Using mobile, kills cyclist - sentenced to 5 years.

[anonymous-user]

agtlaw said:

There's an amusing aside to this case:

Judge reprimands lawyer for dressing like something out of Harry Potter.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-ord...

What a knobend.

[Red 4]

Breadvan72 said:

What a knobend.

That's just a poor attempt at masking your jealousy, that is.

I've got a 50 metres swimming badge you can have for £500.

PM me if you're interested (you know you are).

[anonymous-user]

Pah, I care not for your baubles, I already got the 100 metres swimming badge from eBay.

Meanwhile, more details here...

http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/defen...


Exec Summary - Sorting Hat says : ps off

[tenpenceshort]

Well at least I know who to represent me when I take the Quidditch World Council to the Court of Arbitration for Sport.

[agtlaw]

Breadvan72 said:

What a knobend.

I knew you'd like that story.

The wearing of coloured bands on your gown (itself almost a criminal act) is made even worse by virtue of the fact that it was a homicide trial - the convention during which is to wear a white shirt (rather than a snazzy coloured stripes shirt under your collar and bands).

Edited by agtlaw on Friday 29th August 13:25

[singlecoil]

supermono said:

singlecoil said:

No, we're not. We are trying to reduce the frequency of accidents.

Really? I've seen nothing training wise in recent years. And since seatbelt law everything has been concentrating on sending people bills who were spotted displaying the wrong number on their speedos which they receive up to two weeks later whilst safely home. Mobile phone law is ok though massively ignored but I suppose it made a change from speed cameras.

Might I suggest (looking at the flat figures for last decade) that 'we' are failing miserably?

Yes, really.

There was massive bhing about the drink driving laws when they came it too.

[anonymous-user]

http://barristerblogger.com/2014/08/29/lord-harley...

[Lurking Lawyer]

agtlaw said:

the convention during which is to wear a white shirt (rather than a snazzy coloured stripes shirt under your collar and bands).

You live and learn!

Mind you, my ignorance is perhaps not surprising. I do civil work and I can count on one hand the times I've had to make a foray into open court - each time usually marked by a mad search around the office to see who has got the collar tabs and gown

[agtlaw]

Breadvan72 said:

http://barristerblogger.com/2014/08/29/lord-harley...

Interesting. He mentions the same thing - "Given that Lord Harley was defending in a homicide trial his coloured ribbons and badges were particularly inappropriate."

[anonymous-user]

All legal costume is absurd, and I could only wish that "Lord Harley" had been making that point by his garb, but he was instead seeking to aggrandise himself (achieving the opposite effect), and as agtlaw says this was singularly inappropriate at a homicide trial.

[supermono]

singlecoil said:

Yes, really.

There was massive bhing about the drink driving laws when they came it too.

Erm, I'm not against the using mobiles when driving law just that it's a bit black and white, blunt and ineffective. Drink driving laws are at least scientifically measurable. But in any case, I support the mobile phone ban.

However, it's true to say that this billing people for speeding at some time in the future is bonkers from an effectiveness point of view yet the scale of technology deployed to make sure as many invoices are raised as possible is amazing. Accident figures prove my point beyond doubt.

Mobile Phone legislation hasn't made a dent either.

Training and attitude is expensive and difficult but effective. Yet because of the bozos in charge none of it happens.

So don't try to tell me "we're" trying because we're not. We're failing because the underlying issues aren't being tackled

[anonymous-user]

"Roll on Friday" reports that "Lord Harley" does not have an SRA regulated practice, and should only act as a consultant instructed by another law firm. If this is accurate, query on what basis he conducted the trial in the case under discussion.

[singlecoil]

supermono said:

singlecoil said:

Yes, really.

There was massive bhing about the drink driving laws when they came it too.

Erm, I'm not against the using mobiles when driving law just that it's a bit black and white, blunt and ineffective. Drink driving laws are at least scientifically measurable. But in any case, I support the mobile phone ban.

However, it's true to say that this billing people for speeding at some time in the future is bonkers from an effectiveness point of view yet the scale of technology deployed to make sure as many invoices are raised as possible is amazing. Accident figures prove my point beyond doubt.

Mobile Phone legislation hasn't made a dent either.

Training and attitude is expensive and difficult but effective. Yet because of the bozos in charge none of it happens.

So don't try to tell me "we're" trying because we're not. We're failing because the underlying issues aren't being tackled

Believe me, I wouldn't dream of trying to tell you anything. But to take you up on your second paragraph- accident figures prove nothing of the sort.

Also, speed cameras are very effective in keeping speeds down, I for one avoid exceeding the limit by anything more than a couple of mph simply because I don't want to receive speeding penalties, and I've no reason to believe that I'm the only one.

I myself could safely be left to decide my own speed in any given set of circumstances, but I accept that my own speed must be restricted in order that the speed of those who are not capable of choosing a suitable speed will be kept to reasonable limits. It wouldn't be fair otherwise.

[Devil2575]

Mk3Spitfire said:

He was "using a mobile phone whilst driving". This is the offence I'm referring to. The judge made reference to his actions being as bad as txting. Do you condemn txting whilst driving or is this acceptable to you too?
If he hadn't "used a mobile phone whilst driving", the cyclist wouldn't have died.

You have made the mistake of getting involved in a discussion with the village idiot. Stop, walk away and learn

[turbobloke]

singlecoil said:

supermono said:

singlecoil said:

Yes, really.

There was massive bhing about the drink driving laws when they came it too.

Erm, I'm not against the using mobiles when driving law just that it's a bit black and white, blunt and ineffective. Drink driving laws are at least scientifically measurable. But in any case, I support the mobile phone ban.

However, it's true to say that this billing people for speeding at some time in the future is bonkers from an effectiveness point of view yet the scale of technology deployed to make sure as many invoices are raised as possible is amazing. Accident figures prove my point beyond doubt.

Mobile Phone legislation hasn't made a dent either.

Training and attitude is expensive and difficult but effective. Yet because of the bozos in charge none of it happens.

So don't try to tell me "we're" trying because we're not. We're failing because the underlying issues aren't being tackled

Believe me, I wouldn't dream of trying to tell you anything. But to take you up on your second paragraph- accident figures prove nothing of the sort.

Also, speed cameras are very effective in keeping speeds down, I for one avoid exceeding the limit by anything more than a couple of mph simply because I don't want to receive speeding penalties, and I've no reason to believe that I'm the only one.

As the thread has drifted over to speed and speed limits, here's some food for thought.

http://www.thisisbristol.co.uk/Number-accidents-dr...

"The number of accidents has dropped since Bristol speed cameras switched off. The Avon and Somerset safety camera partnership, which ran the cameras, was disbanded last year and the fixed cameras were turned off in March."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-northamptonsh...

"The number of road deaths in Northamptonshire fell to an all-time low in 2011, police figures show. The figures, the lowest since records began in 1960, coincided with the year the county's road safety partnership was disbanded and fixed speed cameras were switched off."

From the North Wales Daily Post:
"As he came along the High Street in Coedpoeth, the driver slowed down because he knew it was a speed trap area. 'I checked my speed, looked up again and saw a figure in front of me and slammed on the brakes. He just seemed to be stood there, I didn't see where the pedestrian came from' he said."

singlecoil said:

I myself could safely be left to decide my own speed in any given set of circumstances, but I accept that my own speed must be restricted in order that the speed of those who are not capable of choosing a suitable speed will be kept to reasonable limits. It wouldn't be fair otherwise.

Speed limits don't work for populations as a whole in terms of affecting road speed.

Mustyn and Sheppard found more than 75% of drivers set a speed that traffic and road conditions permitted, regardless of the posted speed limit.

Dudek and Ulman found no significant changes in speeds at six urban fringe sites when speed limits were lowered by 10mph.

It works the other way as well - Spitz reported that the 85th percentile speed of traffic increased less than 0.5 mph in 40 zones where speed limits were raised.

[singlecoil]

turbobloke said:

Speed limits don't work for populations as a whole in terms of affecting road speed.

Mustyn and Sheppard found more than 75% of drivers set a speed that traffic and road conditions permitted, regardless of the posted speed limit.

Dudek and Ulman found no significant changes in speeds at six urban fringe sites when speed limits were lowered by 10mph.

It works the other way as well - Spitz reported that the 85th percentile speed of traffic increased less than 0.5 mph in 40 zones where speed limits were raised.

If you are going to rely on the findings of people with rather odd sounding names, you need to post the links.

[walm]

singlecoil said:

If you are going to rely on the findings of people with rather odd sounding names, you need to post the links.

Well in fairness, it's harder when the names are more common.
"Smith and Smith" would stretch even Deep Thought's Googling abilities.

[Mk3Spitfire]

Devil2575 said:

You have made the mistake of getting involved in a discussion with the village idiot. Stop, walk away and learn

Thanks mate, I'll take it on board!

[singlecoil]

walm said:

singlecoil said:

If you are going to rely on the findings of people with rather odd sounding names, you need to post the links.

Well in fairness, it's harder when the names are more common.
"Smith and Smith" would stretch even Deep Thought's Googling abilities.

True. Never the less, I expect that the reports he refers to are more than a single sentence each, and that there is rather more to them than TB's conclusions. Interested parties might like to read them for themselves.

[turbobloke]

singlecoil said:

walm said:

singlecoil said:

If you are going to rely on the findings of people with rather odd sounding names, you need to post the links.

Well in fairness, it's harder when the names are more common.
"Smith and Smith" would stretch even Deep Thought's Googling abilities.

True. Never the less, I expect that the reports he refers to are more than a single sentence each, and that there is rather more to them than TB's conclusions. Interested parties might like to read them for themselves.

Good point, after all the conclusions aren't mine - the researchers looked at the data and drew their own.

If people entering the speed debate want to find sources, and given that some of us can, it can't be too difficult. Some of us might even have been reading the research reports for decades but that wouldn't fit well with the one liner put-downs that people without any similar sources like to resort to.

Better to use data and evidence at hand to form an opinion, rather than run around trying to justify a position without having the basis for it first off.