Man arrested after baby girl is punched in a supermarket.

[jesusbuiltmycar]

julian64 said:

jesusbuiltmycar said:

OT but the classic "sun was in my eyes" defence is outrageous. I read that in the past a judge stated "Jury will be directed to ignore Highway Code ‘slow down or stop if dazzled’“...

Not sure it actually is outrageous. You rarely get the phenomena in a city or town but out in the country it can actually be quite startling.
For instance I've had three cars/motorcyclists hit my front fence in the last year. In a least two of those they got out and said exactly that.

Then they are numpties. When is it ok to drive a motor vehicle if you can't see where you are going? What were they thinking?? Something along the lines of:

Wow the sun is bright today,
I can't see the road,
ho hmm i'll keep going anyway no need to slow down,
it'll be ok,
oh dear I have hit a car/wall/lampost/dog/cyclist/child etc.
The sun was in by eyes
Tough st
It was the responsibility of the car/wall/lampost/dog/cyclist/child to understand that I have the right to drive when I can't see where I am going and stay out of my way.

At the very least hitting something because of the sun is careless driving.

[julian64]

jesusbuiltmycar said:

Then they are numpties. When is it ok to drive a motor vehicle if you can't see where you are going? What were they thinking?? Something along the lines of:

Wow the sun is bright today,
I can't see the road,
ho hmm i'll keep going anyway no need to slow down,
it'll be ok,
oh dear I have hit a car/wall/lampost/dog/cyclist/child etc.
The sun was in by eyes
Tough st
It was the responsibility of the car/wall/lampost/dog/cyclist/child to understand that I have the right to drive when I can't see where I am going and stay out of my way.

At the very least hitting something because of the sun is careless driving.

This is a bit of a thread diversion, and obviously you have strong views on this but imagine you are in a car a quite legal 40mph round my way. you turn a corner at the sun is quite literally on the horizon straight in the front of the car window. You would then obviously slow down. But in the next thirty or forty feet you have very poor vision indeed.

In a town there is no horizon and the sun never sits in your face because by the time it has gone down below the roof of the nearest house or tower block it is no long a problem.

The people who have crashed into my fence have all had similar and suddenly pushed on the brake while going round an opposite camber slippery bend. They all lose the back end in doing this and I unfortunately am on the inside of that bend.

There are obviously times when a driver is culpable for speeding etc, but there are also times when no-one is really to blame even in our litigious world.

[SystemParanoia]

julian64 said:

This is a bit of a thread diversion, and obviously you have strong views on this but imagine you are in a car a quite legal 40mph round my way. you turn a corner at the sun is quite literally on the horizon straight in the front of the car window. You would then obviously slow down. But in the next thirty or forty feet you have very poor vision indeed.

In a town there is no horizon and the sun never sits in your face because by the time it has gone down below the roof of the nearest house or tower block it is no long a problem.

The people who have crashed into my fence have all had similar and suddenly pushed on the brake while going round an opposite camber slippery bend. They all lose the back end in doing this and I unfortunately am on the inside of that bend.

There are obviously times when a driver is culpable for speeding etc, but there are also times when no-one is really to blame even in our litigious world.

Replace your fence with a concrete wall ... and a camera

[julian64]

back to the thread. Anyone have any idea what state the baby is in. Or is that not important to your decision.

[anonymous-user]

From the article I think the baby is fine.

Sheepshanks said:

La Liga said:

He's appeared in court and pleaded 'not guilty' due to some legal wrangling over whether or not he had the intention to hit the baby based on him not believing it was a real baby: http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greate...

I'm a little confused as intention isn't needed for the offence to be complete. Looking at the sentencing guidelines it doesn't seem to make any obvious difference and the mitigating factors appear to be quite strong in his case in any event to lower the sentencing.

Isn't this similar to the discussion on SP&L recently where I was given short shrift for not understanding how someone could plead not guilty to breaking the 30MPH speed limit although they admitted going faster than 30? The accused's argument was the signs where obscured.

Broadly, yes. Both acts are present it's just a case if the other aspects are correct and present such as the 'state of mind' / technical / procedural etc.

[oyster]

julian64 said:

jesusbuiltmycar said:

Then they are numpties. When is it ok to drive a motor vehicle if you can't see where you are going? What were they thinking?? Something along the lines of:

Wow the sun is bright today,
I can't see the road,
ho hmm i'll keep going anyway no need to slow down,
it'll be ok,
oh dear I have hit a car/wall/lampost/dog/cyclist/child etc.
The sun was in by eyes
Tough st
It was the responsibility of the car/wall/lampost/dog/cyclist/child to understand that I have the right to drive when I can't see where I am going and stay out of my way.

At the very least hitting something because of the sun is careless driving.

This is a bit of a thread diversion, and obviously you have strong views on this but imagine you are in a car a quite legal 40mph round my way. you turn a corner at the sun is quite literally on the horizon straight in the front of the car window. You would then obviously slow down. But in the next thirty or forty feet you have very poor vision indeed.

In a town there is no horizon and the sun never sits in your face because by the time it has gone down below the roof of the nearest house or tower block it is no long a problem.

The people who have crashed into my fence have all had similar and suddenly pushed on the brake while going round an opposite camber slippery bend. They all lose the back end in doing this and I unfortunately am on the inside of that bend.

There are obviously times when a driver is culpable for speeding etc, but there are also times when no-one is really to blame even in our litigious world.

1. It's a sunny day.
2. The sun is directly on your left or right (you know this because you can either see the sunlight on the road further ahead at the bend or because it's reflecting through the trees).
3. You know the sun is low in the sky because either you've already caught a glimpse of it or because you know it's winter or early morning or late afternoon/evening.

So you should know before you turn that corner that you might face a very dazzling sun (even more so if the road surface is wet).

If you can't moderate your speed to account for this then you shouldn't be driving. And if you collide with and hurt someone as a result then you've been negligent and you should go to prison.

FFS, how on earth can the sun come as a surprise? A cow maybe. A deer. A runaway horse - these might me more surprising. The sun isn't.

[Sheepshanks]

oyster said:

FFS, how on earth can the sun come as a surprise?

There a route I travel when heading down south on the A51 in Cheshire where you drive through a village that's very gently uphill and if you hit it at sunrise then as you round a curve suddenly the sun is full in your face.

Also the M6 at J15 heading north at sunset does the same - the sun has dropped behind trees to the side but go around a bend, again with the road going slightly uphill, and all the traffic slows dramatically as it directly faces the sun.

[Welshbeef]

Why the flying fk are people comparing trying to punch a strangers toy doll and then actually punching a 5 day old baby to getting sun glare?

I mean I can stretch the truth somewhat about buying a spare or repair 944 from eBay whilst pissed chewing Mars bars but this is beyond tenuous

[dudleybloke]

Welshbeef said:

Why the flying fk are people comparing trying to punch a strangers toy doll and then actually punching a 5 day old baby to getting sun glare?

I mean I can stretch the truth somewhat about buying a spare or repair 944 from eBay whilst pissed chewing Mars bars but this is beyond tenuous

Indeed!

[julian64]

Nanook said:

julian64 said:

back to the thread. Anyone have any idea what state the baby is in. Or is that not important to your decision.

No & no.

You have no idea of the state of the baby, and it wouldn't make any difference to your decision on conviction or sentencing.

Somewhat scary.

[blueg33]

Nanook said:

julian64 said:

You have no idea of the state of the baby, and it wouldn't make any difference to your decision on conviction or sentencing.

Somewhat scary.

A man in a supermarket punched a baby, and you think whether or not the baby got a black eye is remotely relevant?

Somewhat idiotic.

My thoughts exactly

[Pesty]

Nanook said:

julian64 said:

You have no idea of the state of the baby, and it wouldn't make any difference to your decision on conviction or sentencing.

Somewhat scary.

A man in a supermarket punched a baby, and you think whether or not the baby got a black eye is remotely relevant?

Somewhat idiotic.

Anybody medical confirm this? I seem to recall that every punch somebody receives a couple hundred thousand brain cells die, somvisible or not there was damage.

Also babies have thin skulls that are not entirely knitted together.


Would you like to be punched in the head without your skull fully formed? Not to mention the distress caused to the mother who is another victim of a senseless crime.

This is ridiculous even if it where a plastic toy why go up and punch it, mind your own fking business, not hard is it. If it were a toy and the 'mother' would probably have mental issues and probably take it very bad. Is it ok to punch mentally ill peoples fake babies now?

Don't punch things that arnt yours. Don't worry what other people buy,don't buy,like,don't like just mind your own business.

[Halb]

Pesty said:

Don't punch things that arnt yours. Don't worry what other people buy,don't buy,like,don't like just mind your own business.

Quite.

[Mr GrimNasty]

The guy made a stupid mistake, no real harm done. I hope none of you lot are ever on a jury.

[blueg33]

Mr GrimNasty said:

The guy made a stupid mistake, no real harm done. I hope none of you lot are ever on a jury.

You can kill someone by mistake and still go to prison, eg death by dangerous driving. I suspect most dangerous drivers don't set out to kill people, but they are still held responsible if they do. The fact its a mistake is not a full defence.

The act of punching what he thought was a doll was still and act of aggression and is still assault. IMO he is lucky he didn't kill the baby

[Welshbeef]

Mr GrimNasty said:

The guy made a stupid mistake, no real harm done. I hope none of you lot are ever on a jury.

Your user name is very apt.

Let me be patently clear if anyone did that to my family I'm confident I'd be charged with very serious GBH on him.

[Digby]

Shakermaker said:

WestyCarl said:

Have I missed something; WTF would you go up to a stranger in a Supermarket and hit their doll though (if he is to be believed)?

This remains the unanswered question

For the same reason punting a cat / dog / Mini Me over a wall in the movies is funny or as mentioned earlier, due to numerous TV programs which rely on unfortunate or cruel circumstances to get their laughs.

The person in question was known by someone he was with, so it wasn't like randomly walking up to someone and doing it.

A silly comedy moment which backfired. Dissect it all you wish, that's exactly what it was and there will always be people who will wobble a ladder when their mate is on it, give them a pretend shove whilst looking over the edge at Beachy Head or pretend they have been electrocuted etc.

Still, it's nice to know that for many here, had their 'laugh a minute' Father walked in and explained what just happened to him and that he was in utter shock, those people would be straight on to the police to make sure he went to prison or a mental institution.

[anonymous-user]

Welshbeef said:

Mr GrimNasty said:

The guy made a stupid mistake, no real harm done. I hope none of you lot are ever on a jury.

Your user name is very apt.

Let me be patently clear if anyone did that to my family I'm confident I'd be charged with very serious GBH on him.

When my girlfriend was pregnant, a middle aged woman approached us out of nowhere and punched her in the stomach. I went apest and slammed her against a wall. My girlfriend was fine. I have never felt rage like it. I can't imagine what I would do if someone did that to my child.

[greygoose]

Digby said:

Shakermaker said:

WestyCarl said:

Have I missed something; WTF would you go up to a stranger in a Supermarket and hit their doll though (if he is to be believed)?

This remains the unanswered question

For the same reason punting a cat / dog / Mini Me over a wall in the movies is funny or as mentioned earlier, due to numerous TV programs which rely on unfortunate or cruel circumstances to get their laughs.

The person in question was known by someone he was with, so it wasn't like randomly walking up to someone and doing it.

A silly comedy moment which backfired. Dissect it all you wish, that's exactly what it was and there will always be people who will wobble a ladder when their mate is on it, give them a pretend shove whilst looking over the edge at Beachy Head or pretend they have been electrocuted etc.

Still, it's nice to know that for many here, had their 'laugh a minute' Father walked in and explained what just happened to him and that he was in utter shock, those people would be straight on to the police to make sure he went to prison or a mental institution.

I can't say I have ever seen anyone punch a baby in a silly comedy moment, imaginative defence for his barrister to use I suppose.

[Alpinestars]

Mr GrimNasty said:

The guy made a stupid mistake, no real harm done. I hope none of you lot are ever on a jury.

Staggering.