Cyclist likely to be convicted of manslaughter..

Cyclist likely to be convicted of manslaughter..

Author
Discussion

ralphrj

3,508 posts

190 months

Thursday 21st September 2017
quotequote all
AJL308 said:
Question: Obviously, there is no "cycling" licence to take away to prevent someone convicted of a cycling offence (or other traffic offence) from using a bike in the same way that can be imposed in relation to motor vehicles. However, does a court have the power to impose such a ban as part of the sentence in a case like this?
I don't know if a court can impose a ban on cycling but in this case the court ordered the forfeiture of the bike (assuming that is what was meant by "order for the deprivation of the bicycle").

ralphrj

3,508 posts

190 months

Thursday 21st September 2017
quotequote all
heebeegeetee said:
I know. In the second case I posted he could have got 14 years, I believe. It was a terrible case, but he still only got 3.
No he couldn't. The maximum sentence was 5 years and he (eventually) plead guilty so was, presumably, entitled to a discount.

The judge in that case actually mentioned in his sentencing remarks that he did not feel that 5 years was adequate for these crimes.

Judge Richardson said:
I echo the views of the Court of Appeal in the case of Jenkins (2015) where a level of criticism was directed at the maximum sentence of five years for crimes of this kind.

I respectfully agree with those observations, and it has to be said that a case of this kind, with so many exceptionally serious features, would have warranted a higher level of sentencing had it been open to the court.

There is simply not enough room for manoeuvre within the bracket currently open to the court to tailor the sentence in a sufficiently punitive way in a case of exceptional seriousness. Such a facility obtains when death has occurred, but not where, as here in this case, life-shattering injuries have been caused as a result of a level of utterly deplorable dangerous driving with many aggravating features

Mrr T

12,152 posts

264 months

Thursday 21st September 2017
quotequote all
Breadvan72 said:
Watch two skiers collide on piste. Then during the recriminations the uphill skier (especially if he or she is a Millennial) may say "you got in my way". That skier has not learned a basic rule - the uphill skier must avoid the skier downhill, and that means anticipating the chance of a sudden crazy move (or a tumble) by the downhill skier. Much the same when it comes to being on a road - we are supposed to be ready to react if another road user does a daft thing.
Personally I do very little uphill skiing.

Angrybiker

557 posts

89 months

Thursday 21st September 2017
quotequote all
Mrr T said:
Breadvan72 said:
Watch two skiers collide on piste. Then during the recriminations the uphill skier (especially if he or she is a Millennial) may say "you got in my way". That skier has not learned a basic rule - the uphill skier must avoid the skier downhill, and that means anticipating the chance of a sudden crazy move (or a tumble) by the downhill skier. Much the same when it comes to being on a road - we are supposed to be ready to react if another road user does a daft thing.
Personally I do very little uphill skiing.
I thought of that but I held back because I knew someone would come back and say something like 'you prefer uphill gardening then?'

turbobloke

103,742 posts

259 months

Thursday 21st September 2017
quotequote all
Angrybiker said:
Mrr T said:
Breadvan72 said:
Watch two skiers collide on piste. Then during the recriminations the uphill skier (especially if he or she is a Millennial) may say "you got in my way". That skier has not learned a basic rule - the uphill skier must avoid the skier downhill, and that means anticipating the chance of a sudden crazy move (or a tumble) by the downhill skier. Much the same when it comes to being on a road - we are supposed to be ready to react if another road user does a daft thing.
Personally I do very little uphill skiing.
I thought of that but I held back because I knew someone would come back and say something like 'you prefer uphill gardening then?'
Try finding a sloping lake for water skiing.

Awaiting comment on a watersport reference.

Mr2Mike

20,143 posts

254 months

Thursday 21st September 2017
quotequote all
heebeegeetee said:

Are we having a laugh over some heart-rending cases? I know we're all inured to tragedy when it involves motorists, but come on...
I have no idea what you are doing, but I'm chuckling at the antics of a pompous arse of a barrister who has made himself look thoroughly stupid.

turbobloke

103,742 posts

259 months

Thursday 21st September 2017
quotequote all
Mr2Mike said:
heebeegeetee said:

Are we having a laugh over some heart-rending cases? I know we're all inured to tragedy when it involves motorists, but come on...
I have no idea what you are doing, but I'm chuckling at the antics of a pompous arse of a barrister who has made himself look thoroughly stupid.
That's what I was doing, but couldn't speak for others as per heebeegeetee going for a little "we".

anonymous-user

Original Poster:

53 months

Thursday 21st September 2017
quotequote all
Those of you who do no uphill skiing are missing out on the best part of skiing, which is ski touring, and that involves skiing uphill some of the time Joking apart, ski touring connects you to skiing of a kind written about by Hemingway. it is like time travel to an era before crowded resorts, and pylons everywhere. But that is all by the by because, as of course you knew, in context the uphill skier means the skier who is above the skier below. The skier above should avoid the skier below. The person with more control over the possibility of accident has to do more to avoid it than the person with less control over the scenario. That applied to the cyclist in this case.

anonymous-user

Original Poster:

53 months

Thursday 21st September 2017
quotequote all
turbobloke said:
Awaiting comment on a watersport reference.
Fake news! Beside, those girls were Chechen, not Russian.

turbobloke

103,742 posts

259 months

Thursday 21st September 2017
quotequote all
Breadvan72 said:
turbobloke said:
Awaiting comment on a watersport reference.
Fake news! Beside, those girls were Chechen, not Russian.
Nicely trumped, sir.

Stickyfinger

8,429 posts

104 months

Thursday 21st September 2017
quotequote all
turbobloke said:
ry finding a sloping lake for water skiing.

Awaiting comment on a watersport reference.
I have water skied down stream and upstream on a river in the US....I think that counts.

anonymous-user

Original Poster:

53 months

Thursday 21st September 2017
quotequote all
If the water skier crashes into the tow boat, who gets fired/thrown in jail? I tried water skiing once, but I totally sucked at it. At least I got to detox from all the disgusting American all-inclusive food and crappy cheap rum cocktails by drinking about half of the Caribbean and having a good old chunder.



Edited by anonymous-user on Friday 22 September 08:54

Stickyfinger

8,429 posts

104 months

Thursday 21st September 2017
quotequote all
Breadvan72 said:
If the water skier crashes into the tow boat, who gets fired/thrown in jail? I tried water skiing once, but I totally sucked at it. At leest I got to detox from all the disgusting American all-inclusive food and crappy cheap rum cocktails by drinking about half of the Caribbean and having a good old chunder.
Then your instructor was st....if you sit back you are pulling up with your arms, if you go forward you are standing up to early.....even the uneducated should be able to do it....

If the skier hits the boat then he is very good at double cutting and most likely on a few shortenings, skier at fault.



Edited by Stickyfinger on Thursday 21st September 19:21

King Herald

23,501 posts

215 months

Thursday 21st September 2017
quotequote all
Breadvan72 said:
"Here lies the body of William Jay
Who died maintaining his right of way -
He was right, dead right, as he sped along,
But he's just as dead as if he were wrong."
Russians seem to have a particularly aggressive way of proving their right of way on the roads. YouTube has some shocking examples of them just ploughing wildly into anybody who gets in the way. Many years ago I was in Baku, Azerbaijan, and one of my local crew mates took us out in his little POS car. This guy is 6'2", called Igor, and as quiet and gentle a giant as you could ever meet.

Until he got behind the wheel of his car. yikes

We had two minor fender benders in the two hours we were with him! I have never seen so much aggression and macho brutality on the roads in my life.

Sounds like Mr Jail Bird cyclist has the same illness

heebeegeetee

28,591 posts

247 months

Thursday 21st September 2017
quotequote all
Mr2Mike said:
I have no idea what you are doing, but I'm chuckling at the antics of a pompous arse of a barrister who has made himself look thoroughly stupid.
The article is specifically about an article written by Martin Porter QC. That article highlights a couple of tragic cases, including the death of a 26 year old German student. Another link describes the agonising distress her family went through.

Split your sides over it, makes no odds to me. Take the piss right out of Martin Porter or any you like who tries to bring numpty or killer drivers to account.

It's just the gross hypocrisy from people such as yourself, when you pretend to make out that you care about road safety by whining and whinging about cyclists.

Of course we all know that were it your 26 year old daughter, you wouldn't be laughing for a long time.

heebeegeetee

28,591 posts

247 months

Thursday 21st September 2017
quotequote all
ralphrj said:
Neither of those cases are directly comparable with the one we are discussing.

In both cases the victim survived so the driver was prosecuted for causing serious injury by dangerous driving which carries a maximum prison sentence of 5 years.

If the victims had died then the charge would have been causing death by dangerous driving which carries a maximum prison sentence of 14 years*.


  • The Government is currently consulting on increasing the maximum sentence for death by dangerous driving to life imprisonment.
Yes you're right, I got that wrong, apologies.

I disagree that the cases are not directly comparable because the guilty party has no control over the victim being killed or not, they're all terrible cases where people have been killed or seriously injured.

heebeegeetee

28,591 posts

247 months

Thursday 21st September 2017
quotequote all
FiF said:
The article in question is not discussing any genuine heart rending case, it's rather mildly taking the mick out of another barrister who has publicly presented a rather dubious argument, it's then dissecting that argument and pointing out the failure points. Which is, frankly, amusing. LoL indeed, just for the extra heebee annoyance factor.

The only possibly heart rending case involved is that where a litigant, having decided to go against CPS opinion, then proceeded to lose and incurred the presumably heart rending costs of over £22,000, though my heart won't suffer much from his plight.

Frankly, in your quest to repetitively grind the same old axe, these latest posts make yourself look even sillier than many already think. Sorry if the truth hurts.
The truth is that the article is specifically about an article which cites heart rending cases as examples.

It is of no surprise at all that a great many like yourself just gloss over that stuff, almost don't see it / don't want to see it.

Road safety campaigners (which Is something I'm not) have fought the same battles all along, including battling to introduce drink driving laws, seat belts, and so on.

FiF

43,962 posts

250 months

Thursday 21st September 2017
quotequote all
heebeegeetee said:
FiF said:
The article in question is not discussing any genuine heart rending case, it's rather mildly taking the mick out of another barrister who has publicly presented a rather dubious argument, it's then dissecting that argument and pointing out the failure points. Which is, frankly, amusing. LoL indeed, just for the extra heebee annoyance factor.

The only possibly heart rending case involved is that where a litigant, having decided to go against CPS opinion, then proceeded to lose and incurred the presumably heart rending costs of over £22,000, though my heart won't suffer much from his plight.

Frankly, in your quest to repetitively grind the same old axe, these latest posts make yourself look even sillier than many already think. Sorry if the truth hurts.
The truth is that the article is specifically about an article which cites heart rending cases as examples.

It is of no surprise at all that a great many like yourself just gloss over that stuff, almost don't see it / don't want to see it.

Road safety campaigners (which Is something I'm not) have fought the same battles all along, including battling to introduce drink driving laws, seat belts, and so on.
It cited two cases only where juries acquitted the defendant. Seems to me, like Porter, that you want a rule of law but only as long as the system gives the result that conforms with your own prejudices, and where it doesn't then desire to rig the system.

Furthermore in the first case cited, against the lesser charge of careless driving, a charge to which the driver returned a guilty plea, in my personal opinion, considering the aggravating factors, on the surface I'm rather surprised at the leniency of the sentence, but then I don't have all the facts, neither do you.

irocfan

40,153 posts

189 months

Thursday 21st September 2017
quotequote all
heebeegeetee said:
Maybe, but not much evidence that he'd get much more:

Drunk, killed victim in a hit and run, continued to drink at home: 2 years. http://www.cyclingweekly.com/news/latest-news/drun...

Drunk, hit and run, changed clothes, drove 130 miles from the scene, lied, did not admit guilt until 6 months later, judge was so moved by the injuries his victim suffered that he promised to visit him at home - 3 years. http://www.hulldailymail.co.uk/news/hull-east-york...
and yet, unlike with the dhead on the bike, you'd be lucky to find a single drive who'd defend these scum. In the sad cases above the law is at fault/wrong (or possibly the system, IDK-IANAL). With scumbag being referenced here there are, even on here, mutterings of if not sympathy then something not far removed from that.

Point the second - just because the wastes of skin above were not properly put behind bars does not make it right that some other twunt doesn't get put behind bars (but sir, but sir, he did it first/did the same!)

Stickyfinger

8,429 posts

104 months

Thursday 21st September 2017
quotequote all
irocfan said:
heebeegeetee said:
Maybe, but not much evidence that he'd get much more:

Drunk, killed victim in a hit and run, continued to drink at home: 2 years. http://www.cyclingweekly.com/news/latest-news/drun...

Drunk, hit and run, changed clothes, drove 130 miles from the scene, lied, did not admit guilt until 6 months later, judge was so moved by the injuries his victim suffered that he promised to visit him at home - 3 years. http://www.hulldailymail.co.uk/news/hull-east-york...
and yet, unlike with the dhead on the bike, you'd be lucky to find a single drive who'd defend these scum. In the sad cases above the law is at fault/wrong (or possibly the system, IDK-IANAL). With scumbag being referenced here there are, even on here, mutterings of if not sympathy then something not far removed from that.

Point the second - just because the wastes of skin above were not properly put behind bars does not make it right that some other twunt doesn't get put behind bars (but sir, but sir, he did it first/did the same!)
but but EVERYBODY does it !