BTCC's Frank Wrathall in court after cyclist collision

BTCC's Frank Wrathall in court after cyclist collision

Author
Discussion

Budweiser

1,077 posts

184 months

Wednesday 5th February 2014
quotequote all
Someone has lost a child. I have no sympathy with the idiot that caused the death of another human being. The trial judge will decide his fate and my hope is that the punishment will be proportionate to the crime and whatever the outcome the family of the deceased will feel justice has served them well.

Fantuzzi

3,297 posts

146 months

Wednesday 5th February 2014
quotequote all
Reardy Mister said:
jail isn't atonement, it's revenge in a case like this.
Its punishment, that's a big part of the law.


DanielSan

18,786 posts

167 months

Wednesday 5th February 2014
quotequote all
This may well be one of those times where being able to afford the best legal defence will keep him out of prison. I'd imagine he'll be looking at a suspended sentence and considerably lengthy ban obviously.

Crafty_

13,283 posts

200 months

Wednesday 5th February 2014
quotequote all
DanielSan said:
This may well be one of those times where being able to afford the best legal defence will keep him out of prison. I'd imagine he'll be looking at a suspended sentence and considerably lengthy ban obviously.
Either that or a few funny handshakes...

thechosenfamily

332 posts

155 months

Thursday 6th February 2014
quotequote all
Apologies for the incorrect info yesterday I mis-read the careless for dangereous.

agtlaw

6,712 posts

206 months

Thursday 6th February 2014
quotequote all
The sentencing hearing is first in the list at 10am Liverpool Crown Court (court 31) tomorrow - Friday 7th. Open to the public if anyone wants to go see.

DanielSan

18,786 posts

167 months

Thursday 6th February 2014
quotequote all
Crafty_ said:
Either that or a few funny handshakes...
Always a likeliness.

agtlaw

6,712 posts

206 months

Friday 7th February 2014
quotequote all
Result - 2 years' custody. 4 year ban.

Edit: I was told 24 months but it's being reported as 21 months' custody.

Edited by agtlaw on Friday 7th February 13:45

thechosenfamily

332 posts

155 months

Friday 7th February 2014
quotequote all
A fair outcome I think

Auntieroll

543 posts

184 months

Friday 7th February 2014
quotequote all
thechosenfamily said:
A fair outcome I think
Not for the cyclist....

thechosenfamily

332 posts

155 months

Friday 7th February 2014
quotequote all
Auntieroll said:
thechosenfamily said:
A fair outcome I think
Not for the cyclist....
No certainly not.

I would have been upset if he had not got some time given the offence.

Badly phrased on my part no offence was meant at all.

melvster

6,841 posts

185 months

Friday 7th February 2014
quotequote all
He is lucky to get 21 months IMO; he has taken someone else's life away choosing to ignore the law of not using your mobile phone whilst driving. It is disgusting that Wrathall had the cheek to say that is was the cyclist's fault and that he rode into him.

MitchT

15,863 posts

209 months

Friday 7th February 2014
quotequote all
Funny, when I posted on here some time ago about whether I should report someone in a large van who'd been driving a few feet off my back bumper while visibly using their phone, I was pretty much lambasted and it was suggested that I'd be a 'grass' or a 'snitch' if I were to do so. I wonder, if any of said complainants were to lose a loved one to a phone-using careless driver, they'd change their tune and wish that a 'grass' or 'snitch' had reported them some time prior, thus circumventing said loss. Perhaps with this as a reminder of what happens when selfish twunts use their phones while driving, equally selfish twunts who think you shouldn't 'grass' or 'snitch' on them might change their tune.

woof

8,456 posts

277 months

Friday 7th February 2014
quotequote all
I don't know how it happened but basically if you're using a phone, have an accident then regardless of fault, then they're going to make a scapegoat out of you.



agtlaw

6,712 posts

206 months

Friday 7th February 2014
quotequote all
Daily Fail has reported the story. Some interesting remarks from the judge:

'You clearly disregarded the law and that led to the tragic death of Mr Fingleton.
'You were obviously distracted and not in proper control of the vehicle and that is why you only saw him when it was too late.
'As a touring car racing champion you should have been setting a better example for others to follow.
'Mr Fingleton had many years ahead of him, he had a very successful career and was clearly loved by his wife and daughter.
'You deprived him of a full life and deprived his family of the love and companionship he would have given.
'The message must go out to motorists that when you flout the law in this way you pay the ultimate price by going to prison.'
'He was wearing a brightly coloured top it - it had been a fine sunny day and I'm satisfied you should have seen him earlier and taken action.
'Both of the witness drivers saw Mr Fingleton in good time. A driver must take the conditions as finds them. You didn't take the necessary care to see him on time, you didn't observe him until it was too late.
'There's no doubt in my judgement that he could be seen clearly. It's difficult to understand why this accident happened except you were holding a mobile phone at the time.'

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2553969/Ch...




woof

8,456 posts

277 months

Friday 7th February 2014
quotequote all
What do you think the sentence would have been if he hadn't been on the phone ?

anonymous-user

54 months

Friday 7th February 2014
quotequote all
woof said:
What do you think the sentence would have been if he hadn't been on the phone ?
Why? Do you think the accident would have still happened? The judge didn't seem to think so.

woof

8,456 posts

277 months

Friday 7th February 2014
quotequote all
REALIST123 said:
woof said:
What do you think the sentence would have been if he hadn't been on the phone ?
Why? Do you think the accident would have still happened? The judge didn't seem to think so.
Hypothetical - and accidents happen without people using a mobile.

mayj

3 posts

197 months

Friday 7th February 2014
quotequote all
A truly tragic story for all parties involved. A life taken and another ruined through a silly mistake which I'm sure he will regret til the day he dies.

pistolp

1,719 posts

222 months

Friday 7th February 2014
quotequote all
I'm with you woof, I don't know how people on here can be so confident about the facts of the case. It could well have just been an accident and it may well have happened with or without a mobile being involved. No one wants to see people killed on the road, but nor do I want to see people going to jail for being caught up in accidents or where they've made mistakes. Albeit very grave ones. When its a case of because you were involved in this accident and maybe if you'd not been on your phone then this guy wouldn't have been killed, hardly an absence of reasonable doubt. It's against the law I know, but still, should a young man go to jail for it. It feels like retribution, hardly fitting in this case.

What is the answer in a case like this, I don't know. For me living with the guilt of having killed someone and a lengthy driving ban would seem more appropriate. But then as I stated before I don't have all the facts and I'm not qualified to make these judgements. It's just a real pity all round.