Driver Who Caused Fatal Crash Was Council Road Safety Officer

woosh. who's leslie philips? and who's been beating (huh huh!) the
french (huh huh!) on turf (huh, huh, Beavis, he said 'turf)?

 

He invented the posi-drive screwdriver.

 

I think that's not the point. Why was his fine so small?

What's the betting that me and Adie will get fined more for filtering
on the motorway than this guy got for killing someone?

 

darsy wrote

That is one that even Blaney wouldn't take.

 

Yebbut, you deserve it.

 

Interesting but shit point: you and Adie knew what you were doing was
'illegal' but equally knew it was 'safe' and not going to harm anyone.

The van driver did not *know* the motorcyclist was there, he didn't
*know* that his inattention/misjudgement[1]/lack of observation was
going to have such horrific consequences.

So it would seem that we prosecute according to the *intention* and
not the results of an action. Which seems a bit wrong to me.

Minority Report, anyone?

[1] he may, after all, have seen him and misjudged the time he had to
make the turn, and is keeping bloody quiet about it.

 

Care to elaborate? What about the Tingewick Two?

 

Wasn't that speeding AND dangerous driving?

 

ISTR they were actually jailed for dangerous driving (in which speed
played a major part, but I do believe it's important to maintain the
distinction) and other offences.

Maybe JP will have the full details.

 

Something else this shows is the leniency of the fines imposed by
magistrates, am I correct in believing that the driver could have been
done £1000 per bald tyre? Whats the point in having that level of
punishment if it's not going to be imposed. Thats also why young drivers
don't bother with insurance - IF they get cought the fine is less than
the premium.

 

That is so true.

 

Indeed.

 

I don't see the connection at all.

In the first case we have an apparent failing of the English legal
system and in the second case a failing of the French. How can we make
a direct comparison of the two?


(Note, I say apparent for the English case since there isn't much
information on this around. In the French case it's been done to death
and the facts are established, there's no question about the guilt only
the sentence)

 

And then when one of us gets caught on a bike with a loud can or
speeding and is prosecuted we moan!

Hell, prosecute everyone to the full extent of the law...

 

They'll look at darsy and adie's ukrm posts and realise:

a) they are both menaces to society.
b) they are both paid too much.

 

It seems absolutely right to me.

 

And at all three of the junctions into Iron Acton that it could have
been, you can see for at least three hundred yards in the direction the
bike was coming from. Given the direction the c*r was coming from, it
would have been the junction closest to Frampton Cotterell and he'd have
been intent on cutting the corner on it at speed and didn't see the
bike. Mind ewe, I seldom do less than a ton on that bit in the
direction the bike was going, so perhaps the bike was adjudged to have
been giving it similar (or, one would hope on a 7R, superior) beans.

No fucking excuse for not seeing him though. Not there.

Cheers,

 

Dont know but its means tested

It boils down to deliberate act or ommission - which reminds me I
*will* get around to answering your e-mail!

 

As someobe else has posted - they were jailed for dangerous driving -
they *couldnt* be jailed for speeding.

 

Cannibal Surf Boy wrote:

Superior beans to a ton? Possibly 125 mph or more?
What's the Highway Code stopping distance at 125mph? Over 300 yards!
Reasonable doubt? Probably not.
What's my opinion worth? What you paid for it!