I hope Lord Howard’s appeal is successful

Widdecombe

FOR once I am entirely on the side of Michael Howard, who was fined £900 for speeding, plus £715 in costs and a victim surcharge and then also had six points applied to his licence. The train of events which led to these penalties is a saga of rigid law and precious little justice, in which a man has been punished for doing no more than telling the truth, because in delivering what passes for judgment in this case the district judge, Barbara Barnes, actually stated that the defendant’s evidence was credible and then threw the book at him on a technicality.

The story began when Lord Howard’s car was clocked travelling at 37mph in an area where the speed limit was 30. Nobody challenged that but by the time the police sent through the paperwork he could not remember whether he or his wife Sandra had been driving.

Before readers harrumph with incredulity let me relate two tales. The first is of a couple who, encountering the same dilemma, sent their photos to the police with the invitation to check their camera records. The police did and said “we think it’s the one with the curly hair” so the wife took the blame. Perhaps Michael should have followed that example – after all, Sandra has long blonde hair and he has precious little hair at all.