147mph on motorway
Discussion
Red 4 said:
Can you provide an example of someone not being charged with (or convicted of) Causing Death by Dangerous Driving if they killed someone whilst travelling in excess of 146 MPH ?
Not north of 146mph I know (not that the actual number is important)But article claims high 'indefensible speeds' & fatality collision resulted.
Verdict, not death by dangerous driving.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/inquiry-urged-in...
A link from 1996. 22 years ago.
That's just, well, a bit sad.
You must have come across loads of examples of death by dangerous at speeds much lower than the guy in this thread during your journey through cyberspace.
Obviously posting details of those incidents doesn't help your stance though.
Quality.
Red 4 said:
A link from 1996. 22 years ago.
That's just, well, a bit sad.
You must have come across loads of examples of death by dangerous at speeds much lower than the guy in this thread during your journey through cyberspace.
Obviously posting details of those incidents doesn't help your stance though.
Quality.
I provide you with the evidence you request & that's the best you can do.
You're comedy Gold
Whilst you still bluster & provide zilch, nada in respect of your assertions.
Where is your real world you keep talking about?
Orbit City?
La Liga said:
What am I missing here?
My understanding is that speed alone doesn't amount to dangerous driving.
Not in Orbit City, it's a special place where the law is different & speed without reference to circumstances can be classed as dangerous where the Police say so.My understanding is that speed alone doesn't amount to dangerous driving.
It's the real world!.
La Liga said:
What am I missing here?
My understanding is that speed alone doesn't amount to dangerous driving.
If the same actions and speed cause a fatal it's likely you'll be prosecuted for Death by Dangerous.My understanding is that speed alone doesn't amount to dangerous driving.
Simples.
Actions re; 147 MPH are deliberate and grossly excessive.
Edited by Red 4 on Wednesday 24th January 17:17
Red 4 said:
La Liga said:
What am I missing here?
My understanding is that speed alone doesn't amount to dangerous driving.
If the same actions and speed cause a fatal it's likely you'll be prosecuted for Death by Dangerous.My understanding is that speed alone doesn't amount to dangerous driving.
Simples.
The theory is clear and from what I've read of Von's posts I agree, but I'd agree practically that a fatal outcome would more likely attract a driving standard charge than excess speed alone. Possibly because the degree of investigation will be so different and humans are better with outcomes than intangibles like risk.
That doesn't mean it always will. The police example I provided 30 pages ago is a good example, albeit one that won't apply to an MOP.
La Liga said:
Red 4 said:
La Liga said:
What am I missing here?
My understanding is that speed alone doesn't amount to dangerous driving.
If the same actions and speed cause a fatal it's likely you'll be prosecuted for Death by Dangerous.My understanding is that speed alone doesn't amount to dangerous driving.
Simples.
The theory is clear and from what I've read of Von's posts I agree, but I'd agree practically that a fatal outcome would more likely attract a driving standard charge than excess speed alone. Possibly because the degree of investigation will be so different and humans are better with outcomes than intangibles like risk.
That doesn't mean it always will. The police example I provided 30 pages ago is a good example, albeit one that won't apply to an MOP.
The fatal more likely attracts a charge/conviction not because it was a collision/fatal, but because if a collision/fatality has occurred, it is far more likely that driver has gone from not dangerous to dangerous as they didn't react to a change in conditions/circumstances. It's that failure in relation to circumstance change that results in it now becoming dangerous, not merely because it's a collision/fatality. The collision/fatality is a consequential outcome of the driving having become dangerous, it's not the reason the driving became dangerous.
ie dangerous driving doesn't automatically follow high speed & fatality collision, it's still the speed/circumstances test that dictate that.
Driving that is not dangerous, doesn't become dangerous because of the outcome.
It becomes dangerous if the driver doesn't react to the change in circumstances.
A collision/fatality does not mean that the driving automatically becomes dangerous.
The court first has to satisfy itself the driving was dangerous & the test for that is the same with death by dangerous as it is with plain old dangerous. It's just with death by dangerous that there is a secondary element to be considered after the first element is established. The cart doesn't come before the horse.
If it was not dangerous driving at that speed in those circumstances, then a fatal collision happened, one of three things essentially apply,
a) The circumstances changed & the driver didn't react to the change resulting in the driving at that speed now being dangerous for the new circumstances. It's the circumstances change & the failure to drive to those in a non dangerous manner that results in the charge. It's a different new assessment of the speed relative to the circumstances that the driver has been found wanting in. It is not a case of the same speed, the same circumstances, different outcome. It's same speed, different circumstances, different outcome. Likely result a rightful charge/conviction for death by dangerous driving.
OR
b) The driving at that speed was not considered dangerous & there was a sudden unforeseeable change in circumstances/conditions that the driver could not reasonably expect to happen. In such a case his driving to the circumstances was always not dangerous, the freaky collision occurring doesn't suddenly mean his good assessments relative to what could reasonably be expected to happen are suddenly bad. Resulting in no careless/dangerous charge/conviction.
OR
c) The driving wasn't considered dangerous at that speed, the driver makes an isolated small mistake (that doesn't satisfy dangerous driving - ie it falls below the standard but not far below the standard of driving expected) with fatal consequences. That results in death by careless.
Edited by vonhosen on Wednesday 24th January 18:02
Red 4 said:
La Liga said:
What am I missing here?
My understanding is that speed alone doesn't amount to dangerous driving.
If the same actions and speed cause a fatal it's likely you'll be prosecuted for Death by Dangerous.My understanding is that speed alone doesn't amount to dangerous driving.
Simples
Actions re; 147 MPH are deliberate and grossly excessive.
Are you claiming that a court will automatically find it to be DbD in every case?
Red Devil said:
Red 4 said:
La Liga said:
What am I missing here?
My understanding is that speed alone doesn't amount to dangerous driving.
If the same actions and speed cause a fatal it's likely you'll be prosecuted for Death by Dangerous.My understanding is that speed alone doesn't amount to dangerous driving.
Simples
Actions re; 147 MPH are deliberate and grossly excessive.
Are you claiming that a court will automatically find it to be DbD in every case?
Grossly excessive in relation to the limit = Yes
Therefore automatically dangerous driving = No
Red Devil said:
Maybe so but, as, I said earlier a charge is one thing: a conviction is another.
Are you claiming that a court will automatically find it to be DbD in every case?
Dude, if I knew what a court would or would not convict on, each and every time.Are you claiming that a court will automatically find it to be DbD in every case?
I would be a very rich man.
I would predict this weeks lottery numbers and stop pissing about on here.
Edited by Red 4 on Wednesday 24th January 18:02
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff