Be careful out there...
Discussion
With people like this about, you'll need to be.
www.getreading.co.uk/story.asp?intid=5977
>>> Edited by daved on Tuesday 11th February 15:37
www.getreading.co.uk/story.asp?intid=5977
>>> Edited by daved on Tuesday 11th February 15:37
She was 19, and had been driving for 4 months. I'd bet she'd spent the last two years trying to pass her test.
The fact that she was in the fast lane, and didn't see a police car behind her, AND the police car was able to pull alongside her justifies a ban in itself.
Panicing is no excuse. "yes officer i was holding the gun, but i paniced and shot 14 people"
PATHETIC
The fact that she was in the fast lane, and didn't see a police car behind her, AND the police car was able to pull alongside her justifies a ban in itself.
Panicing is no excuse. "yes officer i was holding the gun, but i paniced and shot 14 people"
PATHETICI just cannot believe she has only been banned for that amount of time - christ she should be banned for life. But and its only a but the van was obviously to close and unable to stop - probably why she was only prosecuted for Undue care etc.
Having said that how many other people would have been able to stop - see it all the time with arseholes driving far to close to the vehicle in front.
The brakes and weight of a clio vs the brakes and weight of a transit - without the appropriate braking zone the transit did not have a chance.
Having said that how many other people would have been able to stop - see it all the time with arseholes driving far to close to the vehicle in front.
The brakes and weight of a clio vs the brakes and weight of a transit - without the appropriate braking zone the transit did not have a chance.
The police car was trying to pull a Clio over doing 95Mph, I assumes lights and siren were going (if not they should have been), it then pulled up alongside her, she then stopped. If the van was only doing 70, it would have been a long way behind anyway with more than enough room to stop, but failing that, if you saw a Police car trying to pull a car over, wouldn't you pull back a bit??
Bad driving by all concerned. But only way of them is around to face the consiquences...
Bad driving by all concerned. But only way of them is around to face the consiquences...
I think considering what she actually did and the degree of stupidity required to attain this feat, she got off remarkably lightly.
One has to hope that she is sufficiently tortured by the knowledge that by her fcukwittery, she took a life.
A 12 month ban? She should have been banned for life at the very least.
One has to hope that she is sufficiently tortured by the knowledge that by her fcukwittery, she took a life.
A 12 month ban? She should have been banned for life at the very least.
Lets forget the fairly obvious sight of a police car with blues and twos, significant as it is and enter the world of what if...
What if.. instead of a panic induced emergency stop the Clio had suffered a catastrophic mechanical failure, come to a halt in the third lane only to be hit by the Transit that had, clearly, failed to allow sufficient space to take effective evasive action.
I think in those circumstances we would all be sympathetic towards Ms Clio....funny old life isn't it.
What if.. instead of a panic induced emergency stop the Clio had suffered a catastrophic mechanical failure, come to a halt in the third lane only to be hit by the Transit that had, clearly, failed to allow sufficient space to take effective evasive action.
I think in those circumstances we would all be sympathetic towards Ms Clio....funny old life isn't it.
Its not the all the drivers fault!
I am 20 years old so have seen many many people learn to drive then pass a test over the last couple of years. I can think of at least 5 or so people who I know who are not capable of driving a car, even though they have passed their test. Most are guilty of having no idea what is going on around them or driving far to quick in the wrong areas (60 in a 30 limit, 60 in a 70 limit type driving).
The test is not strict enough, and re-testing new drivers would be a good start IMHO.
I am 20 years old so have seen many many people learn to drive then pass a test over the last couple of years. I can think of at least 5 or so people who I know who are not capable of driving a car, even though they have passed their test. Most are guilty of having no idea what is going on around them or driving far to quick in the wrong areas (60 in a 30 limit, 60 in a 70 limit type driving).
The test is not strict enough, and re-testing new drivers would be a good start IMHO.
A whole bunch of things from this.
'flung from the van'. Were they wearing seatbelts?
Now she has been banned for a year, what happens after that year? Will she get her licence back automatically? With no driver training? How safe will she be then.
Is 'what to do when you get stopped by police' part of the standard test?
The van was too close, but how much too close, did it have a load of paving stones in it. If so you'd need a lot of space, the kind of space that if you left it someone would nip in on the inside.
Simon
'flung from the van'. Were they wearing seatbelts?
Now she has been banned for a year, what happens after that year? Will she get her licence back automatically? With no driver training? How safe will she be then.
Is 'what to do when you get stopped by police' part of the standard test?
The van was too close, but how much too close, did it have a load of paving stones in it. If so you'd need a lot of space, the kind of space that if you left it someone would nip in on the inside.
Simon
She will have to take a new test, hopefully with further instruction.
As to the van, it probably was travelling too close as most people do on motorways. It is the drivers responsibility to leave enough space to stop in time.
I doubt the Clio stopped dead, at worst she may have managed an emergency stop in which case the van driver should have been able to stop if was driving correctly with 'due care and attention'. If the van driver was that close to a police pursuit with blues and twos then one must question how much attention he was paying.
It sounds as though none of the van occupants was wearing a seat belt - again their choice but would anyone have died with a belt on.
Being realistic, yes the girls driving skills were below par - but is the driving test good enough. Looking at the state of some of the driving on our roads I'd say not.
As to the van, it probably was travelling too close as most people do on motorways. It is the drivers responsibility to leave enough space to stop in time.
I doubt the Clio stopped dead, at worst she may have managed an emergency stop in which case the van driver should have been able to stop if was driving correctly with 'due care and attention'. If the van driver was that close to a police pursuit with blues and twos then one must question how much attention he was paying.
It sounds as though none of the van occupants was wearing a seat belt - again their choice but would anyone have died with a belt on.
Being realistic, yes the girls driving skills were below par - but is the driving test good enough. Looking at the state of some of the driving on our roads I'd say not.
If she has passed her test recently then this accident is proof positive of criminal neglegence on the part of the Government. The theory test contains lots and lots of questions which require lies, and green bullshit to gain credit for a correct answer, yet despite the many examples I have seen I am yet to see a question asking about the process of stopping on a motorway. It is by far the biggest killer on motorways and a great deal more public information is needed to stop this kind of thing happening. The police clearly broke the law by undertaking her and it seems likely that the reason she was given a light sentence was because she was made scapegoat. It is complete nonesense to expect people to learn to drive on busy motorways with no tuition. The conclusion that she is at fault ultimately may well be correct, but whos fault is that then?
A case for new drivers not to be allowed on motorways if ever there was one - case that is, not motorway !!
Driving at 95 after 4 months on the road, how much car control did she have? what if a puncture had occured?... people should have to take a seperate test for the motorway, IMHO of course...
Driving at 95 after 4 months on the road, how much car control did she have? what if a puncture had occured?... people should have to take a seperate test for the motorway, IMHO of course...
A lot of people who pass their test do so as a result of being very confident people - not necessarily through their skills as a driver. I can imagine that when faced with a situation like this, an unexperience driver could panic - and what do people do then? they slow down. People who we refer to as numpties are not driving enthusiasts, they have to drive as a necessity of modern society and as such there are many people who are not really competent to be behind the wheel. The driving test should remove the worst of these people before causing accidents such as this, but as motorway driving is (unbelievably in this day and age) not even taught or tested it doesn't suprise me at all that these things happen. Traveling on motorways requires different techniques from 'normal' driving, observation and anticipation in particular.
JSG said:
I doubt the Clio stopped dead, at worst she may have managed an emergency stop in which case the van driver should have been able to stop if was driving correctly with 'due care and attention'. If the van driver was that close to a police pursuit with blues and twos then one must question how much attention he was paying.
i doubt the clio would have acheived an 'emergancy stop' most small cars wouldn't have any brakes left by 30mph if you tried doing 95-0...
the article read that the clio was doing 95, the van 70 so although he may have not being paying attention, i see it as:
he panic swerves to avoid a stationary or unusually slow moving car he is approaching at speed, a few seconds after the car may have started braking... and looses control of the van.
to be honest this is expected, most people over compensate when driving which causes "ghost" traffic jams on motorways and accidents.
i think what we are all forgetting hear is this is a very sad incident (in both senses of the word sad, sad someone died and sad the girl didn't have enough driving ability) and also that the girl was lucky not to be charged with death by dangerous driving and that no one else was killed...
especially considering the van bounced of the central reservation, acros 3 or 4 lanes of traffic and rolled, then one of the van occupants was hit by another car!!! VERY lucky no one else was killed!!!
littlegearl said:
JSG said:
I doubt the Clio stopped dead, at worst she may have managed an emergency stop in which case the van driver should have been able to stop if was driving correctly with 'due care and attention'. If the van driver was that close to a police pursuit with blues and twos then one must question how much attention he was paying.
i doubt the clio would have acheived an 'emergancy stop' most small cars wouldn't have any brakes left by 30mph if you tried doing 95-0...
the article read that the clio was doing 95, the van 70 so although he may have not being paying attention, i see it as:
he panic swerves to avoid a stationary or unusually slow moving car he is approaching at speed, a few seconds after the car may have started braking... and looses control of the van.
to be honest this is expected, most people over compensate when driving which causes "ghost" traffic jams on motorways and accidents.
i think what we are all forgetting hear is this is a very sad incident (in both senses of the word sad, sad someone died and sad the girl didn't have enough driving ability) and also that the girl was lucky not to be charged with death by dangerous driving and that no one else was killed...
especially considering the van bounced of the central reservation, acros 3 or 4 lanes of traffic and rolled, then one of the van occupants was hit by another car!!! VERY lucky no one else was killed!!!
This would have been a complete travesty if she had been charged with causing death by dangerous driving. The police are in charge in this situation and their actions have influenced the outcome whichever way you cut it. You can only come to a sensible conclusion by taking all the facts into account. Clearly the poor driving was caused by the ineffective test and the accident was exaserbated by the exuberance of the police. End of story. It just so happens that the tale fits the "cars are bad" culture currently occupying the UK, we are all dinasaurs and yesterdays transport system is the future.....
Supposing some cupid stunt (drunk - drugs - take your pick) had staggered into the road in front of her. Or someone crashed in front of her, more likely. She'd have had to pile on the brakes as hard as possible. Same result to the transit, but you couldn't blame the Clio driver.
All that she's actually been guilty of is stopping inappropriately, and driving with due care etc seems a sensible charge for that. And a year's ban seems a harsh penalty for it.
The transit driver lost control of his vehicle in circumstances that he should have been equipped to deal with, I don't think his death can be principally the fault of the clio dirver.
All that she's actually been guilty of is stopping inappropriately, and driving with due care etc seems a sensible charge for that. And a year's ban seems a harsh penalty for it.
The transit driver lost control of his vehicle in circumstances that he should have been equipped to deal with, I don't think his death can be principally the fault of the clio dirver.
JohnL said: Supposing some cupid stunt (drunk - drugs - take your pick) had staggered into the road in front of her. Or someone crashed in front of her, more likely. She'd have had to pile on the brakes as hard as possible. Same result to the transit, but you couldn't blame the Clio driver.
All that she's actually been guilty of is stopping inappropriately, and driving with due care etc seems a sensible charge for that. And a year's ban seems a harsh penalty for it.
The transit driver lost control of his vehicle in circumstances that he should have been equipped to deal with, I don't think his death can be principally the fault of the clio dirver.
And the person who stops in lane 3 of a motorway to change the tyre on there car or stop to have a cup of tea?.... a little extreme I grant you but it's the same thing in principal, the highway code and to a degree common sense dictate that you do not stop on lane 3 of a motorway unless there is no alternative i.e. an accident in front causing you to perform an emergency stop.
Had she had proper training on how to use a motorway and been encouraged to drive within the limits of her new found freedom (i.e. not at 95mph - 25mph over the speed limit !!! 4 months after geting her licence) She may well have reacted differently, she does however not have any excuse at all 1) for where she stopped and 2) doing 95mph - if any of us get caught speeding we have to hold our hands up.
MapCop or **999** should be able to clarify the points scheme etc. but AFAIK just the speeding alone would almost give any driver an outright ban, combined with the other factors a 12 months ban a re-test is not harsh at all.
Speed Matters | Motoring News | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff