Macquarie Network ::: 2GB | 2CH | LIVENEWS | STREET CORNER | RUGBYLEAGUELIVE | WHAT CAREER | AMAZING AUSTRALIANS :::
Tuesday, 02 December 2008

Pat O'Shane escapes drink driving conviction

29/08/2008 12:16:00 PM.  | Amie Meehan

RELATED ARTICLES

LATEST FEATURES

Sydney magistrate Pat O'Shane has escaped conviction despite pleading guilty to drink driving.

The 67-year-old returned a blood alcohol reading of 0.08 when stopped for a random breath test at Linley Point, in March.

A later test conducted at a police station recorded her alcohol content as 0.05 - exactly the legal limit.

The court has heard Ms O’Shane admitted to having three glasses of champagne before getting behind the wheel, but didn’t feel affected by alcohol.

Today she’s been given a 12 month good behaviour bond, with the conviction not being recorded.

She had initially pleaded not guilty to the charge, but changed her plea – she previously had two speeding tickets, which were the only blemishes on her 51 year driving record.

Ms O'Shane's solicitor Andrew Thorpe has told 2GB's Ray Hadley, her good character, together with the low level range helped.

"She's had a series of extraordinary firsts in her life, in terms of her achievements and they are some of things that the court does take into account," he said.

"There will be some people who do not have the sorts of things that will help them [when the court] exercises its discretion and there are some people that do."

COMMENTS

Friday, 29 August 2008

This is no surprise if it were any ordinary citizen you would have been stripped of all your rights, paid a huge fine and lost your licence and perhaps placed your employment in jeopardy i.e. many require to drive to hold a job, feed their family and pay the mortgage.So what happens you have people with status breaking the law, changing their plea and getting off scot free.Great to to know that no one is discriminated against in this country. Everyone person should be outraged by this decision.This is the wonderful justice system you have in this state and country.

Posted by: Dan Concerned, *

 

Friday, 29 August 2008

Of course she gets off !!! What did ANYONE expect?

Posted by: Mark watson, Dapto

 

Friday, 29 August 2008

Interesting decision but the fact that she was right on the limit is relevant. One must allow a certain margin of error. However, I believe that the penalty for drink driving should be the loss of the right to drink, not the loss of the right to drive. It's the drinking that is the real problem and in a case like this it would allow a suitable punishment that was not onerous or damaging.

Posted by: Graeme Henderson, Darling Downs

Friday, 29 August 2008

Graeme Henderson-Had this been John Howard you would have wanted him hung,drawn and quartered.

Posted by: Desmond Harris, Beacon Hill

Friday, 29 August 2008

Desmond, Your comment is indicative of your tiny intellect. .05 is a line call, and as I do not know how other such cases are dealt with I can only say that it is interesting. I was making the point that the way drink driving is dealt with is completely arse about face. I am against random testing, I think if you can drive properly that should be the measure. Different people have different reactions to alcohol. Anyway, I just want Howard to be tried for the War Crimes he committed.

Posted by: Graeme Henderson, Darling Downs

Friday, 29 August 2008

I defy anyone with half a brain (and that obviously is more brain than Henderson has EVER had!), to list crimes comitted by Howard that would get anywhere near 1st base at The Hague? Henderson, you can't charge anyone based on rumour and innuendo or for the fact that they led the party that you dislike. And by the way, IF you think of putting Iraq on the list, please remember that your mate Rudd was also of the opinion that WMD's existed. That is not Howard's fault you fool.

Posted by: Geoff Bolton, Lane Cove

Friday, 29 August 2008

For once I agree with you Graeme...ohh hell hope its not habit forming though lol

Posted by: Pierce B, Vic

Friday, 29 August 2008

Graeme Henderson-You little pea brain you took the bait. Any way if you want John Howard to be tried for war crimes you had better have Rudd arraigned as well. He was shooting his mouth off that Sadam had WMDs and he was baying for action. He should be in the dock for aiding and abetting.

Posted by: Desmond Harris, Beacon Hill

Friday, 29 August 2008

Took the bait Des? Shot you down you mean. Prime Minister Rudd, when he was the Leader of the Opposition, it those days when Oppositions had a leader, gave bipartisan support to the gov of the day on matters of national security. We can now see that he was fooled by the lies told by Howard, Nelson and Bush on these matters. And there in lies the problem, the Howard Gov lied, it's defense Minister lied, so Rudd was guilty of believing those people. Howard however is legally liable for war crimes.

Posted by: Graeme Henderson, Darling Downs

Friday, 29 August 2008

Graeme Henderson-As usual you are making up stories as you go along. There was a time when John Howard was having second thoughts about going to Iraq and it was Rudd the Dudd that kept insisting.Hendo any fool can do what you do and that is to ignore the truth-hoping it will go away-it wont.

Posted by: Desmond Harris, Beacon Hill

 

Friday, 29 August 2008

The drink driving issue ,that is.

Posted by: Pierce B, Vic

Friday, 29 August 2008

Yes Pierce, I was onto that but I did get a chuckle out of the timing thing. Taking away someones license not only affects them but it can punish everyone around them in many was that are not just. Taking away their right to drink only punishes them and will doubtless have a beneficial effect for those people close to them. I can't understand why I get no support for this idea as I am sure that it would revolutionize the whole business.

Posted by: Graeme Henderson, Darling Downs

 

Friday, 29 August 2008

I must say though Geoff that it was rather strange that none of the Liberal Govt polies new anything about the Australian wheat board paying something like $300 million to Sadam Hussien on the side.

Posted by: Pierce B, Vic

Friday, 29 August 2008

Pierce, if you've ever done business overseas (Asia & Middle East) you'd know that some of the trading "customs" of other countries to be strange! I believe AWB to be in that category, ie knowledge was at "arms length". Those however that pontificate from the sidelines without the benefit of "real" experience (I've worked in Asia), tend to theorise. BUT, you'd hardly get a conviction in The Hague based on the evidence (and that's my point)

Posted by: Geoff Bolton, Lane Cove

Friday, 29 August 2008

Oh no, Geoff Bolton is on his Corruption is Good bandwagon again. We have heard this before, according to Bolton the Howard Government and the AWB was allowed to breach it's contract with the UN to supply food for oil. Geoff Bolton sees nothing wrong with financing the enemy who can then use that money to by weapons to use against Australian Soldiers. Geoff Bolton regards "his side" as being above all laws.

Posted by: Graeme Henderson, Darling Downs

Friday, 29 August 2008

Henderson is a bit like Rudd, he keeps re-stating the argument and verballing the contributor until the debate comes down (eventually, you watch!) to Hitler, the Nazis and other irrelevencies. To go back where we started..Henderson wanted Howard charged with war crimes, and that's done in The Hague. I said quite simply "you'd hardly get a conviction in The Hague based on the evidence (and that's my point)". Issue ends....but I can feel a "Hitler" coming my way!

Posted by: Geoffrey Bolton, Lane Cove

 

Friday, 29 August 2008

Dont forget this is one of our judiciary, the one who told a young offender that is was ok to use foul language to Police Officers, then let him walk free thumbing his nose at the law LOL..great role modeling for a magistrate there !! O'Shane is one of the lefts judiciary, who really believed she would have a conviction recorded against her, as I would have had it been me ? I certainly didnt..her leniency on the bench is well known, and the fact she wasnt even fined, is no surprise.

Posted by: susan lawe, gippsland

Friday, 29 August 2008

Slowe, So what has all that got to do with this case? Your prejudice is showing again. And by the way, there are more than enough police officers whose behavior earns them individually the title of pig or any other bad name you can come up with. Think about the Wood and Fitzgerald inquiries, recent cases about pedophilia and the current situation with corruption in Vic. The days when the police deserve respect just because of their uniform have long gone, and it's their own fault.

Posted by: Graeme Henderson, Darling Downs

 

Friday, 29 August 2008

Ms O'Shane should go down on her hands on knees and thank God that she has friends in high places. A pity some of her sisters and brothers, who had been incasterated for lesser crimes are not awarded the same privilages.

Posted by: Gordon Thomas, Hurstville

 

Friday, 29 August 2008

Are you serious - the women is 67, has NEVER been done for drink driving before and was on the actual line - she only had three drinks, but theres no mention of the time period this was taken over. I personally don't like the woman's politics but fairs fair....in other States she wouldn't even be classed as being over the limit!

Posted by: Concerned Liberal, Minto

 

Friday, 29 August 2008

Henderson thats about what I would expect from you. Maybe they turned into "pigs" because they get paid crap to protect the real PIGS like you Henderson. Carry a weapon for crap pay to be insulted by 13 yr olds and spat on,for what? Of course they become "pigs", whats your excuse? Let me guess, bet if you were in trouble, you would be first one howling for the cops to come save you,far leftys are like that, but I am sure would never do a cops job. Your an anarchist, your response was expected.

Posted by: susan lowe, gippsland

 

Friday, 29 August 2008

It is possible that this is a normal, explicable result. However, it is possible that corruption was involved in arriving at the result. We will never know, because the NSW government is famed for its opaque approach to justice.

Posted by: Happy Fun Ball, Carramar/Sydney

 

Friday, 29 August 2008

For your future reference Henderson, the word she apparently had no problem with wasnt "pig"...it was the famous F word, and it was aimed at the Police AND the VICTIM of the young offender. So much for jumping to conclusions , but then your practiced at that.

Posted by: susan lawe, gippsland

 

Saturday, 30 August 2008

well i am not supprised by this at all. a guy here who has had his third high range. got his licence taken, has to right a 10 page essay about the ills of drink driving for the judge. will probably not get jail time. he still has his job. he is still drinking excessively. you would think he would be going to AA & to a rehab program to make sure he looked good to the judge. drunk drivers who do worse than O'Shane get off all the time. everyone knows that alcohol affects people differently anyway

Posted by: Belinda Hummie, New lambton

 

Sunday, 31 August 2008

I read the news reports on this and thought the decision was both fair and balanced. Ms O'Shane has an oustanding record of achievement, and it was appropriate that she be accorded the measure of fairness she has applied over the years. One suspects there is an anti-Pat O'Shane lobby that would love to see her retired. I wonder why? It might have more to do with her guts and honesty, and her willingness to treat the battlers in our society with a measure of fairness often denied them.

Posted by: Steve Borrow, Rhodes

 
 

YOUR SAY




 


 

500 characters maximum. 500 characters left.


 

* Required field