Horses On The Roads - What's the Law?
Discussion
Breadvan72 said:
I am a civil lawyer, and only get involved in the criminal legal process when doing parole and prison cases for HMG, but in principle, and without knowing all of the ins and outs, my advice might well have been along these lines:-
(1) When the matter was first referred to the police, I would have counselled a contrite approach, stressing that tempers had frayed on both sides, and endeavoured to negotiate a peaceful conclusion, even if that might mean my client accepting a caution, although I would try to avoid that. My aim would be to have the matter dropped, with no adverse consequence to anyone involved.
(2) If charges had still been pursued, I would have advised that the weight of the evidence was likely to tell against my client, and encouraged him to make a plea, maybe in respect of some lesser offence, or accept a bind over.
(3) If the matter had still gone to trial, I would not have adopted a defence strategy of attacking the prosecution witnesses, or a diversionary strategy of arguing about GCSE physics. I would have argued that this was a roadside spat that had been blown out of proportion as people had entrenched their positions.
(4) If the court had found against my client, then, absent any plain misdirection of law or decision contrary to the weight of the evidence, I would not have counselled an appeal. I would, however, have advised on the time limit for appealing.
I would also have advised, before the whole thing happened, that moderation in language and behaviour is always best, even if confronted by immoderate behaviour or language from others. I would also have advised learning to share the road with other road users, wheeled, mounted, fast, slow, whatever. That, however, might be more dad stuff than lawyer stuff.
Nick did actually include a statement in his NIP explaining what had happened. He was, at the advice of the second solicitor, also willing to accept a caution, or even plead to a Section 5 for swearing; the thing that made it a Section 4A was the wheel spin of '1 minute', which as has been established is nigh on impossible. This was the crux of the matter in his trial, yet any evidence Nick presented to disprove this was overlooked (eg the photos of the road that he took 2 weeks after the incident, showing no abrasions or tyre marks on the road). (1) When the matter was first referred to the police, I would have counselled a contrite approach, stressing that tempers had frayed on both sides, and endeavoured to negotiate a peaceful conclusion, even if that might mean my client accepting a caution, although I would try to avoid that. My aim would be to have the matter dropped, with no adverse consequence to anyone involved.
(2) If charges had still been pursued, I would have advised that the weight of the evidence was likely to tell against my client, and encouraged him to make a plea, maybe in respect of some lesser offence, or accept a bind over.
(3) If the matter had still gone to trial, I would not have adopted a defence strategy of attacking the prosecution witnesses, or a diversionary strategy of arguing about GCSE physics. I would have argued that this was a roadside spat that had been blown out of proportion as people had entrenched their positions.
(4) If the court had found against my client, then, absent any plain misdirection of law or decision contrary to the weight of the evidence, I would not have counselled an appeal. I would, however, have advised on the time limit for appealing.
I would also have advised, before the whole thing happened, that moderation in language and behaviour is always best, even if confronted by immoderate behaviour or language from others. I would also have advised learning to share the road with other road users, wheeled, mounted, fast, slow, whatever. That, however, might be more dad stuff than lawyer stuff.
Edited by Breadvan72 on Wednesday 25th April 11:01
The lesson to be learned is to never stop for any group of people who may collude evidence against you. Simple.
Sadly, it appears from the many threads on this tawdry little fracas that King Fisher, and, it may be inferred, his golden child, are impervious to all suggestions that the sainted boy is other than a saint. KF does indeed appear to be somewhat hard of study. There is endless focus on inessentials such as an exaggerated account of a wheelspin, or precise measurement of speed, rather than on the essentials of the situation, which was about how someone responded to someone else objecting, whether reasonably or unreasonably, to what he was doing.
doogz said:
If that's what your son has actually learned from this, this whole thread has been a waste of time, he's an idiot, you're just as bad, and it'll only be a matter of time before he's in s
t again.
Honestly, are you actually that dim?
So he should stop, and let them then make false allegations which he is powerless to disprove? No, I think not. He always slows for horses, as do I, but if they start flapping their arms up and down again, shouting and swearing, I certainly won't stop for them for fear the same thing will happen to me as happened to Nick. t again.Honestly, are you actually that dim?
doogz said:
King Fisher said:
The lesson to be learned is to never stop for any group of people who may collude evidence against you. Simple.
If that's what your son has actually learned from this, this whole thread has been a waste of time, he's an idiot, you're just as bad, and it'll only be a matter of time before he's in st again.Honestly, are you actually that dim?
doogz said:
King Fisher said:
So he should stop, and let them then make false allegations which he is powerless to disprove? No, I think not. He always slows for horses, as do I, but if they start flapping their arms up and down again, shouting and swearing, I certainly won't stop for them for fear the same thing will happen to me as happened to Nick.
You said "The lesson to be learned is to never stop for any group of people who may collude evidence against you. Simple."
That f
king retarded. When your son crashes into a car, then decides to flee the scene, incase anyone "colludes" against him, make sure to come back here and let us know how that goes.I decided quite a while ago that nick the bassist and kingfisher were the same person. All the posts since just seem to confirm. I really am not sure why you would think that family loyality would prevent any sort of rational thought.
They both have the same writing style, they both have the same additudes and strangely have exactly the same character flaws. Same reaction to helpful or unhelpful advice.
This isn't genetics. Genetics isn't that perfect.
They both have the same writing style, they both have the same additudes and strangely have exactly the same character flaws. Same reaction to helpful or unhelpful advice.
This isn't genetics. Genetics isn't that perfect.
doogz said:
You said
"The lesson to be learned is to never stop for any group of people who may collude evidence against you. Simple."
That fking retarded. When your son crashes into a car, then decides to flee the scene, incase anyone "colludes" against him, make sure to come back here and let us know how that goes.
Well obviously not in that case as that is illegal. There is no law saying you must stop for a horse rider who flags you down though. If Nick hadn't stopped, he would never have got into a situation where this would have happened. His mistake was stopping and asking what the problem was. Comprende? "The lesson to be learned is to never stop for any group of people who may collude evidence against you. Simple."
That f
king retarded. When your son crashes into a car, then decides to flee the scene, incase anyone "colludes" against him, make sure to come back here and let us know how that goes.10 Pence Short said:
singlecoil said:
Telling what the problem was?
Exactly. He stopped to give a piece of his mind and crossed the line whilst doing so.King Fisher said:
but basically my son is under investigation for careless driving after he stopped for a few horse riders (who I may add flagged him down), they abused him for the volume of his exhaust
singlecoil said:
10 Pence Short said:
singlecoil said:
Telling what the problem was?
Exactly. He stopped to give a piece of his mind and crossed the line whilst doing so.King Fisher said:
but basically my son is under investigation for careless driving after he stopped for a few horse riders (who I may add flagged him down), they abused him for the volume of his exhaust
10 Pence Short said:
singlecoil said:
10 Pence Short said:
singlecoil said:
Telling what the problem was?
Exactly. He stopped to give a piece of his mind and crossed the line whilst doing so.King Fisher said:
but basically my son is under investigation for careless driving after he stopped for a few horse riders (who I may add flagged him down), they abused him for the volume of his exhaust
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff