Could this affect motorists as well ?

[Jon Ison]

This

Sorry if its a re post.

[saaby93]

Jon Ison said:

http://www.motorcyclenews.com/MCN/News/newsresults...

Sorry if its a re post.

MCN said:

To read how the prosecuting cop posted pictures on a swingers’ website showing him astride a police bike, get MCN, on sale now.

MCN reported the court said:

“If you are riding at the front any group at excess speed, then the very fact you’re at the front is an aggravating factor.”

Ken Clark, 49, reached 85mph on his Yamaha R1 while leading a group of three riders on the 60mph A272 near Rogate, Sussex, last June.

The speed is within the usual threshold for a fixed penalty of three points and a £60 fine.

But Chichester Crown Court ruled he should receive the same penalty as a following rider accused of going 103mph.

Edited by saaby93 on Friday 20th November 22:50

[Boosted LS1]

Terrible state of affairs, just goes to show how the state keeps moving the goalposts further apart.

[marlinmunro]

The guy is obviously a menace to society, only had a clean licence for 24 years

[saaby93]

As Ive said before, speed limits should be there for a reason and we all sign up to them through who we vote for to make the laws.
The guy broke the law - fair cop?

What's at stake here is whether he should take the rap for what someone has done behind him? Did he ask the guy behind to do that?

It says aggravated - is that similar to aggravated burglary etc?

[Uncle Fester]

This desperately needs appealing to a higher Court until a sensible ruling is obtained.

Here are some obvious pitfalls of this ruling, as reported in the MCN story (which may or may not be the entire story).

Suppose the lead rider stuck just within the limit. Would he be liable for offences committed by others, or as this is an aggravating factor, and if there was no offence by the lead rider to aggravate, he is guilty of nothing?

If we apply the logic of the Court, for the lead rider to ride at or near the limit would still mean ‘Although his was the lesser speed, [the bench] found it an aggravating feature that he was the lead motorcyclist, was setting the pace and he knew that the other two motorcyclists would want to catch him up and would be speeding to do so.’

Since the following riders may have to catch up and are likely to speed, is he still responsible?

Extending this logic, how much less than the limit would the lead rider have had to travel in order to be certain of avoiding prosecution?

Clark’s solicitor, Philip Somarakis, said 103mph was the speed reached by a police officer on an unmarked bike while tailing Clark's two friends, but the prosecution accepted it was not possible to prove from video evidence that Clark himself had exceeded 85mph.

There is no evidence of how fast the following bikes were traveling in the MCN article, except the Police officers speed of 103mph. It seems to infer that the following Police officers become part of the group and the lead rider is responsible for the speed of the Police officers too! Since 103mph is usually automatic disqualification, is a lead rider now travelling just over the limit potentially liable to be banned because of the speed the Police chose to pursue at?

The speed driven by Police is always a matter for the Police officer involved, given the circumstances. This includes the fact that no offence of speeding is committed and regard for safety. The Police officer is responsible for breaking off pursuit if it’s unsafe to proceed. Why does the same logic not apply to the public?

How can the lead driver know at what speed the followers will choose to ride? How therefore can a Court determine a penalty? If the lead drives at 1mph over the limit, but the follower chooses to go fast enough to merit a custodial sentence are we suggesting custody for both?

Every driver is liable for the safety of their actions. If the lead driver is traveling at excess speed, the following drivers are able to decide not to exceed speed limits in order to catch up. They can choose to continue at legal speeds until either traffic conditions bring the vehicles together, or contact is lost. Since on most group rides everyone knows the final destination and waypoints there is no reason why the following riders cannot either continue at lawful speed. As the route planning of such rides normally takes a circular route of good driving roads, it’s often possible to cut a piece out of the route and be waiting at a waypoint further on.

The lead driver will often stop altogether in order to allow the following drivers to regroup. Leaders and followers know this, so any speeding by those following is entirely at the discretion of those following. Groups are often in radio contact and almost everyone has a mobile phone. As soon as the group realizes it has fragmented there is no reason why contact cannot be reestablished using these, rather than the lead driver expecting speeding.

Then there is the definition of what constitutes a group. If there is an event on at a particular destination, is everyone going a group? If two or more people agree to travel in convoy, but agree that if they become separated they will continue individually and rendezvous at some future point, are they still a group at the material time?

The lead driver may assert that he thought the group had split up and he was now acting as an individual because the followers had become separated.

How are people to prove they were or were not a group? What is the definition? I dare say many of the school run mums know each other and are going to the same place at the same time. Half the women in my village leave our village at the same time and arrive at the school in the next village together. Many will meet afterwards for coffee. Are they a group?

The liability could potentially be extended further. Suppose an accident occurred and the speed of the followers found to be a contributing factor. Is the lead driver now responsible for part of damages? Does any insurance cover that?

This is bad law

[marlinmunro]

saaby93 said:

As Ive said before, speed limits should be there for a reason and we all sign up to them through who we vote for to make the laws.
The guy broke the law - fair cop?

What's at stake here is whether he should take the rap for what someone has done behind him? Did he ask the guy behind to do that?

It says aggravated - is that similar to aggravated burglary etc?

Uncle Fester has put you in your place

[saaby93]

Uncle Fester said:

Then there is the definition of what constitutes a group. If there is an event on at a particular destination, is everyone going a group? If two or more people agree to travel in convoy, but agree that if they become separated they will continue individually and rendezvous at some future point, are they still a group at the material time?

I thought there were so many issues with road events groups etc that no-one organises them any more? Instead someone posts up a trip theyre going to do on a particular day. If anyone else fancies doing the same trip on the same day at the same time, it's up to them.

[Uncle Fester]

marlinmunro said:

saaby93 said:

As Ive said before, speed limits should be there for a reason and we all sign up to them through who we vote for to make the laws.
The guy broke the law - fair cop?

What's at stake here is whether he should take the rap for what someone has done behind him? Did he ask the guy behind to do that?

It says aggravated - is that similar to aggravated burglary etc?

Uncle Fester has put you in your place

Just for the record, I wasn't putting anyone in their place.

Typing longish posts takes time, especially when I have one window open with a post and others with the work I'm supposed to be doing.

I wasn't aware of Saaby's post when I submitted mine.

That said, the idea that any political system confers the agreement of all the electorate upon every issue is laughable.

As the case went to appeal it appears that the law was untested. Now a Court with authority to set precedent has ruled the law is clarified.

Much law is set by precedent and therefore by an unelected Judicial authority.

[the_lone_wolf]

People unfamiliar with MCN should be aware that to the majority of bikers it stands for "More Crap then News"


The verdict however, is a new height of stupidity, hopefully it'll be overturned by a court that isn't headed by an utter retard...

[herewego]

Perhaps the argument made was that leading a group of riders at 25 over the limit is more serious than just doing 25 over on his own, hence the higher penalty.

[esselte]

herewego said:

Perhaps the argument made was that leading a group of riders at 25 over the limit is more serious than just doing 25 over on his own, hence the higher penalty.

So,following that logic,you're saying that the lead rider is responsible for the speed being done by those behind him?What if he had been under the limit,would he be responsible for others behind him speeding?

[saaby93]

herewego said:

Perhaps the argument made was that leading a group of riders at 25 over the limit is more serious than just doing 25 over on his own, hence the higher penalty.

I'd go with that - pity that's not what's written. Is there another version of the court events other than MCN?
In a run where everyone's turned up of their own accord, they can all choose what to do and take the consequences. If someone's leading a group they ought to do it responsibly.

[saaby93]

esselte said:

So,following that logic,you're saying that the lead rider is responsible for the speed being done by those behind him? What if he had been under the limit,would he be responsible for others behind him speeding?

I think that's what this judgement is saying i.e. that the leader should keep an eye open for those following and hold back rather than expecting them to play catch up?

[p1esk]

Boosted LS1 said:

Terrible state of affairs, just goes to show how the state keeps moving the goalposts further apart.

Yes, I think this judgement is quite wrong, and I'd like to see it overturned; but given that cars travelling in convoy is a much rarer situation, I can't see it affecting motorists very much.

Best wishes all,
Dave.

[herewego]

esselte said:

herewego said:

Perhaps the argument made was that leading a group of riders at 25 over the limit is more serious than just doing 25 over on his own, hence the higher penalty.

So,following that logic,you're saying that the lead rider is responsible for the speed being done by those behind him?What if he had been under the limit,would he be responsible for others behind him speeding?

To question one I'd say not specifically responsible for their max speed but responsible for encouraging them to achieve at least his speed as he knew they had to keep up with him, if that's not too vague.
To question two no.

[Engineer1]

esselte said:

herewego said:

Perhaps the argument made was that leading a group of riders at 25 over the limit is more serious than just doing 25 over on his own, hence the higher penalty.

So,following that logic,you're saying that the lead rider is responsible for the speed being done by those behind him?What if he had been under the limit,would he be responsible for others behind him speeding?

OR, you have agreed to do a convoy heading somewhere, the guy at the front does set the pace, and can put pressure on other people in the convoy to speed up to keep up. If you are at the front and doing 80+ then the convoy will have to also be doing 80+ to keep up and anyone who was held up will have to do considerably more.

[Darth Paul]

p1esk said:

Boosted LS1 said:

Terrible state of affairs, just goes to show how the state keeps moving the goalposts further apart.

Yes, I think this judgement is quite wrong, and I'd like to see it overturned; but given that cars travelling in convoy is a much rarer situation, I can't see it affecting motorists very much.

Best wishes all,
Dave.

Would have to agree. Also, when going against a beak, bikers are treated differently to car drivers. It's wrong, but the evidence seems to back it up, and I say this without being a biker.

[heebeegeetee]

saaby93 said:

and we all sign up to them through who we vote for to make the laws.

No we don't - we have two main political parties both as bad as each other both having played their part in bankrupting the nation twice and both being equally keen and gung-ho to enter needless, illegal and pointless wars and both being politically stone dead in the water with nothing to offer.

I don't see any political party or politician who is keen on not treating the motorist as anything other than a pariah even though they all drive or use personal transport themselves and who all have personal carbon footprints far larger than the average-man-in-the-street, even though motorists form the sort of majority they could only dream about.

Phew.

Anyway, back on topic. This is getting right on my tits, because we have already had the case where one driver overtook another, the overtaken then crashed for no apparent reason (i think he had actually speeded up when being overtaken) and was killed and the overtaker was blamed for his death.

The idea that a speeding driver or rider has the speed of another pinned on him is utter ludicrous - how on *earth* can that work in law? No wonder the law is so often brought into such disrepute with the Nick Freemans of the land able to earn a fortune by constantly showing that the upholders of our laws are incompetent - or maybe they're all in it together and divvy up the proceeds afterwards - after all, we do live in a society that's crooked from the top down.

I was a member of an MG club when i had my B and/or RV8 and often went out on runs with many other like-minded enthusiasts, all of middle age and older, ahem, none of whom could be treated as a threat to society. (unlike bikers eh, all of whom are clearly a menace, I mean, they wear leather and everything )

Sometimes we could have 20 cars on these runs, so no, the leader could not see the tail end and had no influence whatsoever on what the tail-enders did. Me and a couple of others would lurk around at the back to use the 'whiplash' effect (of having to play catch up) as an excuse to clog it and have of a taz.

One of our members was once done for 33 in a 30 in his MG Midget. He wasn't able to monitor his speed that accurately due to his Smiths speedo doing its usual 'wavy needle' thing, our man knew he wasn't doing less than 20 or more than 40 .

So now, if that man is leading a run and me and a mate are doing 85 (at least) in a 70 a mile back in our V8s, does the Midget man get credited with 85 in a 30?

Absolutely incredible!

[saaby93]

heebeegeetee said:

saaby93 said:

and we all sign up to them through who we vote for to make the laws.

No we don't - we have two main political parties both as bad as each other

as long as no-one gets onto them to say something needs doing about it...