Jack Waterford pleads guilty to DUI

johnboy 26 September 2013 24

The Canberra Times reports their editor-at-large has plead guilty but avoided conviction for a low range DUI:

Waterford blew 0.082 after he was stopped by police on Northbourne Avenue, Braddon, about 11.35pm on July 10 this year.

Waterford, who represented himself, applied for and was granted a Section 17, which allowed him to avoid a conviction and keep his licence, due to his 44-year unblemished driving record.

He was, however, ordered to pay court costs of $69.


What's Your Opinion?


Please login to post your comments, or connect with
24 Responses to Jack Waterford pleads guilty to DUI
Filter
Order
PrinceOfAles PrinceOfAles 7:00 pm 27 Sep 13

goggles13 said :

Growling Ferret said :

Punter

You sound like a someone with a grudge against the local old print identity. I have never met, nor have any affiliation with Jack, other than being a former Canberra Times subscriber.

I don’t condone drink driving. But .08 at near enough midnight on a Wednesday night in the middle of winter is hardly peak hour for ‘killing someone’. I was pointing out the excessive shrillness of Fabforty’s post.

He broke the law (and as I said, it was probably one glass of wine over the course of the night too many), but after 44 years of unblemished record, has got his fine and public shaming.

Peta Credlin blew a similar figure (.075) and also had her charge dismissed.

If he was a serial offender, caught for the 3rd time and driving unlicenced, I would suggest throwing the book at him.

But he aint, the court decided his punishment so play on….

who’s to say that he hasn’t driven drunk in the past and just not caught?

Fortunately our legal system doesn`t work that way. Who`s to say you haven`t raped women in the past and just not been caught. Perhaps we should just try you for that hey?

chilli chilli 6:41 pm 27 Sep 13

Thumper said :

Punter said :

Growling Ferret said :

fabforty said :

I don’t get it.

How does a 44 year unblemished record stop you from killing someone when you drive p*ssed ?

0.08 is hardly driving around ‘pissed’.

Over the limit, yes, but probably one drink over the course of an evening over the limit. For someone like Mr Waterford who has had more drinks than you have hot meals, it was a small transgression in the greater scheme of things.

Ferret, I so want to comment on your lack of community responsibility (and I did have a lengthy piece written which I deleted for this ‘dulled down’ post) but I have faith the greater community will see your comment for all it’s irresponsibility that it deserves. Waterford has for so long been the critic of how laws are administered in this great territory of ours, and now, when he is outed as a ‘perpetrator’ (as my 9yo would put it) and has been proven in the eyes of our justice system, we’re confronted with your watered down analysis of what community should expect? Your comments smack of either a grossly irresponsible goose, or an employee of some kind involved with Waterford. Either way, your comments carry no weight toward my opinion of any valid argument regarding this issue; and I properly feel scared to think you may be driving on the same roads as my family and I.

I’m with the ferret on this one. 0.08 is hardly smashed.

+1

goggles13 goggles13 3:48 pm 27 Sep 13

Growling Ferret said :

Punter

You sound like a someone with a grudge against the local old print identity. I have never met, nor have any affiliation with Jack, other than being a former Canberra Times subscriber.

I don’t condone drink driving. But .08 at near enough midnight on a Wednesday night in the middle of winter is hardly peak hour for ‘killing someone’. I was pointing out the excessive shrillness of Fabforty’s post.

He broke the law (and as I said, it was probably one glass of wine over the course of the night too many), but after 44 years of unblemished record, has got his fine and public shaming.

Peta Credlin blew a similar figure (.075) and also had her charge dismissed.

If he was a serial offender, caught for the 3rd time and driving unlicenced, I would suggest throwing the book at him.

But he aint, the court decided his punishment so play on….

who’s to say that he hasn’t driven drunk in the past and just not caught?

Solidarity Solidarity 2:27 pm 27 Sep 13

0.08 was the limit for most of his driving career anyway

dtc dtc 11:45 am 27 Sep 13

Well, lets get philosophical.

What is the rationale for punishment of crimes

1. to stop people committing them in the first place
2. to punish those who commit the crime

If you believe in the first, or (more likely) believe in the first for some crimes, then punishing someone after 44 years of not committing the crime isnt going to achieve that outcome. They havent committed it before and probably wont again. He was punished (had to appear in court, conviction recorded) but not fined (so reduced punishment). Its hardly likely to encourage all those other 44 yr drivers without a blemish to go out and get drunk.

Now obviously there are crimes which are so serious as to justify punishment regardless of how infrequently you have done it before – usually crimes with an actual victim in which case retribution becomes important.

MERC600 MERC600 10:56 am 27 Sep 13

” There but for good fortune ….

Growling Ferret Growling Ferret 9:27 am 27 Sep 13

Punter

You sound like a someone with a grudge against the local old print identity. I have never met, nor have any affiliation with Jack, other than being a former Canberra Times subscriber.

I don’t condone drink driving. But .08 at near enough midnight on a Wednesday night in the middle of winter is hardly peak hour for ‘killing someone’. I was pointing out the excessive shrillness of Fabforty’s post.

He broke the law (and as I said, it was probably one glass of wine over the course of the night too many), but after 44 years of unblemished record, has got his fine and public shaming.

Peta Credlin blew a similar figure (.075) and also had her charge dismissed.

If he was a serial offender, caught for the 3rd time and driving unlicenced, I would suggest throwing the book at him. But he aint, the court decided his punishment so play on….

Thumper Thumper 8:28 am 27 Sep 13

Punter said :

Growling Ferret said :

fabforty said :

I don’t get it.

How does a 44 year unblemished record stop you from killing someone when you drive p*ssed ?

0.08 is hardly driving around ‘pissed’.

Over the limit, yes, but probably one drink over the course of an evening over the limit. For someone like Mr Waterford who has had more drinks than you have hot meals, it was a small transgression in the greater scheme of things.

Ferret, I so want to comment on your lack of community responsibility (and I did have a lengthy piece written which I deleted for this ‘dulled down’ post) but I have faith the greater community will see your comment for all it’s irresponsibility that it deserves. Waterford has for so long been the critic of how laws are administered in this great territory of ours, and now, when he is outed as a ‘perpetrator’ (as my 9yo would put it) and has been proven in the eyes of our justice system, we’re confronted with your watered down analysis of what community should expect? Your comments smack of either a grossly irresponsible goose, or an employee of some kind involved with Waterford. Either way, your comments carry no weight toward my opinion of any valid argument regarding this issue; and I properly feel scared to think you may be driving on the same roads as my family and I.

I’m with the ferret on this one. 0.08 is hardly smashed.

HiddenDragon HiddenDragon 11:09 pm 26 Sep 13

Deeply shocked – journos now and always have been renowned for their steely, teetotal sobriety.

Punter Punter 9:53 pm 26 Sep 13

Growling Ferret said :

fabforty said :

I don’t get it.

How does a 44 year unblemished record stop you from killing someone when you drive p*ssed ?

0.08 is hardly driving around ‘pissed’.

Over the limit, yes, but probably one drink over the course of an evening over the limit. For someone like Mr Waterford who has had more drinks than you have hot meals, it was a small transgression in the greater scheme of things.

Ferret, I so want to comment on your lack of community responsibility (and I did have a lengthy piece written which I deleted for this ‘dulled down’ post) but I have faith the greater community will see your comment for all it’s irresponsibility that it deserves. Waterford has for so long been the critic of how laws are administered in this great territory of ours, and now, when he is outed as a ‘perpetrator’ (as my 9yo would put it) and has been proven in the eyes of our justice system, we’re confronted with your watered down analysis of what community should expect? Your comments smack of either a grossly irresponsible goose, or an employee of some kind involved with Waterford. Either way, your comments carry no weight toward my opinion of any valid argument regarding this issue; and I properly feel scared to think you may be driving on the same roads as my family and I.

breda breda 9:47 pm 26 Sep 13

@ roundhead:

” Around ten years ago the CT held an open day at the Fyshwick hacienda and Waterford was chain smoking in front of everybody. Not a good look at all.”
———————————————————————————-
In front of everybody? Just like that? OMG.

He should have gone around the back, by the dunnies, as was required at school. After all, the “look” is what matters.

Now, you’d best be off. We don’t want to keep you from that appointment with the headmaster where you straighten out the ludicrous allegations about dear little Harry being a bully …

Postalgeek Postalgeek 9:38 pm 26 Sep 13

Masquara said :

Diggety said :

Have a Q regarding a Section 17: although no conviction is recorded, does that mean a repeat offence will show up in further hearings?

Depends on whether you still have drinking buddies in high places maybe?

‘Cause I’ve got friends in high places
where the whiskey drowns
and the beer chases the boys in blue away
and I’ll be okay

Masquara Masquara 8:51 pm 26 Sep 13

Diggety said :

Have a Q regarding a Section 17: although no conviction is recorded, does that mean a repeat offence will show up in further hearings?

Depends on whether you still have drinking buddies in high places maybe?

Growling Ferret Growling Ferret 7:32 pm 26 Sep 13

fabforty said :

I don’t get it.

How does a 44 year unblemished record stop you from killing someone when you drive p*ssed ?

0.08 is hardly driving around ‘pissed’.

Over the limit, yes, but probably one drink over the course of an evening over the limit. For someone like Mr Waterford who has had more drinks than you have hot meals, it was a small transgression in the greater scheme of things.

chewy14 chewy14 6:42 pm 26 Sep 13

fabforty said :

I don’t get it.

How does a 44 year unblemished record stop you from killing someone when you drive p*ssed ?

C’mon now, everyone knows drink driving isn’t a crime. (as long as you haven’t been caught in a while).

snoopydoc snoopydoc 6:37 pm 26 Sep 13

Anyone else think that a previous untarnished record somehow alters the probability that during this drunk-driving episode you’re going to hurt someone?

#logic #fail

Should be automatic loss of licence +/- vehicle, irrespective of previous record.

fabforty fabforty 4:54 pm 26 Sep 13

I don’t get it.

How does a 44 year unblemished record stop you from killing someone when you drive p*ssed ?

Heavs Heavs 4:38 pm 26 Sep 13

Roundhead89 said :

So he’s drinking and driving now? Around ten years ago the CT held an open day at the Fyshwick hacienda and Waterford was chain smoking in front of everybody. Not a good look at all.

At least that R.Slicker chaps kind of vaguely on-topic recollections from 20 years ago are amusing.

Diggety Diggety 4:26 pm 26 Sep 13

Have a Q regarding a Section 17: although no conviction is recorded, does that mean a repeat offence will show up in further hearings?

Roundhead89 Roundhead89 4:15 pm 26 Sep 13

So he’s drinking and driving now? Around ten years ago the CT held an open day at the Fyshwick hacienda and Waterford was chain smoking in front of everybody. Not a good look at all.

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top

Search across the site