Shout to all the peeps at the party in Reading Saturday gone. Fairplay to the crews for totally defying the OB and using the premier free party venue in the South again, respect!
Good to meet Sqwot-u-like and TeknicianKC even tho it wasnt for long. Met another but cant remember name, hello!
Top nite, c ya all again soon.
aye – unfortunately I wasn’t there as I wasn’t feeling that good on Saturday (probably due to getting far too drunk the night before at a work do) 🙁 – but I had a few people call me to say how good it was.
I don’t think the old bill were that bothered about the party itself anyway – its in an area where there is no noise problem as there are no houses for miles – and given that although the building owners went 2 all the trouble of getting the court papers and getting the polis to help them – they didn’t do all the correct paperwork for a full eviction, nor even secure the building against re-entry.
In other words, after this private company made a big fuss about the state of their building, and used up a lot of expensive police and Court time and resources (which all of us who are citizens of the UK and Europe have paid for), they were too fucking cheap to even put their hands in their own pockets and pay for bailifs or security -I bet they were hoping the cops would do the eviction for free (which they cannot do in a civil case apart from in very special circumstances).
still – more power to the squatters…
what is however worth taking note of is that these days (in Reading at least) although the cops do not really bother those inside the building, they do wait around outside (often with traffic cars that contain video equipment) and randomly stop vehicles.
I think their view is now that although they cannot stop parties that easily, they want to make sure people aren’t committing traffic offences or stealing cars to get to them, nor are being blatant with drugs whilst people are driving.
I suppose this is fair enough – the same tactics are used outside licensed venues at chucking out time (and have been for some years) – and its probably fair to say that driving whilst tired or totally fucked is far more dangerous to society than parties!
As for car theft, its not big, its not clever, its not fair on the victims (who are usually people like ourselves who depend on their car for daily transport) and it brings it on top for all of us. Don’t do it.
On a serious note, if you are driving to one of our parties, then its worth perhaps preparing in advance that you may be stopped and taking appropriate precautions. It may mean you have to buy a new tax disc or get your MOT or whatever, but at the end of the day thats your payment for the extra burden cars put on society (you already pay for roads in normal tax whether you drive or not!). Plus looking after your vehicle may mean you won’t break down on the Ridgeway next summer 😉
And as there is no “chucking out time”, on the “morning after” you are perfectly welcome to crash out in whatever corner of the warehouse you choose (check it is clean first!) or in your car to get some rest before you get behind the wheel.
Reading free parties have a fairly good road safety record, and we don’t want anyone being a “Crasher Kid” and joining the Charlotte Frankham School of Motoring!
Hi D Racer, yeh good to see you again 🙂 Nice little party that one, enjoyed not having the rig to look after for a change. We’ll be at the ToM/Ravenous party for NYE rather than Reading. Have a good one wherever you end up 😀
this contained two anon posts [presumably]complaining about my use of the term “crasher kid” in the context of the RTC where Charlotte FRankham killed 4 of her friends due to lack of sleep, having left the Gatecrasher organised rave at its finish time
for whichever anon is complaining about my comments on Charlotte Frankham – OK perhaps my words were a bit flippant in that context but what she did is real crime (people died) and I do not need to know her or anyone else associated with her to make a judgement that what she did was wrong. The facts of the case have been widely reported on reputable news source (not just the tabloids).
I stand by everything I say – whether she likes it or not she will constantly be confronted by the consequences of those actions, and judged by far harsher people than myself.
Had this discussion turned up on some other boards she would have received some far nastier personal attacks than anything on here…
You do the crime, you do the time (and its not always just the time in the prison or police cell.)
OTOH If she had just had a minor prang with no injuries, been searched and pills found and then got 2 years I would have posted about the injustice!
When the incident happened I researched several news sources, as well as the offficial pressrels of both Police forces involved, and I did not post the incorrect rumours that the cops were trying to spread about her at the time. There is also a full and factual article on this site here
She may have been “remorseful” but it does not change the fact that she took others lives; anyone can say “sorry” in front of cops and Court (its commonsense unless you want to do a longer stretch!)
she has also ensured the rave scene as a whole is judged once more, and has caused further surveillance and clampdowns on those driving to raves since that event.
Killing people in a motor car is a violent crime, same as using a gun or a knife and yet it does not carry enough strong penalties. TBH I think her penalty should have been longer – more so than any drug dealer or rave organiser or any of the others who have ended up in jail for their rave activities yet have not hurt anybody.
If you think I’m being harsh I’ve lost friends through road traffic collisions as well – and I’m also a regular cyclist, which is why I may come across as harsh on people who are unsafe on the roads – they put me at personal danger.
Just because she is a raver doesn’t mean I should change my views and adopt a softer line…
Also, We do not tolerate anon abusive posts on this board so they have been deleted, and if you continue to post them your IP address will be banned from here.
However, if you want to have a constructive discussion -If you feel you can justify what she did or you know her and have another side of the story to put across then please have the courage to register here and have an actual debate.
perhaps Charlotte has since done some good work to help young accident victims; perhaps whilst in jail she helped others to sort their lives out perhaps she is giving talks to schools to show kids the dangers of DUI – if so then register here and tell us all.
unfortunately too many people abuse anon posting on boards so its hard to trust unregistered posts, I don’t know if you’re from another board just taking the piss!
I am also very curious to know why you waited 2 whole years to complain about this post – are you Charlotte?
I accept though that legal process has been served; and perhaps further discussion could have a positive result and prevent others from suffering a similar tragedy.
But don’t bother whinging at me and complaining that I’m a Sun reader after I’ve spent 14 years supporting raves and free parties and 7 years helping run this board despite the opposition to these event (which is often triggered by events like her RTC), when I am only stating the facts..
This is not the only mention of this incident on the net, it is shown worldwide…it will always be reported on for evermore by somebody (and its usually the antidrugs lobby) – and TBH if you hadn’t dragged this up again the whole saga would have got buried in the influx of other posts on this board.
OK – here’s a compromise.
If you are her or one of her friends, and are prepared to post a full and frank apology (for the victims) to this board, the circumstances of the crash from your POV and advice to young drivers not to make a similar mistake, then I will remove the comment in my first post. For four young lives lost that is more than fair.
I’m going back now to helping the Frenchtek refugees escape the mutant caterpillars. if you wish to continue this discussion in an appropriate manner, the ball is now in your court…
First of all, I’m sorry to awaken this matter after over a year since the last post, but I only came across this while looking up entries on the subject of Charlotte Frankham on google last night. I wasn’t going to post, but I’ve been brooding on this and I think I must get it off my chest. I will try to do this without being abusive; if you feel I’ve crossed the line, ban me and delete my post; this forum isn’t really meant for me and I don’t intend to be a regular poster anyway.
I must also make plain that I don’t know Charlotte Frankham and can’t speak for her. I have read some fairly detailed news items on the case, and my comments are based on these. If you’ve read extensively on this at the time, General Lighting, I accept you may know details I don’t.
Here goes. General Lighting, it’s very clear that Charlotte did wrong; she drove when she really wasn’t fit to drive (due to tiredness), and four people did indeed die as a result. However, to call her crime a violent crime and to compare it to using a gun or knife seems to me wrong. People who use guns or knifes do it on purpose. Clearly Charlotte didn’t intend to fall asleep while driving; how could she have when she herself might very easily have been the one killed? I can only imagine that, despite being by her own admission drowsy, she thought she’d be OK and would be able to stay awake. A misjudgement for sure, but not a deliberate violent offence.
You also say that if she’d had a minor prang with no injuries you’d have found a 2 year sentence too severe. This is something I’ve never understood, even though the law seems to be with you on this. What Charlotte did wrong was to drive when she wasn’t fit to. Whether or not she killed anyone or not once she fell asleep at the wheel was sheer chance and luck, and she would have been equally to blame whether she had a minor prang or a fatal crash. This is why I hate the whole idea of having such an offence as causing death by dangerous driving; to me this punishes people for the outcome of their actions rather than for the actions themselves. The sentence should depend on how dangerous the driving is, not on whether anyone dies, which can be outside the control of the driver. There was one case I know of where a girl crashed while driving a group of her friends; the driver and two passengers were wearing seat belts and were unhurt; the other two passengers weren’t wearing their seat belts, and one was seriously injured and the other killed. It has to be pretty likely that both would have been unhurt if they’d worn seat belts. The driver got four years; had no death occurred she’d have faced two years at most (and maybe less). Is there really any justice in having the driver’s sentence depend on whether a passenger chooses to wear a seat belt or not?
The worst of this policy of treating drivers differently because of whether there are deaths or not is that I think it robs the sentences of any effect they might have in deterring others. After all, few drivers intend to cause death (and if they do, the charge should be murder). If they really thought they were going to kill someone, most drivers would find this deterrent enough. I think most drivers who drive dangerously think that they’ll be OK; they overestimate their driving skills. If they knew they faced severe sentences just for getting caught speeding/driving drunk/driving badly, then that might actually have some real effect on people’s driving. As it is, all we end up doing is banging up some poor sorry-hearted people who’ve given themselves a lifetime of guilt already and are often unlikely to drive again at all, never mind dangerously.
That brings me on to another thing; you seem very cynical about Charlotte’s remorse as expressed at the trial. Now I accept that I know no more about her frame of mind than you, and I’m not so naive that I don’t know that many expressions of remorse in courtrooms are fake. However, I think most people would feel pretty remorseful if their misjudgement had caused four people to die, and there seems no reason not to give the lass the benefit of the doubt on this one.
One final point, I haven’t read the deleted posts, and it might be that there were clues there to suggest that the poster was Charlotte. However, the fact that it took 2 years to respond doesn’t seem especially signicant. Charlotte was sentenced in June 2001; no doubt she’d have got out after serving half her two and a half year sentence, which takes us to Autumn 2002. Your remark about the Charlotte Frankham School of Motoring was posted in December 2002, and she would almost certainly have been at liberty to respond then. Whoever posted, whether Charlotte or someone else, probably posted then because they had only just come across it, just as I am doing now.
That’s me done, and curiously I do feel much better for having got that off my chest. Delete or ban if you feel you must.
if not a deliberate act of violence; it was negligence that resulted in a life lost. This will (and should) always carry a heavy penalty in the eyes of the law; although not of course the same as stabbing someone! It is similar to situations in workplaces where bosses trying to meet a deadline forget about safety rules and someone is hurt or killed.
She could so easily have had a few hours kip in the car and drove back the next day. Most of our rave drivers do this…
in this case, a driving ban and re-test rather than a long jail sentence is more proportionate. I have always believed prison should only be there for people who have hurt someone else; there are too many people inside as it is.
There is a case for making traffic offence penalties higher; OTOH it could create a backlash from motorists which most Governments are too chicken to deal with.
Consider the fuss over speed cameras, for instance. Also a certain amount of speeding is tolerated in the name of getting stuff delivered quickly and business contracts signed etc which is wrong…
There isn’t such a thing as road accident. There are collisions, which occur because one or more people has made an error or judgement.
Remorse will not bring back her friends (incidentally many of my friends are from the Swindon area and know the victims.)
Part of the punishment is having to remember the consequences of ending someones life – every day for the rest of your own life.
To be fair I did point out and rubbish a number of smear campaigns the Police (two forces!) were circulating about her, namely that she dropped out of uni due to drugs (she in fact did so due to the the stress of the forthcoming Court case.)
This messageboard wasn’t really up and running until 2002. check the dates – these posts appeared in 2005!
The anon posters were removed because they were anonymous and it was impossible to tell whether they were really Charlotte or her associates. Incidentally they were given the opportunity to respond or to defend Charlotte (as I said she could have been doing a lot of good either in jail or afterwards) and never took up the offer. She could have registered – we’re hardly gonna turn her in to the old bill or the media; she has done her time!
Although I think you are genuine, your actions (even by my cynical standards!) are a bit odd.
Maybe you mistook this board for one of the modifed car boards (they use the same software and the colours may be the same); but it seems odd to go onto a rave board with a load of friendly people (including a lot of Scots) and make such a dark post as your first one!
It almost seems that either you or a friend are or have been in the same situation as Charlotte – in which case the best thing you can do (or have done) is do your time, and keep your head down other than warning younger people not to do the same thing….
This topic has no tags