The presentation of speeds here still makes me smile. Several times I have seen the shock and outrage headlines citing speeds of "up to 130km/h". In the UK, on a clear dual carriageway, you'll probaby not even raise the eyelids of PC Traffic Cop at anything under 85mph, and on a clear motorway it would be entirely dependent on their mood as to whether they came looking for you at 90mph. (130km/h is around 80mph, a very normal cruising speed on UK motorways despite the limit being 70mph.) OK, so this event involves a higher speed (but doesn't mention how that speed was recorded).
Spped doesn't kill, provided it is safely and appropriately applied. Whether the 7-series driver in question was driving in a situation that meant he was being unsafe, I can't say - I don't know the road, or the area. He cites in defence that there was no other traffic around, yet the prosecution continues to say he was a danger to the public.
Judge Venning seems to contradict himself:
"According to the appeal decision released by Justice Geoffrey Venning, he accepted that while there was no other traffic near Fleming's car..."
Then:
"Justice Venning found that if Fleming had at any point lost control of his car, it would have been dangerous to the public."
OK. In the event of an accident, the damage caused and the eventual positioning of the vehicle may have presented a danger to other traffic coming along behind. But if I crash at 75km/h on SH1 around J427, it's more than likely to cause a similar problem.
Sure, the driver was breaking the law. But it seems rhetoric and drama have been used to justify the fine and licence suspension, rather than law.