Driver jailed

JLB said:

AFAIR the layout followed national standards/guidelines for such things.
*If* that is correct there is not the slightest possibility of bringing
a case against the person who decided to use that layout. The blame
would have to attach to those responsible for the standards/guidelines.
However, such things are almost always drawn up by committees of people
who are considered competent and who openly consult on their proposals.
That does not mean they always get everything right, but if done
properly it does rule out finding the committee members or those who
afterwards apply the standards/guidelines negligent.

I'm sure we'd all like to have a world where nothing ever goes wrong and
nobody makes mistakes, but there's a clear contradiction between the
above comment and the views in other threads that complain about the
consequences of officials who are paranoid about being sued or prosecuted.

Have a read of http://citycyclists.spc.org/blackfriars.html

Tony

Tony Raven said:

JLB said:

AFAIR the layout followed national standards/guidelines for such
things. *If* that is correct there is not the slightest possibility
of bringing a case against the person who decided to use that
layout. The blame would have to attach to those responsible for the
standards/guidelines. However, such things are almost always drawn
up by committees of people who are considered competent and who
openly consult on their proposals. That does not mean they always
get everything right, but if done properly it does rule out finding
the committee members or those who afterwards apply the
standards/guidelines negligent.

I'm sure we'd all like to have a world where nothing ever goes
wrong and nobody makes mistakes, but there's a clear contradiction
between the above comment [asking why the person who designed the
cycle lane was not facing legal action] and the views in other
threads that complain about the consequences of officials who are
paranoid about being sued or prosecuted.

Have a read of http://citycyclists.spc.org/blackfriars.html

Thanks. Whoever put all that together is to be congratulated on
presenting the information and well-argued views with great clarity.

--
Joe * If I cannot be free I'll be cheap

On Sat, 12 Feb 2005 12:42:17 GMT, Steve Peake <[email hidden]>

wrote in message : said:

Quoted message said:

Judge Simon Davies said on Friday that while Duncan had lost concentration,
the layout of road markings was a "contributory factor".

Quoted message said:

Then why isn't the council planner/council who designed that layout also up
in court?

And a driver's obligation to exercise due care means that a bad road
layout should lead to extra caution. Look at the naked streets
schemes.

Guy
--
"then came ye chavves, theyre cartes girded wyth candels
blue, and theyre beastes wyth straynge horn-lyke thyngs
onn theyre arses that theyre fartes be herde from myles
around." Chaucer, the Sheppey Tales

Pete Biggs <[email hidden]> whizzed past me
shouting

Quoted message said:

How many weeks/days/hours of training to London bus drivers get now?

Bus drivers must have a special Passenger Carrying Vehicle licence. They
get trained until either they pass, or the trainer gives them up.

In addition, the operator they work for will show them how to work the
ticket machine, how to call the police etc, and give them a guided tour
of the routes they'll work on [1]. Usually this includes warnings about
special hazards like dangerous junctions.

All this only ensures that the driver is competent when he is paying
attention; nothing can guard against his being distracted [2], or
against a usually sensible driver making an error of judgement[3].

[1] It's unusual, but not unheard-of, for a new driver to get lost and
have to call in for directions!
[2] Google on "Moorgate train crash" for example.
[3] When a van pulled out in front of a fully-loaded double decker that
was doing 30mph, the driver decided to hit it rather than do a full
emergency stop. This was correct: there was nobody in the back of the
van, and an emergency stop would've meant carnage among the passengers.

--
Sue ]🙁🙂

What goes down must come up again - Confucius' Law of Mountain Biking

Sue White said:

In addition, the operator they work for will show them how to work the
ticket machine, how to call the police etc, and give them a guided tour
of the routes they'll work on [1]. Usually this includes warnings about
special hazards like dangerous junctions.

[1] It's unusual, but not unheard-of, for a new driver to get lost and
have to call in for directions!

I have been on a bus where the driver was taking directions from the
regular passengers.. In London (Ladbroke grove).

...d

Sue White said:

nothing can guard against his being distracted [2], or
[2] Google on "Moorgate train crash" for example.

I recall reading about that (perhaps the official report? - it was 15
years ago and I don't have the reference, sorry). It suggested that it
was caused by the train driver suffering what was in effect a seizure.
Unfortunately by the time they retrieved his body there was little to be
gleaned from a postmortem, even if they could have ever proved it in the
first place. It was suggested that there were sufficient visual cues
that "distraction" was unlikely to be the cause, particularly as several
witnesses stated that he was staring directly ahead of him and was
motionless as the train entered the station without slowing. There was
some contributory negligence from the guard who didn't attempt to use
the emergency brakes until it was too late.

Also c.f. the Shrewsbury train crash, where the driver /and/ the
fireman were seen looking directly ahead as the train entered Shrewsbury
station far exceeding the speed limit, without any brake application.

R.

Just zis Guy said:

On Sat, 12 Feb 2005 12:42:17 GMT, Steve Peake <[email hidden]>

wrote in message : said:

Quoted message said:

Judge Simon Davies said on Friday that while Duncan had lost concentration,
the layout of road markings was a "contributory factor".

Quoted message said:

Then why isn't the council planner/council who designed that layout also up
in court?

And a driver's obligation to exercise due care means that a bad road
layout should lead to extra caution. Look at the naked streets
schemes.

Guy

I spoke to one of the officers attending the accident. I guess the
reason the driver pleaded guilty is that, according to the traffic
officer, the video shows the bus driver arguing with a taxi driver for a
full 25 seconds before hitting the cyclist and the bus driver monitor
shows him clearly not looking in his direction of travel for that time,
the cameras, presumably on the bridge, show the cyclist travel under the
bus before her head is crushed by the rear wheels.
Bad layout? Well yes it is a poor layout, contributory factor? no I
don't believe so. I'll have a chat with my mate when I get a chance to
see what really happened in court, don't hold your breath though I may
not see him for a while.

Sniper8052

Sniper8052(L96A1) said:

I spoke to one of the officers attending the accident. I guess the
reason the driver pleaded guilty is that, according to the traffic
officer, the video shows the bus driver arguing with a taxi driver for
a full 25 seconds before hitting the cyclist and the bus driver
monitor shows him clearly not looking in his direction of travel for
that time, the cameras, presumably on the bridge, show the cyclist
travel under the bus before her head is crushed by the rear wheels.
Bad layout? Well yes it is a poor layout, contributory factor? no I
don't believe so. I'll have a chat with my mate when I get a chance to
see what really happened in court, don't hold your breath though I may
not see him for a while.

That is really appalling. That makes the driver's assertion that he
wasn't confident with the route etc., trying to turn himself into some
kind of victim of the situation, look like just a mealy-mouthed excuse
made in the hope of mitigating his sentence. I don't like the
proliferation of cameras everywhere, but it gives some satisfaction when
video evidence can ensure the right charge and conviction is obtained.

Rich

Richard Goodman said:

Sniper8052(L96A1) said:

I spoke to one of the officers attending the accident. I guess the
reason the driver pleaded guilty is that, according to the traffic
officer, the video shows the bus driver arguing with a taxi driver for
a full 25 seconds before hitting the cyclist and the bus driver
monitor shows him clearly not looking in his direction of travel for
that time, the cameras, presumably on the bridge, show the cyclist
travel under the bus before her head is crushed by the rear wheels.
Bad layout? Well yes it is a poor layout, contributory factor? no I
don't believe so. I'll have a chat with my mate when I get a chance to
see what really happened in court, don't hold your breath though I may
not see him for a while.

That is really appalling. That makes the driver's assertion that he
wasn't confident with the route etc., trying to turn himself into some
kind of victim of the situation, look like just a mealy-mouthed excuse
made in the hope of mitigating his sentence.

[snip]
I cannot see any contradiction between Sniper's account and the
assertion that the driver wasn't confident with the route etc.

Also, anyone charged is entitled to make a defence and anyone found
guilty is entitled to put forward mitigation (without perjury). If he
was genuinely not confident of the route, he can say so. The judge
weighs that up along with everything else that's emerged in court.

Hence, I'm struggling to see anything appalling.
--
Joe * If I cannot be free I'll be cheap

"JLB" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I cannot see any contradiction between Sniper's account and the assertion
that the driver wasn't confident with the route etc.

Also, anyone charged is entitled to make a defence and anyone found guilty
is entitled to put forward mitigation (without perjury). If he was
genuinely not confident of the route, he can say so. The judge weighs that
up along with everything else that's emerged in court.

Hence, I'm struggling to see anything appalling.

The appalling bit was not looking where he was going for 25 seconds while he
apparently argued with a taxi driver. If that was what happened then it
seems 'lack of confidence with the route', while not contradicting Sniper's
account, has no more to do with it than the design of the cycle route. But
yes, of course he has a right to put his mitigation, and of course the Court
has to weigh it up, and the sentence came out as it did. I didn't mean to
say that it was appalling that he put his mitigation, even if it doesn't
sound convincing given Sniper's account.

Rich

"Richard Goodman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

The appalling bit was not looking where he was going for 25 seconds while
he apparently argued with a taxi driver.

Oh, and I also find the thought that without the video evidence he might
have got off or received a much lesser charge/sentence by blaming his
supervisors and the cycle route design for the incident appalling, but I
guess that's just in the nature of things.

Rich