When considering legality of 'eye test trip' you might imagine what a police office who stopped Cummings family on that day and listened to the explanation would have done:
"Yes officer I am staying many miles away from my home on my family farm. I work for the Prime Minister...
"Yes officer I am staying many miles away from my home on my family farm. I work for the Prime Minister...
... I am keen to get back to London but am not sure if my eyesight is up to it so I wanted to do a test run to Barnard Castle which is where we're going now"
Would the officer have thought this wasn't a reasonable excuse? Would a judge now decide that objectively it was?
Would the officer have thought this wasn't a reasonable excuse? Would a judge now decide that objectively it was?
Knowing how strictly police were interpreting rules at the time, I expect he would have been fined. A judge - not sure. With a fair wind, Cummings might just get away with it but (a) judge would find story fishy and (b) even if believed, not clearly a reasonable excuse
I wouldn't underestimate, though, how much deference a magistrate would be likely to give to someone who worked for PM and who was obviously under huge stress because of the national crisis. As I said at the outset, I think this is ultimately a political not legal question really
