Not a good Friday evening post .. sorry.

The BIG problem is dangerous driving or indeed death by dangerous
driving is VERY difficult to prove in a court of law ....... so the
pitiful charge of careless is the next charge down the list. In any
case maximum or near maximun sentences are very very rarely handed out.
We always hear blag blag blag from ALL political parties, but none of
them actually DO anything about it!! One of the MANY reasons I resigned
as a Magistrate after 10 years. My deepest sympathies go out to Laura's
family, another family let down by a 'stuffy' judicial system.

Anyone listening to [censored] Tim Yeo on Radio 2 today wouldn't have
appreciated him going on about the "poor persecuted motorist who suffers so
much from car hating public bodies".
I nearly choked on his words.

John Clayton
www.wakefieldsupportgroupautism.org

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

Quoted message said:

The BIG problem is dangerous driving or indeed death by dangerous
driving is VERY difficult to prove in a court of law ....... so the
pitiful charge of careless is the next charge down the list. In any
case maximum or near maximun sentences are very very rarely handed out.
We always hear blag blag blag from ALL political parties, but none of
them actually DO anything about it!! One of the MANY reasons I resigned
as a Magistrate after 10 years. My deepest sympathies go out to Laura's
family, another family let down by a 'stuffy' judicial system.

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

Quoted message said:

Yet another one ... £500 fine, £200 costs ...

http://tinyurl.com/bh9tu

It always pzzles me why they (CPS) don't prosecute for manslaughter- after
all he did kill someone even if it was not deliberate. Does anyone know if
there is a reason for this?

Julia

On 22 Apr 2005 10:00:43 -0700 someone who may be "Jack Ouzzi"
<[email hidden]> wrote this:-

Quoted message said:

The BIG problem is dangerous driving or indeed death by dangerous
driving is VERY difficult to prove in a court of law

According to the report:

"The court was told that if Mitchell had been travelling at the
speed limit of 40mph he could have stopped in time to avoid hitting
Laura.

"But accident experts calculated he was travelling at 55mph, and
even after braking, hit Laura at 48mph."

That seems to be an open and shut case of causing death by dangerous
driving to me.

--
David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E
I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK government
prevents me by using the RIP Act 2000.

On Fri, 22 Apr 2005 19:18:33 +0000 (UTC) someone who may be "JBB"
<[email hidden]> wrote this:-

Quoted message said:

It always pzzles me why they (CPS) don't prosecute for manslaughter- after
all he did kill someone even if it was not deliberate. Does anyone know if
there is a reason for this?

Juries were reluctant to convict a "fellow motorist".

--
David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E
I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK government
prevents me by using the RIP Act 2000.

On Fri, 22 Apr 2005 20:59:11 +0100,

David Hansen said:

On 22 Apr 2005 10:00:43 -0700 someone who may be "Jack Ouzzi"
<[email hidden]> wrote this:-

Quoted message said:

The BIG problem is dangerous driving or indeed death by dangerous
driving is VERY difficult to prove in a court of law

According to the report:

"The court was told that if Mitchell had been travelling at the
speed limit of 40mph he could have stopped in time to avoid hitting
Laura.

"But accident experts calculated he was travelling at 55mph, and
even after braking, hit Laura at 48mph."

This doesn't sound right. He managed to lose 7mph of speed in braking
and during that time was doing an average of 51.5mph

In order to stop completely from 40mph he would have to brake for
slightly over 5 times as long at an average speed of 20mph

So it would take approximately twice as much distance to stop from 40mph
as it would to slow from 55 to 48mph.

Infact, my quick back of the envelope calculation suggests he would have
slowed from 40 to about 30mph in the same distance

Of course, I haven't actually read the article - if she was cycling
along and he hit her from behind then this is a very different
calculation which would also depend on the speed of the cyclist. I think
a speed of just over 18mph would be sufficient which seems quite a high
speed for the accident investigators to assume (I can't see how they can
possibly calculate this speed post accident)

Tim.

--
God said, "div D = rho, div B = 0, curl E = - @B/@t, curl H = J + @D/@t,"
and there was light.

http://tjw.hn.org/ http://www.locofungus.btinternet.co.uk/

Tim Woodall said:

This doesn't sound right.

You omitted reaction time, which takes you a long way at high speed.

Simple linear interpolation doesn't describe braking entirely
accurately :-)

--
Nick Kew

On 22 Apr 2005 10:00:43 -0700, "Jack Ouzzi" <[email hidden]>
wrote in message
<[email hidden]>:

Quoted message said:

The BIG problem is dangerous driving or indeed death by dangerous
driving is VERY difficult to prove in a court of law ....... so the
pitiful charge of careless is the next charge down the list.

Solution: charge manslaughter, causing death by dangerous driving,
dangerous driving, driving without due care, speeding, looking at me
in a funny kind of way, possession of a kipper tie with intent and
anything else they can think of, and let the court decide on which to
convict.

And then cut his goolies off.

Guy
--
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

"To every complex problem there is a solution which is
simple, neat and wrong" - HL Mencken

"Just zis Guy, you know?" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

And then cut his goolies off.

Slowly there, surely with a cheese grater as someone else here suggested?

elyob said:

Yet another one ... £500 fine, £200 costs ...

http://tinyurl.com/bh9tu

"While the sentence was a heavier one than magistrates would normally pass,
we always believed that Laura's death was caused by dangerous driving."

Christing puce!

--
Dave Larrington - <http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk/>
Beware of the opion.