Rhyl verdict out

[Simon Brooke]

in message <[email protected]>,
[email protected] ('[email protected]') wrote:

>> So why was the driver not prosecuted for dangerous driving?
>> I understand that there were other factors involved, but
>> the decision to drive at that speed was a conscious decision.
>
> He was prosecuted - just not for the crime you would like him to be
> found guilty of.
>
> It is now crystal clear that it could have been either the car or the
> cyclists that hit the ice first, and that perhaps if the road had been
> gritted there would have been no ice and no accident, but no-one can
> change the sequence or outcome of that tragic day now.

And if the cyclists had hit the ice first, so what? I as on a club run on
very similar Sunday this January, when we hit an extensive sheet of black
ice. No-one was injured. One cyclist did fall.

If you ride of drive at an appropriate speed, and don't try to brake or
steer suddenly, black ice is not a major problem.

> This was an awful outcome to what in other circumstances might have
> been a nothing event - but it wasn't - but nor was the outcome the
> result of malicious intent

No one is suggesting malice. However, there was gross and culpable
negligence.

--
[email protected] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

;; ... exposing the violence incoherent in the system...

 

[Adrian Godwin]

Tom Crispin <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Contrary to what appears to be popular opinion in this group, I feel
> that the police and local authority are more culpable for the deaths
> than the driver. The corner was clearly dangerous as there had
> already been a crash, and the police left the scene while it was still
> unsafe.
>
> Clearly the driver was driving at an inappropriate speed, but the
> fatalities would not have occurred if the police had stayed at the
> scene warning motorists until it had been made safe by the local
> authority.

While the police and local authority might have been able to reduce
the risk and may be guilty of negligence in failing to respond rapidly
to information about an icy road, had they not had that information
due to earlier events then they could not have been blamed : it's not
expected that they should monitor every spot of road at all times.

But the driver is responsible for his own actions : he should have
been and was in fact aware that it was cold enough for ice, and should
therefore have taken any corner more slowly than the speed limit allowed.

-adrian

 

[[email protected]]

On 27 Jun, 18:00, "p.k." <[email protected]> wrote:
> Chief Inspector Lyn Adams, from North Wales Police, said the driver appeared
> to have lost control on a gentle left-hand bend, striking a wall and
> rebounding into the road.
>
> He said: "The driver has lost control because of the ice on the road. *There
> is no indication to suggest that this is down to something like excessive
> speed.*
>
> "Our best estimate at the moment is that the car is driving at something
> like 50 miles per hour. And on a road like this, that isn't excessive speed."
>

What rubbish. 50mph on a road where you think there might be black ice
is clearly excessive. Any fool can tell when it's cold enough for ice
to be around when they get in their car. So many people seem to think
that there is a "safe speed" for a given stretch of road regardless of
the conditions, hence people driving at 70mph on flooded motorways and
aquaplaning, or as in this case, doing 50mph into an icy bend. Seems
as long as they are sat in a warm dry car, the conditions outside do
not affect them...

Rob

 

[The other view point, there is one you know...]

On 27 Jun, 18:06, Marc Brett <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Jun 2007 15:54:44 +0100, Tony Raven
>
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/north_east/6246140.stm
>
> >Criticisms from cycle deaths jury
>
> >An inquest jury has said a serious lack of communication between police
> >and councils contributed to the deaths of four cyclists killed by a car.
>
> >Thomas Harland, 14, Maurice Broadbent, 61, Dave Horrocks, 55, and Wayne
> >Wilkes, 42, died in icy conditions near Abergele, Conwy, on 8 January, 2006.
>
> >Robert Harris's "inappropriate" driving was also a factor, the jury said.
>
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/north_east/6246492.stm
>
> Cycle death families 'let down'
>
> The families of four cyclists mown down by an out-of-control car say
> they feel badly let down that the driver had not faced more serious
> criminal charges.
>
> The coroner has also said he failed to understand why Mr Harris had not
> been prosecuted for careless driving.

if Harris is to be prosecuted for careless driving, then every one
that skidded on the ice must also face a charge of careless driving...

 

[The other view point, there is one you know...]

On 27 Jun, 20:34, [email protected] wrote:
> On 27 Jun, 18:00, "p.k." <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Chief Inspector Lyn Adams, from North Wales Police, said the driver appeared
> > to have lost control on a gentle left-hand bend, striking a wall and
> > rebounding into the road.
>
> > He said: "The driver has lost control because of the ice on the road. *There
> > is no indication to suggest that this is down to something like excessive
> > speed.*
>
> > "Our best estimate at the moment is that the car is driving at something
> > like 50 miles per hour. And on a road like this, that isn't excessive speed."
>
> What rubbish. 50mph on a road where you think there might be black ice
> is clearly excessive. Any fool can tell when it's cold enough for ice
> to be around when they get in their car. So many people seem to think
> that there is a "safe speed" for a given stretch of road regardless of
> the conditions, hence people driving at 70mph on flooded motorways and
> aquaplaning, or as in this case, doing 50mph into an icy bend. Seems
> as long as they are sat in a warm dry car, the conditions outside do
> not affect them...
>
> Rob

If it was such a bad morning, cold and ice etc, why go for a 60 mile
bike ride?

It couldn't have been that bad if 12 club cyclist though it was safe
to go for a 60 mile ride, and some had even traveled on that road to
get there....One of them might have seen the earlier cars being towed
away...Not every single thing comes out in a court or inquest does
it...

 

[Tim Dunne]

"The other view point, there is one you know"
<[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]

> if Harris is to be prosecuted for careless driving, then every one
> that skidded on the ice must also face a charge of careless driving...

It's encouraging to see that you are finally talking sense.

Tim
--
Sent from Birmingham, UK... Check out www.nervouscyclist.org
'I find sometimes it's easy to be myself, but sometimes I find it's
better to be somebody else.' - Dave Matthews 'So Much To Say'
My 'reply to' address is valid, mail to the posting address is dumped

 

[p.k.]

The other view point, there is one you know... wrote:
>> The coroner has also said he failed to understand why Mr Harris had
>> not been prosecuted for careless driving.
>
> if Harris is to be prosecuted for careless driving, then every one
> that skidded on the ice must also face a charge of careless driving...

The test for careless driving: "It is a question of fact in all cases as to
whether any particular driver was exercising that degree of care and
attention that a reasonable and prudent driver would show in the
circumstances"

Note, that a number of other drivers also skidded at the same position

From the same legal source: "A skid is not prima facie evidence of
negligence but is simply a factor to be considered in all the circumstances
of the case as to whether the driving has been careless"

http://lemac.co.uk/resources/publication/careless_driving.html

As always, things are not as clear cut or easily determined as we might like
them to be

pk

 

[Adam Lea]

"The other view point, there is one you know..."
<[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> If it was such a bad morning, cold and ice etc, why go for a 60 mile
> bike ride?
>

If they are capable of cycling appropriately for the conditions then why
not? The driver wasn't driving appropriately for the conditions which is why
the accident occurred in the first place.

 

[Paul Boyd]

Tony Raven said the following on 27/06/2007 15:54:

> "The vehicle was being driven in an inappropriate manner for the adverse
> weather conditions."

Does this mean that the driver can now be charged for causing death by
dangerous driving, or whatever, instead of just having a slapped wrist?

--
Paul Boyd
http://www.paul-boyd.co.uk/

 

[Tony Raven]

Paul Boyd wrote on 28/06/2007 08:54 +0100:
> Tony Raven said the following on 27/06/2007 15:54:
>
>> "The vehicle was being driven in an inappropriate manner for the
>> adverse weather conditions."
>
> Does this mean that the driver can now be charged for causing death by
> dangerous driving, or whatever, instead of just having a slapped wrist?
>

I believe the problem is they are out of time for a prosecution and
incompetence meant they were unable to bring a prosecution other than
the bald tyres for the same reason.

--
Tony

"The most savage controversies are those about matters as to which there
is no good evidence either way."
- Bertrand Russell

 

[Alan Braggins]

In article <[email protected]>, p.k. wrote:
>The other view point, there is one you know... wrote:
>>> The coroner has also said he failed to understand why Mr Harris had
>>> not been prosecuted for careless driving.
>>
>> if Harris is to be prosecuted for careless driving, then every one
>> that skidded on the ice must also face a charge of careless driving...
>
>The test for careless driving: "It is a question of fact in all cases as to
>whether any particular driver was exercising that degree of care and
>attention that a reasonable and prudent driver would show in the
>circumstances"
>
>Note, that a number of other drivers also skidded at the same position

How many of them were going fast enough when they skidded that they
left the road and bounced off the wall? Dewi's "other view point"
appears to be, once again, one requiring considerable anatomical
contortion, and not one that many people are likely to want to share.

 

[Simon Brooke]

in message <[email protected]>, Tony Raven
('[email protected]') wrote:

> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/north_east/6246140.stm
>
> The jury concluded: "The four persons died as a direct result of an
> out-of-control vehicle which skidded on ice and collided into the
> cyclists.
>
> "There were contributing factors towards this happening.
>
> "The vehicle was being driven in an inappropriate manner for the adverse
> weather conditions."

Does anyone have a link to the full text of the jury's verdict? And of the
coroner's statement?

--
[email protected] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

;; When your hammer is C++, everything begins to look like a thumb.

 

[Ian Smith]

On Wed, 27 Jun <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 27 Jun, 18:06, Marc Brett <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > The coroner has also said he failed to understand why Mr Harris
> > had not been prosecuted for careless driving.
>
> if Harris is to be prosecuted for careless driving, then every one
> that skidded on the ice must also face a charge of careless
> driving...


Everyone that was driving such that the skid resulted in them crossing
the road, bouncing off the wall beyond the opposite verge and ramming
the verge on the side they started on, yes. Absolutely.

So that's just the one driver, who also killed four people on the
way.

regards, Ian SMith
--
|\ /| no .sig
|o o|
|/ \|

 

[AndyMorris]

David Martin wrote:
> On Jun 27, 5:41 pm, Matt B <"matt.bourke"@nospam.london.com> wrote:
>> Do you have an opinion on why they might /want/ to ""accidentally""
>> fail to bring the charge on time?
>
> I wouldn't want to regard the police as any less professional than the
> coroner, but the conspiracy theorists might get off on the driver
> being an ex police officer.


Well that never came out on the 10 o clock news.

Source?



--
Andy Morris

AndyAtJinkasDotFreeserve.Co.UK

Love this:
Put an end to Outlook Express's messy quotes
http://home.in.tum.de/~jain/software/oe-quotefix/



--
Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
------->>>>>>http://www.NewsDem

 

[Rob Morley]

In article <[email protected]>, Tony Raven
[email protected]lid says...
> Paul Boyd wrote on 28/06/2007 08:54 +0100:
> > Tony Raven said the following on 27/06/2007 15:54:
> >
> >> "The vehicle was being driven in an inappropriate manner for the
> >> adverse weather conditions."
> >
> > Does this mean that the driver can now be charged for causing death by
> > dangerous driving, or whatever, instead of just having a slapped wrist?
> >
>
> I believe the problem is they are out of time for a prosecution and
> incompetence meant they were unable to bring a prosecution other than
> the bald tyres for the same reason.
>
I expect the inquest findings put the victims' families in a strong
position to mount a civil prosecution.

 

[The Luggage]

On 29 Jun, 01:09, "AndyMorris" <[email protected]> wrote:
> David Martin wrote:
> > I wouldn't want to regard the police as any less professional than the
> > coroner, but the conspiracy theorists might get off on the driver
> > being an ex police officer.
>
> Well that never came out on the 10 o clock news.
>
> Source?

Google provides no relevant hits for '"robert harris" ex-police
officer' so it appears unlikely to be true.

TL

 

[The other view point, there is one you know...]

On 28 Jun, 13:25, Ian Smith <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Jun <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > On 27 Jun, 18:06, Marc Brett <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > The coroner has also said he failed to understand why Mr Harris
> > > had not been prosecuted for careless driving.
>
> > if Harris is to be prosecuted for careless driving, then every one
> > that skidded on the ice must also face a charge of careless
> > driving...
>
> Everyone that was driving such that the skid resulted in them crossing
> the road, bouncing off the wall beyond the opposite verge and ramming
> the verge on the side they started on, yes. Absolutely.
>
> So that's just the one driver, who also killed four people on the
> way.
>
> regards, Ian SMith
> --

Doesn't work like that, if 4-5 cars skidded on the ice and they were
fine as they didn't hit anything but the 6th did so he is the only bad
guy?

Not quite right is it?

 

[The other view point, there is one you know...]

On 29 Jun, 16:13, The Luggage <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 29 Jun, 01:09, "AndyMorris" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > David Martin wrote:
> > > I wouldn't want to regard the police as any less professional than the
> > > coroner, but the conspiracy theorists might get off on the driver
> > > being an ex police officer.
>
> > Well that never came out on the 10 o clock news.
>
> > Source?
>
> Google provides no relevant hits for '"robert harris" ex-police
> officer' so it appears unlikely to be true.
>
> TL

They want to blame someone and are struggling, so they having a go at
conspiracies etc, always helps if you don't like the results

 

[Mark]

>> > > The coroner has also said he failed to understand why Mr Harris
>> > > had not been prosecuted for careless driving.
>>
>> > if Harris is to be prosecuted for careless driving, then every one
>> > that skidded on the ice must also face a charge of careless
>> > driving...
>>
>> Everyone that was driving such that the skid resulted in them crossing
>> the road, bouncing off the wall beyond the opposite verge and ramming
>> the verge on the side they started on, yes. Absolutely.
>>
>> So that's just the one driver, who also killed four people on the
>> way.

> Doesn't work like that, if 4-5 cars skidded on the ice and they were
> fine as they didn't hit anything but the 6th did so he is the only bad
> guy?
>
> Not quite right is it?

You're speaking before thinking again. Read the quoted stuff above.

 

[The other view point, there is one you know...]

On 29 Jun, 17:30, Mark
<pleasegivegenerously@warmail*turn_up_the_heat_to_reply*.com.invalid>
wrote:
> >> > > The coroner has also said he failed to understand why Mr Harris
> >> > > had not been prosecuted for careless driving.
>
> >> > if Harris is to be prosecuted for careless driving, then every one
> >> > that skidded on the ice must also face a charge of careless
> >> > driving...
>
> >> Everyone that was driving such that the skid resulted in them crossing
> >> the road, bouncing off the wall beyond the opposite verge and ramming
> >> the verge on the side they started on, yes. Absolutely.
>
> >> So that's just the one driver, who also killed four people on the
> >> way.
> > Doesn't work like that, if 4-5 cars skidded on the ice and they were
> > fine as they didn't hit anything but the 6th did so he is the only bad
> > guy?
>
> > Not quite right is it?
>
> You're speaking before thinking again. Read the quoted stuff above.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Not at all.