A woman received a report for the eighth time on mobile use while driving and decided to froze on charges • The judge actually thought the punishment was insufficient • Thus a fine of 1,000 shekels and points became a much more severe punishment
Illustration
Photo:
Moshe Shay
A woman caught for the eighth time talking on her cell phone has decided to appeal to the court for the fine. In response, the judge decided to double the amount of the fine and even revoke her license. Thus a fine of 1,000 shekels and points became a much more severe punishment. "When it comes to an eighth conviction and it is evident that a fine alone did not cause her to internalize the gravity of the act and change the manner of her conduct, the court orders a penalty to be used to deter the defendant."
As mentioned, about a year ago, a woman filed a traffic report relating to her use of a cellphone while driving. The leadership asked to be tried, a violation of the charge attributed to her and the case was set to be heard. A few days ago, Judge Crispin convicted the driver of making the finding Reliability about the officer and the defendant.
The magistrate was impressed that the officer documented in detail the circumstances of the offense with reference to all its components. In her humble opinion, the police officer's testimony was relevant and was not concealed in a cross-examination. She further stated that the officer was wrong in registering the date of the offense in the light of his testimony and believed that the duty unit's duty should not be credited to the fact that the officer did not describe the cellphone in the report.
Against Justice Crispin, she stressed that the testimony of the leadership was not credible to the court, when her immediate response, as documented by the police officer, can be found on full admission of the offense, "The defendant did not settle for an apology to the witness, but requested that she be waived, explaining that "The Wise" app on the car multimedia system got stuck and so she tried to activate it on her mobile phone. At no point did she claim, as the court argued, that the mobile phone was on the device, "Judge Crispin wrote.
More on:
Recommendation: Traffic offenses will not be dealt with criminally
What are the most common traffic offenses in Israel?
Using the Phone While Driving: Everything You Need to Know
As part of the arguments for the punishment petition, the prosecution for imposing an actual disqualification penalty was fined, in light of the fact that it was a recidivist defendant in the Pelephone offense, once eighth, against the defense attorney who asked not to aggravate her. Justice Crispin finally decided to sentence Negro for one month, fined NIS 2,000 and suspended two months for three years.
The judge ruled that "when it comes to an eighth conviction for a felony use of a mobile phone while driving and it is evident that in previous cases the mere fact that the defendant paid only a fine did not make her internalize the gravity of the act and change the manner of her driving. In these circumstances, the court orders that it be punishable You are accused of committing a similar offense in the future, regardless of the fact that she has chosen, according to her permanent right, to conduct the proceedings in her case. "
