Hit & Run Caught on Camera.... Unbelievable
Discussion
daveco said:
That video is fake.
If she was prosecuted why are they hiding her number plate?
Why did the other car not stop when she hit the man?
It also looked like a computer animation when she hit the 'man'
Utter b
ks imo.
I am suspicious of it. That does not mean I am right, just that I am suspicious.If she was prosecuted why are they hiding her number plate?
Why did the other car not stop when she hit the man?
It also looked like a computer animation when she hit the 'man'
Utter b
ks imo.If the woman was handed a 2 year suspended sentence, then the case will have run through Magistrates and on to Crown, where the woman will have had at least 2 hearings in Crown (1 for plea hearing and case management, then another for sentencing following a probation pre Sentence Report).
I find it hard to believe, considering the main body of evidence is some rather good footage of the incident taking pace, that the local press and even the national press have not latched on to it. Previous similar incidents have certainly made the national press.
Every Crown Court has journalists from the local rags hanging around looking for interesting stories.
The reason I take interest is that this is either footage of a shocking incident, in which case it is quite right that we see it, or that it is an advert designed to be viral in nature, in which case the driving of one of the 'actors' should be brought into question.
Baryonyx said:
Looks like the bloke with the camera is driving a Volvo, maybe an S60. I've gleaned that much watching the first few seconds.
Just watched all of that now. Bloody unbelievable. She was driving like a total idiot and I'm not surprised she hit a pedestrian. Making off from something like that and then trying to deny it, what a feckless cow.
It's a Passat. Just watched all of that now. Bloody unbelievable. She was driving like a total idiot and I'm not surprised she hit a pedestrian. Making off from something like that and then trying to deny it, what a feckless cow.
Edited by Baryonyx on Friday 8th July 08:14
Shocking behaviour.
10 Pence Short said:
daveco said:
That video is fake.
If she was prosecuted why are they hiding her number plate?
Why did the other car not stop when she hit the man?
It also looked like a computer animation when she hit the 'man'
Utter bks imo.
I am suspicious of it. That does not mean I am right, just that I am suspicious.If she was prosecuted why are they hiding her number plate?
Why did the other car not stop when she hit the man?
It also looked like a computer animation when she hit the 'man'
Utter b
ks imo.If the woman was handed a 2 year suspended sentence, then the case will have run through Magistrates and on to Crown, where the woman will have had at least 2 hearings in Crown (1 for plea hearing and case management, then another for sentencing following a probation pre Sentence Report).
I find it hard to believe, considering the main body of evidence is some rather good footage of the incident taking pace, that the local press and even the national press have not latched on to it. Previous similar incidents have certainly made the national press.
Every Crown Court has journalists from the local rags hanging around looking for interesting stories.
The reason I take interest is that this is either footage of a shocking incident, in which case it is quite right that we see it, or that it is an advert designed to be viral in nature, in which case the driving of one of the 'actors' should be brought into question.
The fact that you can't see either car's number plate would lead me to believe neither party want to be prosecuted for dangerous driving when their ruse is discovered.
daveco said:
That video is fake.
If she was prosecuted why are they hiding her number plate?
Why did the other car not stop when she hit the man?
It also looked like a computer animation when she hit the 'man'
Utter bks imo.
Possibly. If she was prosecuted why are they hiding her number plate?
Why did the other car not stop when she hit the man?
It also looked like a computer animation when she hit the 'man'
Utter b
ks imo.The self-importance of the people 'filming' was pretty nauseating. Frankly, they came across as a pair of tossers.
Oli.
daveco said:
Well that backs up what I think of this video.
The fact that you can't see either car's number plate would lead me to believe neither party want to be prosecuted for dangerous driving when their ruse is discovered.
I think it would be reasonable to assume, considering the power of PH in fishing out facts, that we could be given:The fact that you can't see either car's number plate would lead me to believe neither party want to be prosecuted for dangerous driving when their ruse is discovered.
- Location of the offence
- Location of Crown Court dealing with offence
- Name of the driver
None of these items will be subject to restrictions by the court and if the story is true should be easy to track down.
Nedz said:
If you listen at 1:45 they actually say "i reckon if we stay up her arse we can get her to do something dodgey" as if they ARE actually trying to provoke her into doing something silly.Does seem a bit strange what they are doing.
Fair play though,drivers like that should be banned for life!
What they actually said (emphasis mine) is: "I reckon if we stay up her ass we'll probably get her doing something dodgy"Fair play though,drivers like that should be banned for life!
Sure enough, they did. They made a conscious decision to follow her and record her driving expecting something to happen, having already seen her involved in two near collisions (right at the start of the video where she cuts them up at the junction, then the near head-on collision at 1:34 while jumping a queue of traffic to turn right), but in no way appeared to provoke such poor driving.
entwicklung said:
Nedz said:
If you listen at 1:45 they actually say "i reckon if we stay up her arse we can get her to do something dodgey" as if they ARE actually trying to provoke her into doing something silly.Does seem a bit strange what they are doing.
Fair play though,drivers like that should be banned for life!
What they actually said (emphasis mine) is: "I reckon if we stay up her ass we'll probably get her doing something dodgy"Fair play though,drivers like that should be banned for life!
Sure enough, they did. They made a conscious decision to follow her and record her driving expecting something to happen, having already seen her involved in two near collisions (right at the start of the video where she cuts them up at the junction, then the near head-on collision at 1:34 while jumping a queue of traffic to turn right), but in no way appeared to provoke such poor driving.
Usually if you drive up someones arse 'as they say' it does provoke the driver infront to react either by slamming on the brakes or screwing off into the distance which was maybe what they were after!
I find it depressing our clueless justice system give her such a light sentence!!! Did they not watch the film?,she left the scene of a serious accident then denied it! .
Yet if someone opens the taps on their motorbike on a dual carriageway they get thrown in the slammer.
This is,of course me generalising after reading threads on here for years.
Yet if someone opens the taps on their motorbike on a dual carriageway they get thrown in the slammer.
This is,of course me generalising after reading threads on here for years.
chrisgtx said:
I find it depressing our clueless justice system give her such a light sentence!!! Did they not watch the film?,she left the scene of a serious accident then denied it! .
Yet if someone opens the taps on their motorbike on a dual carriageway they get thrown in the slammer.
This is,of course me generalising after reading threads on here for years.
What evidence do we have yet that this ever went through the justice system (aside from an unauthenticated view from the creator of the video)?Yet if someone opens the taps on their motorbike on a dual carriageway they get thrown in the slammer.
This is,of course me generalising after reading threads on here for years.
Parrot of Doom said:
Amazing that when faced with such awful and dangerous driving, so many question why the following car was recording footage.
I hope the bh driving that car is banned for ten years.
Given the amount of pontificating about other people's driving that goes on on this forum, it's pretty rich for some posters to be criticising the people with the camera for commenting on the muppet in front of them.I hope the b
h driving that car is banned for ten years.I've often thought about getting an in-car camera fitted myself precisely because of all the moronic manoeuvres I see on the roads. You never know when some idiot might crash into you, or you could witness an accident. Always helps to have as much evidence as possible in case something happens.
Cameras are getting cheaper and cheaper and I'd hazard a guess that within a decade they'll be relatively common in cars.
Parrot of Doom said:
Amazing that when faced with such awful and dangerous driving, so many question why the following car was recording footage.
I'm not amazed. It seems like the fashionable thing to do on PH these days to arbitrarily pick the OP to pieces in what appears to be a point scoring excercise.
10 Pence Short said:
daveco said:
Well that backs up what I think of this video.
The fact that you can't see either car's number plate would lead me to believe neither party want to be prosecuted for dangerous driving when their ruse is discovered.
I think it would be reasonable to assume, considering the power of PH in fishing out facts, that we could be given:The fact that you can't see either car's number plate would lead me to believe neither party want to be prosecuted for dangerous driving when their ruse is discovered.
- Location of the offence
- Location of Crown Court dealing with offence
- Name of the driver
None of these items will be subject to restrictions by the court and if the story is true should be easy to track down.
daveco said:
I also find it interesting that the majority of the filming took place in a residential area, and the actual hit and run was on a residential street. This would mean there would be no CCTV to immediately discredit the video. And if this took place in January of this year, and they had this footage along with the suspect's licence plate details, why did it only surface now? Surely it wouldnt' have taken 6 months to prosecute her, given the mountain of evidence?
The video wouldn't be allowed to surface until after sentencing, assuming it was used in evidence. Any public showing would more than likely unduly and negatively affect any subsequent trial or sentencing.As for 6 months, that would be very quick. Even with guilty plea from the outset, you're still looking at 2 Magistrate and 2 Crown Court hearings before sentencing.
I'd be surprised it happened that quickly.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff