discuss

Quote:
Originally Posted by tonym View Post
Forgive my cynicism, but for one minute do people really believe that he was doing 33mph?? (in the text not the video), which funnily enough is the magic 10% over the speed limit.
If you read the details of the case, the police expert estimated that he was travelling between 35-45mph. The police officer that crashed said he was doing no more than 33mph, which he will have been advised to do so by his solicitor for the precise reason you have stated.

Quote:
Secondly how the hell did he get off with 'careless' driving - surely overtaking a row of 3 vehicles on a 'no-go' chevron area at speed (according to eye witnesses at the time) is dangerous driving. If he wasn't speeding then how did his bike travel over 50 yards.
He was tried by public jury. Quoted from one of the articles "Judge Elliot Knopf said if the jury could not find Mr Myerscough guilty on that charge they could look at driving without due care and attention." This is common place in trials.

Your comment of overtaking a row of 3 vehicles on a "no-go" chevron area I find a little strange as unless I have missed something in each of the articles, there was no "no-go" chevrons.

Take a faired motorcycle and fall off at 35mph and you'll find out how far it slides. Add to this the impact speed of the car and there is every likely hood that the initial speed was increased.

If the pedestrian had been crossing the road at the time then i'd suggest that there would not of been a moments hesitation that the death was caused by dangerous driving.

Quote:
Thirdly the vehicle wasn't even taxed at the time of the accident and hence forth not insured.
Not having road tax is not a reason for insurance to be declined.

Quote:
I'm sorry but I smell a rat with the CPS only persuing a charge of careless.
All is possible, but the original charge brought in the case was causing death by dangerous driving. The public jury decided through hearing the entire case that this wasn't the correct charge.

Quote:
As for parity, well.... one guys out acting a **** doing 130mph with half of Wiltshire constabulary on his arse, ultimately does no one any harm and avoids immediate capture, gets 14 months in jail. Then the other guy is out doing probably 50/60 mph, no tax, overtaking in a dangerous place on a narrow road and kills someone as a result of his actions and gets slapped with £1000 fine, a careless driving charge and early retirement on the Costa Del Sol. Looking at the fundamentals to me there is no parity.
Ultimately he didn't do anyone any harm, I agree. But then you'd be saying the same if the bike in the other incident hadn't slid and tragically killed a pedestrian. You could put one down to good luck despite bad judgement, the other to tragic bad luck as a result of bad judgement.

Quote:
Then there's myself on the other hand, who at 18 years of age driving a MK1 Escort, has a race with some *** who ends up in a hedge as no result of mine and I got slapped with a Wreckless driving charge, despite hiring the best motoring law barrister this side of the Thames
Let it go. Racing on the highway is an instant reckless driving charge, irrespective of the fact that you didn't go into a hedge.

I'm sorry tonym, i'm not having a go at you in the slightest, and can fully understand that this is an emotionally driven situation, but you can't have parity from completely different cases, accidents and circumstances. Yes the speeder was harshly dealt with, but behaving like an ***** as he did, i'd hazard a guess he didn't do himsel any favours in court either.

The people I feel for are the family that are left without a mother, a daughter or a sister. I hope they have found some way through their loss.

Keep it sunny side up gents

Click to expand...

Looney Tunes said:

:lol :doug

Click to expand...

Looney Tunes said:

:lol :doug

Click to expand...