Muslim is spared a speeding ban so he can drive between his two wives

[Fiannan]

Mohammed Anwar said a ban would make it difficult to commute between his two wives and fulfil his matrimonial duties.

His lawyer told a Scottish court the Muslim restaurant owner has one wife in Motherwell and another in Glasgow - he is allowed up to four under his religion - and sleeps with them on alternate nights.

He also needed his driving licence to run his restaurant in Falkirk, Stirlingshire.

Airdrie Sheriff Court had heard that Anwar was caught driving at 64mph in a 30mph zone in Glasgow, fast enough to qualify for instant disqualification.

Anwar admitted the offence, but Sheriff John C. Morris accepted his plea not to be banned and allowed him to keep his licence.

Muslim is spared a speeding ban so he can drive between his two wives | the Daily Mail

Just wondering if a Christian had two wives in Britain would the courts be pretty tolerant of him?

[Elgama]

Muslim is spared a speeding ban so he can drive between his two wives | the Daily Mail

Just wondering if a Christian had two wives in Britain would the courts be pretty tolerant of him?

firstly in this case it is Scotland and not Britain in this instance the legal systems are different. Family reasons are often accepted in Scottish Courts for example a parent needing it for access to his children. Work related reasons are also accepted. So yes both are enshrined in our legal system and we work largely on precedent which has now been set,

-Charley

[MorningStar]

People get permission to speed there?

[Elgama]

People get permission to speed there?

no only in extreme circumstances/emergency is speeding permitted. However we get penalty points on our licenses, someone who is a learner driver or a provisional driver (first 3 years after test) have 6 points they can afford to lose, someone who is over that period have 12.

The Sheriff (judge) can impose a number of points or a complete ban - I understand from the article the man received 6 penalty points and a £200 fine which is low for the Sheriff in my area but the Sheriff in Inverness would have imposed about the same my brother got 3points and a £180 fine for driving 110mph in a 60mph because he is disabled he did not lose his license. (he was in the Inverness area by 3 miles - I suspect our Sheriff would have imposed at least 5 penalty points and a £600 fine)

Long story involving a nasty procurator fiscal (prosecutor) and my husband hitting a wall, Richard got a £200 fine and 4 penalty points (very low for the Elgin Sheriff who suggested the case be dropped, Inverness Sheriff it is high for), he would not have removed Richard's license because it would have made it difficult for him to get to work and because of my disability and needing transport (although we are actually managing without a car right now).

If my husband gets 8 more points he will lose his license, after a period of 3-5 years the points are removed.

In this case the man required the car to visit his wives (it doesn't mention but we can assume there are children involved), and to maintain his business - so it is a perfectly reasonable argument that he does not receive an automatic ban on his driving.

I am shocked it made the tabloids if he hadn't been Muslim it would have just been accepted his defence is a normal one admittedly having 2 wives instead of just 2 families makes it different. Let me see if I can find a more balanced article

-Charley

[Elgama]

ok no there is a very small article in the Scotsman, and the Herald our other major Scottish Paper didn't even report it. And most of the scandal sheets didn't bother it really is non news, I notice most of the comments seem to be English people so that would explain lack of knowledge of Scots Law. Which is based on Roman Law.

-Charley

[Latter Days Guy]

firstly in this case it is Scotland and not Britain in this instance the legal systems are different. Family reasons are often accepted in Scottish Courts for example a parent needing it for access to his children. Work related reasons are also accepted. So yes both are enshrined in our legal system and we work largely on precedent which has now been set,

-Charley

Eeh I think you will find that Scotland is in fact part of Britain, as is England and Wales. And Scotland does have a different legal system to England and Wales, Britain is not a country but the name of the island that has England, Scotland and Wales upon it.

[Elgama]

Eeh I think you will find that Scotland is in fact part of Britain, as is England and Wales. And Scotland does have a different legal system to England and Wales, Britain is not a country but the name of the island that has England, Scotland and Wales upon it.

which is why I said

firstly in this case it is Scotland and not Britain in this instance the legal systems are different

I could bore you but Britain is Wales and England - in 1707 it became GREAT Britain which includes Scotland, although we shared a head of state from 1603 the parliaments did not merge until 1707. United Kingdom includes Northern Ireland (technically its the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland) but to be totally safe the British Isles covers everything:) I promise no more British Isles history

[Canuck Mormon]

So, Scotland is the GREAT in Great Britain? My Mother would agree (from Dumfries), but my Father wouldn't (from Manchester).

Back to the topic at hand. This Muslim's defense seems about as silly as the "I was too drunk to know what I was doing defense" that someone tried here in Alberta a few years ago.

[Elgama]

So, Scotland is the GREAT in Great Britain? My Mother would agree (from Dumfries), but my Father wouldn't (from Manchester).

Back to the topic at hand. This Muslim's defense seems about as silly as the "I was too drunk to know what I was doing defense" that someone tried here in Alberta a few years ago.

lol yup without Scotland - England and Wales would be just Britain - Dumfries is Lowland Scots which is where the incident occured :)

its not really silly the Scots courts place importance on Parents being able to visit their children do we know if children were involved? They also think being able to provide for your family is important if he can't run his business both of his families get to live entirely on the State.

-Charley

[Moksha]

Four wives? That would not be enough for the Clan McJeffs.

[Latter Days Guy]

which is why I said

firstly in this case it is Scotland and not Britain in this instance the legal systems are different

I could bore you but Britain is Wales and England - in 1707 it became GREAT Britain which includes Scotland, although we shared a head of state from 1603 the parliaments did not merge until 1707. United Kingdom includes Northern Ireland (technically its the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland) but to be totally safe the British Isles covers everything:) I promise no more British Isles history

I new doing those A levels in Ancient History and Archeology would come in handy some day!

Britain has been called that since Roman times (Britannia). It has nothing to do with the union of 1707, in fact Great Britain was probably coined by the French (Grande Bretagne) to distinguish it from Brittany (in French: Bretagne) after the Norman Invasion.

Here's a link to a site that explains it in very simple terms:

Are Britain, Great Britain and the UK the same country?

[Elgama]

I new doing those A levels in Ancient History and Archeology would come in handy some day!

Britain has been called that since Roman times (Britannia). It has nothing to do with the union of 1707, in fact Great Britain was coined by the French (Grande Bretagne) to distinguish it from Brittany (in French: Bretagne) after the Norman Invasion.

Here's a link to a site that explains it in very simple terms:

Are Britain, Great Britain and the UK the same country?

I could trump your A levels with a History/Archaeology degree and first year law and living in Scotland- this is a legal question, what I have used are the legal terms - we did not offcially in government and legal documents become Great Britain until the Act of Union in 1707 at that point Scotland, England and Wales became the United kingdom of Great Britain. In 1922 we became the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland although the term British can be used for anyone in it. The term British Islands includes the United Kingdom, Channel Islands and the Isle of Man, the British Isles incorporates all of the above plus Southern Ireland and 5,000 other small ones. And then there is the Commonwealth - if the Queen is doing a speech. And we still have some very tiny remnants of the British Empire left. All above information can be found and the Foreign and Home Office websites.

Britannia is a term usually reserved for defunct airlines and the Proms and is very outmoded:) It still does not change the fact that the article refers just to Scotland it has nothing to do with law elsewhere in Great Britain or Britain.

-Charley

[kona0197]

Why are we discussing what a guy who is Muslim is doing on a Mormon board? Come on guys we have better things to talk about!

[Latter Days Guy]

I could trump your A levels with a History/Archaeology degree and first year law and living in Scotland- this is a legal question, what I have used are the legal terms - we did not offcially in government and legal documents become Great Britain until the Act of Union in 1707 at that point Scotland, England and Wales became the United kingdom of Great Britain. In 1922 we became the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland although the term British can be used for anyone in it. The term British Islands includes the United Kingdom, Channel Islands and the Isle of Man, the British Isles incorporates all of the above plus Southern Ireland and 5,000 other small ones. And then there is the Commonwealth - if the Queen is doing a speech. And we still have some very tiny remnants of the British Empire left. All above information can be found and the Foreign and Home Office websites.

Britannia is a term usually reserved for defunct airlines and the Proms and is very outmoded:) It still does not change the fact that the article refers just to Scotland it has nothing to do with law elsewhere in Great Britain or Britain.

-Charley

I think that is where we are getting ourselves mixed up. Your talking legal and I'm talking historical. Oh and Britannia may be outmoded but it is what the Romans called the place when they popped over here 2000 years ago, in latin that is.

[WillowTheWhisp]

Muslim is spared a speeding ban so he can drive between his two wives | the Daily Mail

Just wondering if a Christian had two wives in Britain would the courts be pretty tolerant of him?

A Christian in Britain who had two wives would be arrested for bigamy never mind being allowed to speed.

[Latter Days Guy]

A Christian in Britain who had two wives would be arrested for bigamy never mind being allowed to speed.

I'm sure there was a case in Bradford a few years ago about a bigamous muslim man being charged with, well bigamy! I'm sure it's illegal here wether your a muslim or anything else.