Lewis Hamilton receives $500 fine under hoon laws

Article
Gallery

By Brett Davis | August 25th, 2010

Lewis Hamilton’s attempt to show-off in front of his fans came to end in March, when the Formula 1 driver was caught by Victorian police outside Albert Park during the Australian Formula One Grand Prix doing a burnout in his borrowed Mercedes-Benz C63 AMG. The car was then impounded and he was summoned to court.

Hamilton has now been charged under the recent hoon laws and was fined on Tuesday. The fine was said to total a whopping… $500; an amount Lewis earns in a matter of minutes. Magistrate Clive Alsop said shortly after the charge that he would not impose Hamilton with a criminal conviction due to it being his first offense. He also said that Hamilton was ashamed and remorseful and pleaded guilty first off.

Alsop did say that Hamilton’s behaviour was unacceptable though, and said in a recent British Telegraph report,

“This isn’t about somebody’s character, this is about somebody in a responsible position behaving like a hoon.”

Meanwhile Hamilton is relieved the whole ordeal is finally over,

“I’ve made clear throughout that I’ve regretted my actions in this matter, and I’m pleased that it has now drawn to a close,” Hamilton said.

We’ll at least he’s learned his lesson now and won’t drive in a manner dangerous ever again…

TomJ

Im sure Lewis Hamilton is extremely concerned about this fine.

Also Mark Webber for WDC2010. I would rather even Alonso finish ahead of Vettel.
TomJ

Also Caradvice could you give us a post race article following the F1?

Id be more than happy to do it if no one here follows the sport! Autoblog.com usually have one, but talking about real racing to the yanks can be tedious.

http://caradvice.com.au Brett Davis

Hey mate,
The only reason we don’t post F1 news is because we want to try and maintain the whole ‘car advice’ approach. Unless something out of the ordinary happened in F1, we won’t really publish results. And otherwise, if we did, we’d have to incorporate loads of other motor racing news as well.
This particular story is related to motorists though, somewhat; the hoon laws etc. And it’s simply funny.
Cheers for your input though

TomJ

No worries mate, thanks for the reply =)
Andrew M

Brett,
How about a “Motorsport Advice” off shoot??

Im sure it would be a big hit with your regulars and perhaps coach many newbies.

BUT…..
It would need to be care taken by someone with a real understanding and psssion about matorsport rather than just a journalist put in place to publish results and regurgitate press quotes.

TomJ

All we’d get is coverage of Hyundais latest wins in whatever unimportant racing series it competes and Skoda’s victory in europe.

Andrew M

Ha ha ha
Its probably not funny because you are probably right.

It is quite odd how every inch of Hyundais motorsport ventures get coverage
JooberGTi

Hehe

Damian

It’s funny how the Victorian state government and the local media has jumped on the bandwagon and lectured Hamilton on the dangers of hoon driving, yet, has failed to recognise that Hamilton is one of the best drivers in the world. I am sure Hamilton understands and appreciates the intricacies of so-called “hoon” driving better than any pen-pushing bureaucrat. The state of Victoria just made a fool of itself in front of the whole world (and trust me – everyone was watching).

TomJ

I think thats the point of the laws.

Personally i think allowing him to get away with it would encourage every bogan and their R33 to try this on the roads.

Like ive said before, while i debate the stance that people caught going 15kmh over the freeway speed limit on an empty highway are ‘criminals’ this type of ‘driving’ is absolutely unnecessary and should not be allowed by even the best drivers.
Andrew M

So you would think it alright if olympic gold medal shooter Michael Diamond carried a gun through the streets shooting at bottles???

Because he is a good shooter should that also overwrite our gun laws??

Damian

“So you would think it alright if olympic gold medal shooter Michael Diamond carried a gun through the streets shooting at bottles???”

I’d have more faith in an Olympic gold medal shooter (or any other Olympic candidate) than most police officers out there. If you’re in NSW and you’ve been watching “The Recruits” on Channel 10, you’ll understand why it would be safer for Michael Diamond to carry and fire a gun in public, than it would be for “Australia’s (alleged) finest” to do the same.

“Personally i think allowing him to get away with it would encourage every bogan and their R33 to try this on the roads.”

The whole “opening the floodgates” argument is completely valid, however, the Victorian Government has illustrated hypocrisy at its finest. Victorian Police Chief Commissioner Simon Overland was caught carrying LIVE ammunition onto a Qantas flight this March – an offence that carries a maximum seven year prison sentence. Of course, being the Police Chief Commissioner, the whole case was muffled and put on the back burner. Will this encourage punters to take live ammunition onto flights as well, seeing that Overland got away with it?

TomJ

Well, yes, but i can see how those are different situations. Being that a police commissioner is unlikely to use the bullets to commit a crime, were as lewis actually was.

Also Hamilton is just an athlete, he’s not a member of public service or a politician, he has no more right than anyone else in the world to break the law.

Damian

“Well, yes, but i can see how those are different situations. Being that a police commissioner is unlikely to use the bullets to commit a crime, were as lewis actually was.”

The operative word in the above statement being “unlikely”. Nobody would have foreseen the likelihood of a highly decorated senior inspectorate officer boarding a bus in the Philippines and killing eight innocent tourists either.

“Also Hamilton is just an athlete, he’s not a member of public service or a politician, he has no more right than anyone else in the world to break the law.”

So, in essence, you’re expressly stating that public servants and politicians have more of a right than anyone else to break the law? John Della Bosca and Belinda Neal harboured the same mindset and have since met their demise.

Andrew M

I think you are totally missing the point Damian.

I can see all you have is one heck of an anti police attitude.

The bottom line is Lewis broke the law, and paid the same penalty that any other citizen would have suffered.

Since when would it be reasonable to prosecute people based on their skill level

Damian

“I can see all you have is one heck of an anti police attitude.”

It’s not so much an “anti-police attitude” as it is an anti-hypocrisy attitude. I don’t object to Lewis Hamilton having the book thrown at him IF all things were equal.

However, if you research into Simon Overland’s case, you’ll understand that he didn’t even receive a verbal reprimand. Overland’s carrying of live ammunition onto a flight was deemed as a mere “oversight”. It wouldn’t take an educated guess that being a Chief Commissioner of the Victoria Police had something to do with this outcome. If you or I had been found trying to take live ammunition onto a plane, we’d be branded as terrorists and sent to Gitmo.

http://Facebook Jerome Jackson

I agree Damian. The Vic Govt has done nothing but embarrass itself (and Australia) by the way this was handled. They are a bunch of clowns.

Mick

TomJ, if you want a good website for Local and International motorsport try speedcafe.com.au they quite good and have news about many different categories.
Simonsez

As I recall he was charged with “intentionally losing control of a vehicle”.It would have made things more interesting if he’d chosen to contest something so nonsensical but he’s no doubt taken the more sensible option. Luckily he wasn’t in one of the European countries who base traffic fines on a % of the offender’s annual income.
autoboy

The -’simplistic’- discourse of ‘safety’ is just another (ie. the latest) means, among others, of social control. All supported, of course, by the outrage industry and its foot soldiers.

Apparently we need the nanny state to protect us from ourselves; a situation which I think Webber correctly also alluded to.
Save it for the track

How far back do people want rules and laws rolled in what some perceive to be a ‘nanny state’? While I maintain that many of Victorias traffic accident issues have more to do with vehicle and road conditions and speed may be a factor, just how many laws that ‘protect us from ourselves’ do people want removed?
.
How about drink driving? Should those laws disappear? Seatbelts? 40 years now in Victoria and well accepted worldwide, remove the mandatory laws on those shall we?
.
Public roads have speed-limits and laws and rules and regulations to try and regulate the use by ALL users, be they motorists, cyclicts and pedestrians. Some laws are there to ‘protect us from ourselves’, and as has been shown over many years have been required. While there are some that may still not wear seatbelts, or drink and drive, most people wouldn’t contemplate cracking down a freeway at 110 without a seatbelt on. And I can certainly say from firsthand experience that more people in collisions wearing seatbelts correctly, survive than those not wearing a seatbelt. That is but one example.
.
Are we to deem it acceptable for every motorist to try and do a burnout when the whim takes them in a public place? The comparison of the Victorian Police Commissioner carrying live ammunition (with no gun to fire them) onto a plane and the debate about driving matters does not correlate. (while I think the commissioner in this case was simply stupid, and I find it very hard to fathom how he could forget that he had the ammunition[seems there could be an issue within VICPOL of safe storage of firearms and/or ammunition]) They are separate issues. Hasn’t the chief Victorian traffic cop been done for speeding in recent times? Haven’t there been documented cases of politicians, judges and others all coming fowl of traffic laws. Serving police have been booked for traffic matters, friends and relatives of Police, politicians and everyone else have come fowl of traffic laws. Why make an exception for a race car driver on a Public road?
autoboy

The problem with the nanny state is that is represents all only on terms of black and white, when things are never really like that.

In the nanny state, its always the ‘death’ argument — for everything. And who is going to argue against wanting to prevent death.

Ironically, this is not in respect of death, but the banalisation of it.

Hey, let’s just ban life as it seems to be the leading cause of death!

Still believe what you like.