The cycling silk blogsite by Martin Porter has a post on the sentences that people convited of causing the death of cyclist have received. It is English law so slightly different to us but a informative read.
CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Cycling News
Review of sentencing for killing cyclists
(44 posts)-
Posted 13 years ago #
-
I note that 'blinded by the light' is gaining popularity as a defence...
Link to British Cycling campaign on sentencing policy:
http://www.britishcycling.org.uk/about/article/bc20120301-British-Cycling--“Light-sentences-for-drivers-undermine-confidence-in-the-justice-system”-0Posted 13 years ago # -
That's an excellent blog post (so much so I've asked for permission to reprint it).
I've always hated the 'couldn't see for the sun' excuse. If the sun is so bad that you can't actually see what's in front of you then why are you still driving?
Posted 13 years ago # -
But Anth, you can't deny folk their inalienable right to drive, whatever the circumstances. Driving licenses are sacred, dontcha know?
Posted 13 years ago # -
So it would seem. The guy who was found guilty, but plead his innocence, who ran over someone going onto a sliproad with nothing obscuring his vision but 'didn't expect' a cyclist to be there was banned for 12 months and doesn't have to re-sit a test to get his licence back.
Posted 13 years ago # -
The recent launch of this British Cycling campaign was enough for me to switch my annual subs from CTC to British Cycling.
Although to be fair I didn't need too much encouragement to finally turn my back on CTC.
Posted 13 years ago # -
my mother in law managed to hit a bus due to low sun. A BUS. She's suitably embarrassed about it & it was a slow collision with no harm done but it's always made me cycle extra extra carefully on those low sunny winter days
Posted 13 years ago # -
It's definitely worth being aware of the risks when there is a low sun about. Non drivers perhaps don't realise how a low sun can sometimes all but obliterate the view out the windscreen.
Posted 13 years ago # -
"Non drivers perhaps don't realise how a low sun can sometimes all but obliterate the view out the windscreen. "
Surely the problem is that drivers don't realise or don't take appropriate action.
Posted 13 years ago # -
Yes, modern cars have steeply raked windscreens and offer a low contrast view even in normal lighting. Combined with glasses, very tricky.
Posted 13 years ago # -
"Non drivers perhaps don't realise how a low sun can sometimes all but obliterate the view out the windscreen."
But why would drivers just keep battering on when they can't see anything?
Posted 13 years ago # -
Surely the problem is that drivers don't realise or don't take appropriate action.
Exactly.
But why would drivers just keep battering on when they can't see anything?
I refer the honourable gentleman/lady to the remark I made some moments ago.*
* An old favourite of John Major's, I recall.
P.S.:- chdot, why is this forum's dictionary correct-o-bot set to US English? We may be Scots, but we are still 'British'! (In the geographical/linguistic sense mostly).
Posted 13 years ago # -
Without wishing to justify "battering on" when blinded, it can happen suddenly, such as when emerging from the shadow of a building (or a bus?).
Posted 13 years ago # -
"
P.S.:- chdot, why is this forum's dictionary correct-o-bot set to US English?"
Um
Wasn't aware it was
My computas spell check as I tipe.
Don't know if UK option.
Will look later.
Posted 13 years ago # -
It flags up "honourable" and "favourite" with wee red wiggly pixelly lines underneath. For example. Let's try....colour, yep; flavour, yep; labour, no; savour; no, interesting.
Posted 13 years ago # -
Sure its not your browser settings?
Posted 13 years ago # -
"with wee red wiggly pixelly lines underneath"
Ah, so that won't be the BBPress spellcheck.
"Sure its not your browser settings?"
Worth a look...
Posted 13 years ago # -
Doh! I believe it may have been my dishonourable browser. Switched the spell check off... (blush).
Posted 13 years ago # -
All answers are here -
(not just cycling...)
Posted 13 years ago # -
"Without wishing to justify "battering on" when blinded, it can happen suddenly, such as when emerging from the shadow of a building (or a bus?). "
Neither of the cases illustrated had any mention of emerging from the shadow of a building or bus. Both drivers clearly knew full well they could not see a thing, but just kept on driving anyway until they ran over and killed people. There is no way to justify that.
Posted 13 years ago # -
What Min said, also, a decent driver, being aware of the low sun, would be extra catious when emerging from shadow, and anyone with any sort of commonsense would moderate their speed and/or clean their windscreen if unable to see what they were driving towards!
That's a drivers observation not a cyclists btw!!Posted 13 years ago # -
The solution to it happening suddenly is to stop suddenly, for fear of hitting something while temporarily blinded.
There's no questioning what happened or the guilt or innocence. Most of the people admitted what they had done and tried to find mitigation in some feeble excuse. It's well worth reading Martin Porter's blog because he locates the problem precisely - in the decision to charge what is manifestly dangerous as careless and the decision of judges to give the lowest sentence possible.
Posted 13 years ago # -
£200 fine
what will he get this time?
(saw this on another forum)
Posted 13 years ago # -
I remember seeing that last year (it's taken a LONG time to charge him!) and thinking it was ridiculous. Once is careless etc etc etc.
I think Insto pointed out on another thread - killing someone with a car or truck or whatever appears to be less serious, at the moment, than setting fire to a furniture store (I don't disagree with that sentence mind you).
Posted 13 years ago # -
Unbelievable that the same guy has killed again. Needs a lifetime ban and some prison time.
Posted 13 years ago # -
"
"Non drivers perhaps don't realise how a low sun can sometimes all but obliterate the view out the windscreen. "Surely the problem is that drivers don't realise or don't take appropriate action.
"That certainly is a problem.
Even if drivers do slow down/ take extra care, etc. the situation is still made more dangerous by a low sun and that is something that a cyclist or pedestrian might be unaware of.Posted 13 years ago # -
Meanwhile if you cause any damage to any cars (three cars in fact) you can expect to go to jail and be refused bail as the dangerous criminal you are. Note there were no actual people in the cars at the time.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-tayside-central-17788830
It is not made clear how he is supposed to work to pay for the damage from prison.
Posted 13 years ago # -
"three cars that were parked outside a police station."
Ah well, they'll have had him "bang to rights" then. The Sheriff's attitude does seem harsh, mind you.
Posted 13 years ago # -
I would imagine that a background report to go with the sentencing revealed he's got a bit of 'history' of one criminal sort or another. But even so, it does seem wildliy out of proportion if you accept that killing someone with a car only warrants community service and a short ban.
The other way of looking at it is that the car damage case has the correct sentence, and killign by driving penalties should be more harsh/stark/proportionate/reflective of the damage these cause.
Posted 13 years ago #
Reply »
You must log in to post.
posts
