite common.
Have someone drive a race car into the back/side of your modern safe hatchback with a speed difference of probably 80mph+ and see how far that gets you.
Soldato
You failed to answer my earlier question.
Back in July someone dug up pictures of his BMW with bald ditch finders on it. I certainly don't want to know what he got up to in the public road in it, given his disregard for everyone else's safety.
Back in July someone dug up pictures of his BMW with bald ditch finders on it. I certainly don't want to know what he got up to in the public road in it, given his disregard for everyone else's safety.
Soldato
What the old "oh what if it was your family x,y,z" line, dont care and dont have to answer every single pointless comment.
My beef is more to do with lack of consistency in sentencing, this guy isn't a criminal, just a silly kid, who probably will turn into a criminal once his out, his been made an example very harshly, more harsh than those who have killed people yet have got away scot free, when are those people going to be made a proper example of.
My beef is more to do with lack of consistency in sentencing, this guy isn't a criminal, just a silly kid, who probably will turn into a criminal once his out, his been made an example very harshly, more harsh than those who have killed people yet have got away scot free, when are those people going to be made a proper example of.
Soldato
Man of Honour
I accept that but he seems pretty clueless about it.
You are massively underestimating the risk and danger. The competitors will not be expecting a slow moving car on the track, and its surprisingly likely that a car unsighted and tucked up behind another could pull out and collect him. I've spent much of my life at race circuits and a car going slowly on track is often the cause of big incidents or near misses. The difference of course is that the racing cars have roll cages, 5 point harnesses, helmets, fire proof clothing etc. If the polo was hit at racing speed (60-125mph depending on the location on the circuit) there is no doubt the occupants would be seriously injured or killed. Road cars simply do not stand up to those kind of impacts.
If anything I'd say the sentence was lenient considering the potential danger even before you consider all of the other implications of what he did.
Man of Honour
I wouldn't be surprised either, since he's a dangerous idiot who doesn't give a damn about other people, but the sentence could also be explained by the seriousness of what he did. The leniency was in only charging him with public nuisance. Strictly speaking, he was guilty of much worse. False imprisonment, for example, with the aggravating factor of exposing his prisoner to a significant risk of major injury or death.
Man of Honour
Yes. Well deserved.
And there's a thread about it here:
http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showthread.php?t=18637398 which has been merged.