@People are seriously defending this guy...?
"He's driven along a path that seems to be about two foot wide from the picture"
And what was the road like at the entrance where the mistake was made? Certainly no cliff, no slippy rocks or tight bend. If you took a wrong turn down a narrow path and it got narrower, would you continue in the hope it would get better, or try to reverse the whole way back out?
"And only stopped when he went through a fence and nearly off a cliff. That's not 'paying due care and attention', that's 'being a fucking idiot'."
Looking at the road with the drop either side, do you believe, as the magistrate did, that he was looking at the Satnav and not at the road? I find that to be just poor judgement by the magistrate, he didn't need to look at the satnav at that point because there was no turnoffs, the magistrates statement is nonsensical.
I reckon he was unfortunate, the magistrate hasn't driven down many narrow mountain roads, he was in a BMW which always invokes sterotypical images, it was a fuss to get him out, so the rozzers needed to justify the time, the map maker who drew the road in from the aerial photo made a mistake, a lot of mistakes by a lot of people, only one of which was his.
Let me flip it over, instead of me saying why he SHOULDN'T be punished. Why do you think that he SHOULD be punished? For what gain?
IMHO, the fix for this, is better signage at the turnoff and the satnav map to be fixed. He, him, the driver, could be anyone, me, you, the magistrate, and it's nice to kid ourselves that we wouldn't make that mistake, but that's to flatter ourselves. The guy is a professional driver who delivers cars, if he can make that mistake we certainly can.
If the map maker can make the mistake from the aerial photo then a driver (who can't see the road ahead like the map maker can), can certainly make that mistake.