Sorry if you've just eaten, this may make you sick.
CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Cycling News
Latest insult to life - £35 fine and 3 points for killing cyclist
(11 posts)-
Posted 12 years ago #
-
Despicable. I think the judge should be given a driving ban and made to cycle for a year or two.
Posted 12 years ago # -
Just speechless! A human life appears to be the same as a speeding ticket.
Posted 12 years ago # -
c.f. damaging a car: "Vandalism is a criminal offence and anybody found guilty will face criminal punishment, which could be a large fine or imprisonment depending on the severity of the action." source
The Rhyl tragedy remains imo the most egregious example of this type of thing.Posted 12 years ago # -
More detail here
http://thecyclingsilk.blogspot.co.uk/2013/01/update-from-court-cps-v-bhamra.html
It doesn't get any more understandable though...
Posted 12 years ago # -
But if you drive while drunk, kill a pedestrian and flee from the scene, and you have previous convictions for doing the same, you get five years.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-21056285
Pedestrians are vulnerable people going about their business.
Cyclists are there for the taking.Posted 12 years ago # -
The thing that I noticed most about the case that Arellcat linked to was that the driver
"had previous convictions for drink driving, careless driving and being behind the wheel while disqualified".How do we convince people like this to change their ways? Banning them from driving doesn't work, because they'll drive anyway...
Posted 12 years ago # -
For the crime of driving while banned, we ban you from driving.
That's about as much use as banning burglars from burglary.
Is our justice system really so naive that it assumes banning a lawbreaker from breaking the law that they broke (thereby resulting in the ban( will ever work?
Posted 12 years ago # -
In contrast - Snowdon 4x4 case: Craig Williams jailed for 22 months. Somehow managed a dangerouns driving conviction for driving up a path with nobody on it, whereas running down a cyclist then driving down the road with them on your bonnet is merely a lack of "due care and attention"
Posted 12 years ago # -
Ah no, the lack of due care and attention was for his driving *while* the cyclist was on the bonnet. With a bit of mitigation for the fact that he couldn't see very well because the cyclist was on his bonnet (I really wish I was making this up). The CPS declined to prosecute on what happened when he hit the cyclist as they didn't have enough evidence as to whose fault it was. So the driver was actually convicted for hitting a *tree* not a person.
Posted 12 years ago # -
The prosecution decided there wasn't enough evidence to prove that the initial impact was caused by the driver, and we have seen some other cases where attempts by the prosecution to prove this failed.
Strict liability laws might be hard to achieve, but could we push for all motor vehicles to have compulsory data recorders and cameras fitted to record how they were being driven in the event of an accident? Maybe we could start with taxis and skip lorries?Posted 12 years ago #
Reply
You must log in to post.
posts
