Had it been Lester, which cheque book would he have used for the fine acey? £70K would have given the old bugger palpitations.

CagliariG 03 Jul 25 14:45 
No idea how much over the limit he was elise but the ban would suggest not by much.

66mg per 100 millilitres of breath - just under twice the legal limit.

As he rides horses for a living I suggest he be tied in the middle of four, at their rears, and each urged to go in opposing directions.  No need for stocks, rotten tomatoes, gibbets, racks, forum referendums or anything else.  And his entrails buried adjacent to the Royal Ascot winning post, in memory of his fine ride on Never So Brave.

And for offences against decency your ilk should be gone from here Honcho!!

Having been taken to hospital, Murphy was subsequently tested at a police station at 7am where he was found to have 66mg of alcohol per 100ml of blood in his system, which was described as being “just below twice over the legal limit”. The prosecution recorded the last time he was in control of the vehicle as 12.15am.

Delivering his judgement, district judge Sam Goozee said: "On April 27 you were behind the wheel when the level of alcohol was nearly twice above the legal limit. I must add that this is the assumed level of alcohol in your blood at the time of driving, but I note the amount of time between the accident and the test taking place.

Slightly off piste, but hilarious video footage of footballer Dean Saunders wondering whether or not he should provide a breath test after being arrested on suspicion of drink driving:

https://www.google.com/search?q=dean+saunders+arrest&sca_esv=71ced09d0459fd04&source=hp&ei=YJ5maKHUGIDRhbIPquWRuQU&iflsig=AOw8s4IAAAAAaGascK2HKgMjqGLkURRK_mk4uqBqfxA1&ved=0ahUKEwihhIqx_aCOAxWAaEEAHapyJFcQ4dUDCA8&uact=5&oq=dean+saunders+arrest&gs_lp=Egdnd3Mtd2l6IhRkZWFuIHNhdW5kZXJzIGFycmVzdEjBN1AAWMcwcAB4AJABAJgBeaABpQyqAQQxNS41uAEDyAEA-AEBmAIPoALgCsICCxAAGIAEGLEDGIMBwgIOEC4YgAQYsQMYgwEYigXCAggQABiABBixA8ICBBAAGAPCAgUQABiABMICDhAAGIAEGLEDGIMBGIoFwgILEC4YgAQY0QMYxwHCAg4QLhiABBixAxjRAxjHAcICCBAuGIAEGLEDwgIFEC4YgATCAgsQLhiABBixAxiDAcICDhAuGIAEGLEDGIMBGNQCwgILEC4YgAQYsQMY1ALCAggQLhiABBjUAsICERAuGIAEGLEDGMcBGJgFGK8BwgILEC4YgAQYxwEYrwHCAgYQABgWGB6YAwCSBwQxMC41oAeV0AGyBwQxMC41uAfgCsIHBjItMTMuMsgHUw&sclient=gws-wiz#fpstate=ive&vld=cid:49ab8a47,vid:CJ6QCEpBYLw,st:0

So Honcho, you know for a certainty that he was actually driving despite any anomalies?

Btw I remember but have not mentioned vitriol from your ilk against Stefano Cherchi shortly before he was killed on a racecourse, attended a memorial in Sassari.

Judge and Jury and yet you have no clue about any actual facts of the night the incident took place, neither do I but people like you are what is wrong with the world in general!!

LoyalHoncho 03 Jul 25 16:15 
Usual bland smug drivel from uptheirons, the forum abuser.
Lester never threatened to kill anyone, clearly the Murphy didn’t care less whether he did or not.
That is the judgemental difference.
If they’d made a Carry On film with you in it, maybe they would call it Carry On Sneering.

No, it would have been promoted as a sequel to Carry On Behind which had Archeology as its central theme, it would obviously be entitled.....Cary On Digging

You should learn to read Honcho, I said your ilk not you. The point being it is too easy to sit in judgement about people who put their lives on the line daily without knowing all the facts. The fact you acknowledge you have no idea about possible anomalies means you should perhaps open your mind to information now coming to light?

Exactly the point Honcho, you make assumptions and assume that because he pleaded guilty he was actually driving.

I had plenty of experience with Happy Valley and like you they will be happy with the guilty plea without looking any further.

Bottom line though, do you or they have actual evidence he was driving the vehicle without the guilty plea?

Case rested then Honcho, not enough brains to even read a simple conclusion, are your benefits still being paid?

I still haven’t a clue as to your point Cag.  I do however that between the two of you you are the organ grinder and not the monkey.

My point is Honcho that given facts now coming out there is sufficient doubt that Murphy was actually driving the vehicle and has taken the fall, at great cost if so?

If that is the case then the judge and jury of you and this Forum have done him a great dis-service because of your preconceived opinions, not proven tbh but sufficient doubt imvho.

Very fair point Duffy.  And thank you Cag. for at last making it clear just what you were raving about.  As for the serial abuser known as uptherssirons he should work on his self esteem a bit more.

Murphy had a smart lawyer who has got him a good deal in court. Lot of behind the scenes stuff yet to emerge. But the BHA decision I find inexplicable. Reckon they'll face some tough questions.

Did you expect him to be on legal aid DrGordons?
Of course he had top representation as is everyone's right if the can afford to

The court was told that Murphy earns a regular income of £1,250 a week, along with irregular earnings of £250,000 a year net.

At last.
The fact that he is banned from driving for 20 months should preclude that duffy

You could Dela because the judgementals didn't get the outcome they craved