Justice? What justice?
Discussion
A lorry driver who ran over and killed a cyclist was fined £300 and £100 costs, but kept his licence, after admitting careless driving. The father of the dead cyclist was himself given 4 penalty points and fined £600 for doing 40mph over Tower Bridge at 7am on the New Year Bank Holiday - Streaky
But Streaky...
...you forget that speeding can be automated into a system of self incrimination and is so much easier to prove.
It does stink however. At the same court who sentenced the silly bint in Wales who was caught going through the speed trap putting her makeup on in the drivers mirror at 30mph exactly the same fine and punishment they gave me for a speeding issue which was only increased from a 3 point FPN because I was innocent and stood up for myself.
It just goes to show that the system really does punish 'unsafe' actions in a compeltely unrelative way...
...you forget that speeding can be automated into a system of self incrimination and is so much easier to prove.
It does stink however. At the same court who sentenced the silly bint in Wales who was caught going through the speed trap putting her makeup on in the drivers mirror at 30mph exactly the same fine and punishment they gave me for a speeding issue which was only increased from a 3 point FPN because I was innocent and stood up for myself.
It just goes to show that the system really does punish 'unsafe' actions in a compeltely unrelative way...
streaky said:
A lorry driver who ran over and killed a cyclist was fined £300 and £100 costs, but kept his licence, after admitting careless driving. The father of the dead cyclist was himself given 4 penalty points and fined £600 for doing 40mph over Tower Bridge at 7am on the New Year Bank Holiday - Streaky
He kept his licence, but how many points was the lorry driver given ?vonhosen said:
streaky said:
A lorry driver who ran over and killed a cyclist was fined £300 and £100 costs, but kept his licence, after admitting careless driving. The father of the dead cyclist was himself given 4 penalty points and fined £600 for doing 40mph over Tower Bridge at 7am on the New Year Bank Holiday - Streaky
He kept his licence, but how many points was the lorry driver given ?
esselte said:
vonhosen said:
streaky said:
A lorry driver who ran over and killed a cyclist was fined £300 and £100 costs, but kept his licence, after admitting careless driving. The father of the dead cyclist was himself given 4 penalty points and fined £600 for doing 40mph over Tower Bridge at 7am on the New Year Bank Holiday - Streaky
He kept his licence, but how many points was the lorry driver given ?There are also no details of how culpable the pedal cyclist was in the collision.
Circumstances matter & there is little information above, just a punchy headline.
Edited by vonhosen on Thursday 20th September 23:17
vonhosen said:
esselte said:
vonhosen said:
streaky said:
A lorry driver who ran over and killed a cyclist was fined £300 and £100 costs, but kept his licence, after admitting careless driving. The father of the dead cyclist was himself given 4 penalty points and fined £600 for doing 40mph over Tower Bridge at 7am on the New Year Bank Holiday - Streaky
He kept his licence, but how many points was the lorry driver given ?There are also no details of how culpable the pedal cyclist was in the collision.
Circumstances matter & there is little information above, just a punchy headline.
Edited by vonhosen on Thursday 20th September 23:17
Yes the relative sizes of the fines seem absurd, and we all know that speeding offences are treated disproportionately harshly, (FACT!!!!).
BUT, the cyclist could have contributed, I have seen some quite frankly lunatic behaviour from cyclists in the past. I tend to treat cyclists in the same way as I treat horses on the road. Give them a wide berth, as they sometimes appear to be barely in control, and if I hit one I know I will be at fault, (even if I'm not, which I probably won't be).
streaky said:
A lorry driver who ran over and killed a cyclist was fined £300 and £100 costs, but kept his licence, after admitting careless driving. The father of the dead cyclist was himself given 4 penalty points and fined £600 for doing 40mph over Tower Bridge at 7am on the New Year Bank Holiday - Streaky
The state is broken, we need an entirely new one.fluffnik said:
FishFace said:
Well you'll be happy to learn death without due care and attention kicks in in 3 days. Oh wait, it's motoring legislation - where oh where shall one stand? 
Punish culpability and intent, not outcomes.
The van driver could well have been going through a crossing on green and the silly cyclist jumped a red light straight into his path.
This thread is useless without more information...
Convicted of dangerous driving. Either the system gave him a blanket conviction even though the cyclist may have been culpable (what a shit system) or the system is just shit. QED methinks. :-)
Nice to know I could kill a cyclist and get a smaller punishment than going down an empty dual carriageway at 106mph. :sarcastic:
Nice to know I could kill a cyclist and get a smaller punishment than going down an empty dual carriageway at 106mph. :sarcastic:
havoc said:
fluffnik said:
FishFace said:
Well you'll be happy to learn death without due care and attention kicks in in 3 days. Oh wait, it's motoring legislation - where oh where shall one stand?
Punish culpability and intent, not outcomes.The van driver could well have been going through a crossing on green and the silly cyclist jumped a red light straight into his path.
This thread is useless without more information...
fluffnik said:
Punish culpability and intent, not outcomes.
Apologies O/T but I had always wondered about the intent/outcome question in relation to that chap who fell asleep at the wheel and drove onto the train tracks derailing a train and killing several passengers.I asked my barrister buddy why the sleeping driver had done anything worse than dangerous driving; it was sheer bad luck he ended up on train tracks rather than an empty field.
The legal reply was that sometimes justice needs to be seen to be done; there would be an outcry if events leading to death/serious injury were treated with the same sentence as events that did not, even if luck is the only difference.
Hence, we have causing death by dangerous driving offenses as well as standalone dangerous driving.
OK, here's what's available online regarding this tragedy:
A lorry driver who ran over and killed a cyclist who was a writer and jewellery designer was today fined £300 after admitting careless driving.
Emma Foa, 56 died as she cycled from her home in Hampstead Heath to work in Clerkenwell in December. She was killed instantly after being crushed between the cement mixer’s rear wheels and roadside railings.
At Westminster Magistrates Court today Michael Thorn, 52 of Headley Down, Surrey was allowed to keep his driver’s licence and was ordered to pay £100 costs.
The court had been told that Thorn had been looking for some papers in his cabin when the bike was beside him and also when his vehicle began to turn left and the fatal crash occured.
The family of Ms Foa – the daughter of typewriter magnate Adriano Ollivetti said she was wearing a luminious reflector jacket and a helmet when she was crushed by the two tonne lorry.
District Judge Anthony Evans said: “I accept in cases of this sort it’s distressing for all concerned, the family of the disceased and the driver whose inadvertance has resulted in a fatality.”
Prosecutor Graham Parkinson told the court the incident happened at 9.10am in Camley Street, Kings Cross.
“Emma was riding her bike and reached the traffic lights. She went along the nearside and waited for the lights to change,” he said. “She was alongside for 37 seconds and would have been visible. He moved off and turned left causing her to be pushed to the ground and killed instantly. He had been looking for some paperwork in his truck… He felt a bump, saw a bike and jumped out to find her.”
Karen Dempsey, defending, said that Thorn was “shocked and distressed” and that the incident “would live with him for the rest of his life”. She added that witnesses had said he was not driving aggressively.
Now debate.
Streaky
A lorry driver who ran over and killed a cyclist who was a writer and jewellery designer was today fined £300 after admitting careless driving.
Emma Foa, 56 died as she cycled from her home in Hampstead Heath to work in Clerkenwell in December. She was killed instantly after being crushed between the cement mixer’s rear wheels and roadside railings.
At Westminster Magistrates Court today Michael Thorn, 52 of Headley Down, Surrey was allowed to keep his driver’s licence and was ordered to pay £100 costs.
The court had been told that Thorn had been looking for some papers in his cabin when the bike was beside him and also when his vehicle began to turn left and the fatal crash occured.
The family of Ms Foa – the daughter of typewriter magnate Adriano Ollivetti said she was wearing a luminious reflector jacket and a helmet when she was crushed by the two tonne lorry.
District Judge Anthony Evans said: “I accept in cases of this sort it’s distressing for all concerned, the family of the disceased and the driver whose inadvertance has resulted in a fatality.”
Prosecutor Graham Parkinson told the court the incident happened at 9.10am in Camley Street, Kings Cross.
“Emma was riding her bike and reached the traffic lights. She went along the nearside and waited for the lights to change,” he said. “She was alongside for 37 seconds and would have been visible. He moved off and turned left causing her to be pushed to the ground and killed instantly. He had been looking for some paperwork in his truck… He felt a bump, saw a bike and jumped out to find her.”
Karen Dempsey, defending, said that Thorn was “shocked and distressed” and that the incident “would live with him for the rest of his life”. She added that witnesses had said he was not driving aggressively.
Now debate.
Streaky
ASSUMING the truck was indicating...
And ASSUMING that, as a cement mixer, it's a bloody high cab with a couple of blindspots just by the passenger door.
...then she put herself in a dangerous position, and must bear some of the culpability for the accident. A cyclist filtering on the left at a x-roads but intending to go straight on IS being a bit thick!!!
If he wasn't indicating, then her responsibility is less, but not entirely diminished...she still put herself in a silly place.
Equally, how many people here look in their left mirror before turning left from the left lane at traffic lights. I know I don't usually...am I deserving of going to prison for this heinous oversight?!?
And ASSUMING that, as a cement mixer, it's a bloody high cab with a couple of blindspots just by the passenger door.
...then she put herself in a dangerous position, and must bear some of the culpability for the accident. A cyclist filtering on the left at a x-roads but intending to go straight on IS being a bit thick!!!
If he wasn't indicating, then her responsibility is less, but not entirely diminished...she still put herself in a silly place.
Equally, how many people here look in their left mirror before turning left from the left lane at traffic lights. I know I don't usually...am I deserving of going to prison for this heinous oversight?!?
walm said:
fluffnik said:
Punish culpability and intent, not outcomes.
I asked my barrister buddy why the sleeping driver had done anything worse than dangerous driving; it was sheer bad luck he ended up on train tracks rather than an empty field.The legal reply was that sometimes justice needs to be seen to be done; there would be an outcry if events leading to death/serious injury were treated with the same sentence as events that did not, even if luck is the only difference.
FishFace said:
What about going through red lights? May not be any intention there. Same with Manslaughter. Or does that fall into "culpability?" aka make-it-up-as-I-go-along with no regard to the structure of the law nor practical consequences.
Reckless endangerment is fairly culpable.Here in Scotland we don't have Manslaughter, we have Culpable Homicide.
Justice is not a utility, it is a philosophical construct...
There are no practical consequence to not busting people for ignoring arbitrary limits if that's all they've done.
fluffnik said:
walm said:
fluffnik said:
Punish culpability and intent, not outcomes.
I asked my barrister buddy why the sleeping driver had done anything worse than dangerous driving; it was sheer bad luck he ended up on train tracks rather than an empty field.The legal reply was that sometimes justice needs to be seen to be done; there would be an outcry if events leading to death/serious injury were treated with the same sentence as events that did not, even if luck is the only difference.
History has proved that even the very best of us make awful mistakes at times. A simple brain malfunction for a second or two is not uncommon. When combined with certain other circumstances things can become fatal.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff