13yr old killed in F50

[Gameface]

Hyphen, what's your take on him blaming the car having a mystery fault that fired it down the road and that there was nothing he could do about it?

[hyphen]

Gameface said:

Hyphen, what's your take on him blaming the car having a mystery fault that fired it down the road and that there was nothing he could do about it?

See Jane's post at 22:00 yesterday.

[TooMany2cvs]

Dr Interceptor said:

A lot of pictures shown in court yesterday are in the press today...

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/horror-pictu...

The real tell is this one...


So he took out one bit of railway sleeper, cleared the next "bench" in mid air, then took out the next couple plus the fence, before clearing the next one, then landing.

Even assuming that first post launched him, that's quite some achievement. And quite some momentum...

[Dr Interceptor]

hyphen said:

chow pan toon said:

hen you let kids into your car with no seatbelt...

Lot of mention on here and in the press of sea belts, but does the F50 have a seatbelt or a full harness? As suspect the latter and was more a mentality of "only a quick drive around a field, so let's not go to trouble of adjusting it all" as opposed to never wearing seatbelts.

Depends how much the bloke now regrets this I suppose.

Lots of pictures on the web of F50's with regular belts, like the one below. I guess we will never know about this particular car though.

[Gameface]

hyphen said:

Gameface said:

Hyphen, what's your take on him blaming the car having a mystery fault that fired it down the road and that there was nothing he could do about it?

See Jane's post at 22:00 yesterday.

janesmith1950 said:

You do, however many people have their own dependents. Faced with leaving them in the lurch, do you take it on the chin, or minimise how affected your loved ones are?

So you're saying it's ok for him to lie and concoct a story to get off the hook in order to spare his family, while taking no responsibility for his actions which destroyed another family?

[hyphen]

Gameface said:

So you're saying it's ok for him to lie and concoct a story to get off the hook in order to spare his family, while taking no responsibility for his actions which destroyed another family?

I am not saying it is 'OK' at all.

Many people when their lawyers says something along lines of "plea guilty and you will likely go to Jail or we can say x,y and z happened" will naturally veer to the latter.

If the bloke has his own kid, what good does him being in jail/criminal record affecting future income do? Won't bring the victim back, and his son will be without a dad on top. You could even ask if the victim's parents would actually want the accused's child to suffer without a dad for years.

Anyway I am bowing out of this discussion, as we don't know all the facts of the case so all speculation. Will be interesting to see what the outcome of the trial will be.

[hyphen]

^^ then a very strange decision to not wear seatbelts on the day. Will be interesting to read the trial write up for his explanation, as Im sure he will have been asked this question in the police interviews along with in court.

[Gameface]

TooMany2cvs said:

Dr Interceptor said:

A lot of pictures shown in court yesterday are in the press today...

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/horror-pictu...

The real tell is this one...


So he took out one bit of railway sleeper, cleared the next "bench" in mid air, then took out the next couple plus the fence, before clearing the next one, then landing.

Even assuming that first post launched him, that's quite some achievement. And quite some momentum...

Can't be easy to flip an F50.

[silentbrown]

Gameface said:

Can't be easy to flip an F50.

Looks more like it helicoptered than inverted.

[Gameface]

silentbrown said:

Gameface said:

Can't be easy to flip an F50.

Looks more like it helicoptered than inverted.

Says "flipped over" in the article.

[Sk00p]

TooMany2cvs said:

The real tell is this one...


So he took out one bit of railway sleeper, cleared the next "bench" in mid air, then took out the next couple plus the fence, before clearing the next one, then landing.

Even assuming that first post launched him, that's quite some achievement. And quite some momentum...

Here's the road, the narrow one above the A287, that first sleeper hit was as the grass starts after the layby type area

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/place/Hook/@51.26571...

Really not far from the 90 degree bend he was coming off, must have really hoofed it. The road is an uneven concrete access road, I used to cycle along it regularly when I worked nearby. As I recall at the time locals did say the cars in the store were regularly run up and down the service road.

[Dr Interceptor]

Gameface said:

silentbrown said:

Gameface said:

Can't be easy to flip an F50.

Looks more like it helicoptered than inverted.

Says "flipped over" in the article.

Windscreen has gone, certainly looks like its landed upside down at least once.

[TooMany2cvs]

Dr Interceptor said:

Windscreen has gone, certainly looks like its landed upside down at least once.

...and with an open lid and no belts worn, that's what's going to do the damage. The driver has the wheel to hang on to.

[Galsia]

What happened to the car? The damage doesn't look as bad as I imagined.

[Vaud]

Galsia said:

What happened to the car? The damage doesn't look as bad as I imagined.

They are pretty strong and it needn't have been that high a speed?

[Byker28i]

Gameface said:

TooMany2cvs said:

Dr Interceptor said:

A lot of pictures shown in court yesterday are in the press today...

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/horror-pictu...

The real tell is this one...


So he took out one bit of railway sleeper, cleared the next "bench" in mid air, then took out the next couple plus the fence, before clearing the next one, then landing.

Even assuming that first post launched him, that's quite some achievement. And quite some momentum...

Can't be easy to flip an F50.

I would have thought the more logical explanation is he gave it beans to show off, back end stepped out and he let go of the throttle, causing throttle off oversteer. That would throw the car sideways into the sleeper, which could then have spun on the road missing the second sleeper (hence the dirt/marks) and then would be in the position to go backwards into the fence where it finished. The rotating force probably threw the child from the car. I can't see it flipped.

[TooMany2cvs]

Byker28i said:

I would have thought the more logical explanation is he gave it beans to show off, back end stepped out and he let go of the throttle, causing throttle off oversteer. That would throw the car sideways into the sleeper, which could then have spun on the road missing the second sleeper (hence the dirt/marks) and then would be in the position to go backwards into the fence where it finished. The rotating force probably threw the child from the car. I can't see it flipped.

I considered that - but how did it get onto the grass - then through the fence - then miss the next post - then back through the fence towards the road? There's no continuous lines of tyre mark on the grass, just "punctuation". Look at the direction that first post's lying, together with the directions of the later ones that've been snapped off.

Oh, and the broken windscreen.

[wc98]

janesmith1950 said:

You do, however many people have their own dependents. Faced with leaving them in the lurch, do you take it on the chin, or minimise how affected your loved ones are?

in this instance take it on the chin. i have a friend that was in a similar situation with his girlfriend . i believe the guilty plea at the outset saved the family members further heartache. even if there are circumstances outside this individuals control that contributed to the accident like the aforementioned cylinder drop out/kick back in ,the fact remains he was responsible for the child in the car. the judge will decide the level of punishment based on all the circumstances,including lack of seat belts.

[Dr Interceptor]

TooMany2cvs said:

Byker28i said:

I would have thought the more logical explanation is he gave it beans to show off, back end stepped out and he let go of the throttle, causing throttle off oversteer. That would throw the car sideways into the sleeper, which could then have spun on the road missing the second sleeper (hence the dirt/marks) and then would be in the position to go backwards into the fence where it finished. The rotating force probably threw the child from the car. I can't see it flipped.

I considered that - but how did it get onto the grass - then through the fence - then miss the next post - then back through the fence towards the road? There's no continuous lines of tyre mark on the grass, just "punctuation". Look at the direction that first post's lying, together with the directions of the later ones that've been snapped off.

Oh, and the broken windscreen.

Looks to me like it's hit the post where the number 4 is, which has launched it airborne. Then the underside of the car possibly clipped something as it took off, which would cause the rotation in air. It's then landed where the fence is broken upside down, breaking the screen and destroying the rear clamshell. The car has then bounced over the next section of fence, landing again on its wheels.

Horrible to speculate, but that's how it looks.

[number 46]

The F50 is a long and wide car, the ones I have seen have normal three point seat belts in, not harnesses. That road looks pretty narrow so not the place to given loads. It was probably fish tailing as he gave it far too much throttle in a low gear,out of the bend, hit the first post lifting one side then span backwards into the fencing. The qoute from the councel saying that the car flipped, is I think slightly misleading in that it dosen't look like the car inverted, rather it flipped around? If it had inverted it would have been upside down and both passenger and driven would have not survived. I think he is going to struggle succeeding with his 'the car had a fault' defence.

Edited by number 46 on Tuesday 20th February 11:14