In the news - Jaguar Land Rover Manager - Road Rage Crash

[DonkeyApple]

daemon said:

No i meant relative to the fact that there is a view that the woman driver was "innocent" of any wrongdoing - if it had been some young bloke in a Fiesta ST who had flipped the bird would everyone feel the same?

I think the key is that regardless of the stereotype doing the bird flipping it is an error to react/respond.

I do wonder how the DailyMail reader is coping with this story though. We have three terrible types of human being all involved in one incident. We have the despised woman driver who dares to flip the bird at a man, the arrogant, condescending, all powerful SUV driver looking down on everyone and finally a car full of immigrants. I can only surmise they have to fall back on who has the largest mansion as the decider for hate ranking.

The long and short of it is that I think you are probably right that some people's view might alter depending on what stereotype was involved where (for example just imagine NP&E if the LR driver was Muslim and the girls were pure English) but I think everyone in this thread has taken the view that the LR driver is basically 100% at fault and that it is good that he received almost the maximum sentence possible for his actions.

[Dr Jekyll]

F1GTRUeno said:

Dr Jekyll said:

F1GTRUeno said:

And you've never once felt better about yourself and driven a bit more recklessly because you're driving in a nicer car and it inflated your ego?

No.

So you've never once broken the speed limit, gotten angry at another driver nor bought a new car because it was nicer than the one you currently had?

I've never driven recklessly or broken the speed limit or gotten(!) angry because I was driving a nicer car. Of course of bought cars because they were nicer than by current car, or in one case because it was nicer than not having a car. That's not the same as driving recklessly.

[Mastiff]

tenfour said:

It is a sad story and quite a chilling one.

It hammers home just how easy it is to cross the line. I am quite certain that each and every one of us has at some point in our lives fallen victim to the red mist. It happens, especially when we're young and have a point to prove. I know I've been there many a time, albeit thankfully where the net result is just an exchange of coffee beans and both parties go their separate ways. I always feel like an utter pleb for taking the bait thereafter, regardless of who was at fault.

Ironically it takes courage to brush off these incidents and let the offending party have his accident somewhere else. Clearly on this occasion our JLR guy let his ego get the better of him, with tragic consequences.

And on that note I think this thread has gotten the better of itself by two opposing and extreme points of view. I'm willing to bet the JLR guy woke up the morning of the accident the same way as the rest of us. I'm willing to bet he had friends and family who loved and respected him. To all intents and purposes, he was probably just a normal guy, with quite a cool job by the sounds of it. And that's what makes this case all the more frightening: he's not a deranged child rapist; he's not an armed robber and he's not a big time drug dealer. Just a normal guy doing normal things until about five minutes before his loss of judgement changed his and the lives of several other people for ever.

To that end I don't think it's easy to sympathize with him, but I think a lot of us will certainly be able to empathize. And so it's not a case that he should be burned to the stake, but rather his actions should serve as a warning to us all. That is what we all need to take away from this story. He will serve his time and thereafter he will need to somehow come to terms with the fact that there is a family out there who have been permanently affected by his actions: two girls will grow up disabled with all that entails. Likewise, his life will never be the same again: his friends and family will have deserted him and he'll never hold down a respectable job again. His sentence is a life sentence; all the more so because he was, prior to the accident, clearly a normal guy capable of rational thought and remorse (even if it's not obvious from the reporting).

As a side note, the Mazda driver cannot reasonably be implicated in this: she will most likely never forget the events of that day and hence that is it for her. I have no doubt that she'll never react to anyone's road rage again. Therefore, to suggest that she is somehow accountable is just nonsense. I dare say she misjudged an opening prior to the 'chase' and was therefore put in a position where she clearly felt threatened enough to try and remove herself from danger.

Subsequently, our thoughts should be with the girls and her family, and the JLR driver, if only so that we remember just how easily our lives can turn upside down in a flash.

Frankly, I am utterly terrified by what happened here and I know that when I next jump in the car, I'll think twice before getting upset at someone else's driving standards.

And yes, like them or loathe them, there is merit in driving a big car.

Good post - thank you.

[BrownBottle]

A few people have mentioned the LR drivers family facing hardship etc.

I don't think he'll have a wife and kids the passenger in the LR was reported as his partner, he was the one who was smiling and having a laugh as they pursued the woman in the Mazda.

[Johnnytheboy]

daemon said:

bhstewie said:

daemon said:

Out of curiosity, would there be the same vindication if the front car had behaved in exactly the same way, but was being driven by a young male driver and perhaps in a hot hatch instead of by a woman driver?

I'm not sure it makes a difference tbh.

In 20 years I see all kinds of tttish driving and I can honestly say I've never once felt any kind of urge to follow them or consider stopping.

I have been "guilty" of giving the odd smug "worked out well for you didn't it?" look when you pull up alongside someone who'd been driving like a total bell-end only to end up right next to you at the next set of lights, but if that's all it takes to light someone's blue touch-paper then frankly it's them with the issue.

No i meant relative to the fact that there is a view that the woman driver was "innocent" of any wrongdoing - if it had been some young bloke in a Fiesta ST who had flipped the bird would everyone feel the same?

I wish the press coverage would make it a bit clearer what the Mazda driver did to set him off to this degree.

Prevent him from exiting a roundabout is the most illuminating prase I have seen.

[DonkeyApple]

Johnnytheboy said:

I wish the press coverage would make it a bit clearer what the Mazda driver did to set him off to this degree.

Prevent him from exiting a roundabout is the most illuminating prase I have seen.

It doesn't matter though and is wholly irrelevant. Nothing at all can ever excuse what he did.

[Johnnytheboy]

DonkeyApple said:

Johnnytheboy said:

I wish the press coverage would make it a bit clearer what the Mazda driver did to set him off to this degree.

Prevent him from exiting a roundabout is the most illuminating prase I have seen.

It doesn't matter though and is wholly irrelevant. Nothing at all can ever excuse what he did.

It's interesting, and I don't care if you think it matters or is relevant. It's not like it needs to be kept secret.

And your second sentence sounds like a job for Captain Obvious.

[DonkeyApple]

Johnnytheboy said:

DonkeyApple said:

Johnnytheboy said:

I wish the press coverage would make it a bit clearer what the Mazda driver did to set him off to this degree.

Prevent him from exiting a roundabout is the most illuminating prase I have seen.

It doesn't matter though and is wholly irrelevant. Nothing at all can ever excuse what he did.

It's interesting, and I don't care if you think it matters or is relevant. It's not like it needs to be kept secret.

And your second sentence sounds like a job for Captain Obvious.

I am so terribly sorry.

[Willy Nilly]

Artey said:

Willy Nilly said:

On the other hand we have a man who obviously had a decent career, if the value of his company car is anything to go by, who is now in jail and his life pretty much in tatters. If he his just left there to rot it is quite likely he will end up a burden on the state for the rest of his life. You must keep in mind that no matter what punishment is metered out, the crash would still have happened and the two girls will still not be able to ever walk. So where do we go from here? He should certainly be punished, but he needs to come out a reformed man, not a hardened criminal. Maybe he could have some sort of anger management and leave jail to help other people avoid getting into the situation he got into?

Let me throw this out, how about this hypothetical situation - it wasn't the first time he did something like that. And he did it because he knew that chances of being sentenced properly are slim due to the pisspoor (sorrrrrry, civilised) system that we have. Had it not been for the dashcam he might have been able to get even lower sentence since we know he was denying any wrongdoing until the end. And this is why I don't believe in sobering stories about giving the guy a chance. You don't give a chance to a blatant chancer.

And that is why the system should be acting as a deterrent with punishments which would make chancers think twice before acting like tts.

I doubt very much it is the first time he has driven aggressively and of course he is going to deny any wrong doing. I'm not suggesting giving him a chance, I am suggesting that when he goes to jail he comes out and doesn't re-offend. Harsh sentences don't seem to stop people re-offending unless they are never released. The best outcome is that he serves his sentence, doesn't do it again and makes a contribution to society. If you want him to rot in hell, he might as well been given a life sentence.

[carl_w]

MrBarry123 said:

It does pose an interesting question though...

If the children were not properly secured as the law requires them to be, are the parents culpable (at least in part) for the injuries their children sustained?

Of course anything said about the children not being properly secured is pure speculation. It's a long time since I've had to deal with this sort of thing, but aren't kids of that age now supposed to be in child seats rather than booster cushions?

[AW111]

F1GTRUeno said:

Except he didn't choose to get angry. His brain sent the signals to get annoyed with being held up and that combined with the type of person he is and the lack of coping mechanisms he's clearly learnt meant he did what he did.

Considering every single person is completely different saying he SHOULD have done anything is redundant just like asking what his plan was at the end of all of this.

Society tells us that road rage is unacceptable, that driving like a complete tt and in the process injuring poor children and endangering lives is wrong, which it is. I'm not defending the guy at all.

The fact of the matter is that everybody, regardless of how calm they are and how well they've been brought up, trained, whatever is capable of having a moment where the red mist descends and you don't think at all, you act on instinct and clearly his instinct at the time was to act dangerously and endanger people's lives because he was pissed off. It just happens and it's part of who we are, human nature.

We're not machines, we can't just shut off when impulses are dictating to us that we should be angry. We get angry. Obviously this guy through a combination of everything he's experienced in life is an absolute thunder and he should be punished for acting like one accordingly but to sit at your computer and say 'oh well he should've done this' or 'I wouldn't have done this because I never get angry' is absolutely pointless.

You may not choose to get angry, but you can choose how you act when angry.
This was not a momentary brain snap / throw a punch / lean on the horn scenario - LR man chased another vehicle for several miles. There is nothing instinctive about that - it was deliberate, ongoing, aggressive and dangerous behaviour.

[Pagey]

BrownBottle said:

A few people have mentioned the LR drivers family facing hardship etc.

I don't think he'll have a wife and kids the passenger in the LR was reported as his partner, he was the one who was smiling and having a laugh as they pursued the woman in the Mazda.

I thought I was the only one who picked up on that and did a Quick 192 search for Andrew Nay

[lord trumpton]

Heres a slightly longer version of the video

http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/news/coventry-new...

I know it's been stated but the LR cock undertook the the Mercedes, cut right across the front of the merc (no doubt scaring the st out of the driver) and then sadly right in front and into the Vauxhall.

It's not like he chanced a turning and misjudged the speed of the oncoming Vauxhall, it was (imho) clearly an enraged driver for even thinking of a move like that, there's just no way it was ever going to work. Even if there was no Vauxhall he wouldn't have made the turn

Absolutely shocking

[Ozzie Osmond]

lord trumpton said:

Heres a slightly longer version of the video

Why?

[k-ink]

So they can sell advert space at the beginning by the looks of it. Tasteful.

[lord trumpton]

Ozzie Osmond said:

lord trumpton said:

Heres a slightly longer version of the video

Why?

Well it gives a further insight into the 'move' by the LR driver; the approaching VX looks like it was on a long, blind bend.

I figured it adds a little more insight into the whole incident as it also shows the lorry that the LR cock probably couldn't see past.

It adds two more damning factors to his judgement.

Edited by lord trumpton on Sunday 29th May 07:11

[zarjaz1991]

daemon said:

I agree fully
with that. However nearly all jobs these desk either ask if you have a criminal record and a lot do a background check.

Whilst there is no risk to having this bloke do a desk job or whatever down the line, i dont think too many companies would be bothered with the risk of unsettling current staff or having it in the local rag that they have taken him on.

The current system is very good at poking offenders with sticks for a very long time, thus increasing the risk of re-offending.

Well if they re-offend, they can go back to prison.

Prison works, because while in prison, prisoners cannot commit any more offences. At least, not shy offences that affect people not in prison.

I'm not interested in rehabilitation. I have no objection to it in principle, but the onus is on the criminal to want to rehabilitate. If they don't, then they can just keep going back to prison. I don't care about the cost, if it helps prevent incidents like this.

Driving a vehicle is not like walking up the street. It is a huge privilege and responsibility, suitable only for those who comprehend those responsibilities. Which, to be fair, is most of us. But this chap has proved unsuitable. Some have joked about him being restricted to a Ford Ka, that still terrifies me. The idea of this bloke in control of a car, given not only his parlour mental state already demonstrated by this incident, but then also the added bitterness he will undoubtedly harbour from a prison sentence and loss of job, is terrifying.

He had his chance and messed up big time. As others have said, there are some things that there is just no coming back from. If that means he's in and out of prison, then good. As for his family....they should find a new 'Dad' who is not a dangerous unstable crippler off children. If he has children himself, they should be taken a way from him with the explanation that their Dad cripples children due to his mental instability, so it is unsafe for them to remain with him.

I am sick of pandering to dangerous nutters such as him.

Edited by zarjaz1991 on Sunday 29th May 07:20

[zarjaz1991]

F1GTRUeno said:

And you've never once felt better about yourself and driven a bit more recklessly because you're driving in a nicer car and it inflated your ego?

No. Anyone who does that is just as bad the idiot in this case and needs to be taken off the road urgently. They shouldn't be trusted to drive any vehicle.

F1GTRUeno said:

Why ever buy a different car than whatever you started learning/driving in if that's the case.

Because I like cars and I thoroughly enjoy driving them.

I take my driving very seriously, have done since I was 17 and would never drive "recklessly", nice car or not.
Anyone who would has got a dangerous mental problem and shouldn't be on the road.

[stinkspanner]

I wonder how the land rover passenger acted in court.. did he try to defend his colleague, or just admit he was being a tt

[zarjaz1991]

ClaphamGT3 said:

Or move to UAE/SE Asia/South America where no one will give a toss....

Actually, I have a bit of a problem with the whole "he shouldn't get another job" sentiment. In no way diminishing the terrible thing that he has done, we should aim to rehabilitate offenders. Agree with the sentence or not, when he has served that sentence, he has paid his debt to society and should be able to work again and contribute usefully to society

As sensible as that sounds, I can't make myself agree.
Some things are too far gone to come back from. This is one of them. He has proved himself too dangerous to drive a car again, and he is also probably behind rehabilitation. He has a serious mental problem and could "snap" at any time. The knowledge of having destroyed several lives permanently will only exacerbate that.

I hate saying this, but I can't get myself away from the conclusion that if he really does have any shred of decency in him, he should do the proper thing and end his own life. And I do apologise for having to state that opinion, it's not a gut reaction, it's the only calm and reasoned conclusion I can get to. I accept that probably makes me unsuitable to ever be involved in law making, luckily I recognise that and have no intention of ever doing so. A shame this bloke didn't have the same recognition of his unsuitablility to drive a car.