Brutal driver walks
 

On 09/02/2016 17:45, John Smith wrote:
MrCheerful
On 09/02/2016 14:15, John Smith wrote:
MrCheerful

Ah, Jewish, that explains everything.

I'm sure that you'll want to expand on that.

I don't need to, you do it with every post you make.

.. and he folds.


Please try to remember that this is a UK cycling group.

Brutal driver walks
 

On Tue, 9 Feb 2016 07:50:31 -0800 (PST), Tom Crispin
wrote:


If the CPS have taken the correct legal decision not to further pursue the matter, then there is something wrong with the law.

Why? There is no evidence that this was anything more than an
unfortunate accident possibly caused by the driver being distracted.
Despite the lurid labels the video shows nothing more than that.
Crucially it does not show intent (as the video of a driver swerving
into the path of oncoming cyclists did) but a vehicle remaining on
track and hitting the cyclist without showing any obvious intent to do
so. The CPS had all the evidence (which we do not) and decided that
it was insufficient to give any reasonable prospect of a conviction
for even careless much less dangerous driving. They also decided that
the chances of a conviction for the lesser charges of leaving the
scene and failing to report were unsustainable because they couldn't
prove who of the two possible drivers was driving at the time (and we
don't know whether that was because they each blamed each other or
because they remained silent or whatever).

Now arguably this was little different and less serious than the
incident I mentioned earlier where many members of a cycle club knew
perfectly well which of their members had committed a wholly
unprovoked and quite deliberate assault on a pedestrian while out
riding with them but all refused to identify him. I saw no outcry for
the law to be changed then.

RTA s172 is already dangerous law, it introduces a presumption of
guilt (without the need for evidence), removes the right of silence
and requires the accused to prove their innocence. How much further
would you like it to spread? Should all the members of that push bike
club, both guilty and innocent, have been jailed for remaining silent?

The problem with calls for draconian penalties is that when they are
introduced they lead not to a fall in offences but to a fall in
convictions. In the past juries would rarely convict on charges of
causing death by dangerous driving as a result of a momentary failure
as many thought "There but for the grace of god go I". The result was
people getting charged instead with much lesser and often quite
inappropriate offences like careless driving. The solution was to
introduce a " lesser" charge of causing death by careless driving -
and conviction rates rose and more appropriate sentences were passed.

The law is always a blunt weapon, if it has failed in this case to
produce the result pushbikers want (and none of those squealing for
change know the full details of the case) that isn't necessarily a
reason to change it. Mob law is never good law.

Brutal driver walks
 

Tom Crispin wrote:
On Tuesday, February 9, 2016 at 12:22:39 PM UTC, Peter Parry wrote:

The CPS obviously lack your legal expertise as it seems that at no time
did they or the police attempt to charge either of the two possible
offenders with anything other than leaving the scene of an accident and
failing to report the accident (both maximum sentence 6 months in jail
but usually a fine). This seems odd given your legal opinion that
charges of conspiracy to pervert the course of justice and attempted
causing GBH ( both carrying potential life sentences) have been proven
beyond reasonable doubt. You obviously have access to the court report
as well as there is no public evidence either was lying - they could
equally well have simply declined to say anything.

If the CPS have taken the correct legal decision not to further pursue
the matter, then there is something wrong with the law.

Strictly speaking, no. The law here is not wrong. The law as it stands
allows for the prosecution of the responsible driver under s. 18 of the
OAPA 1861 and of both persons named as hirers for conspiracy to pervert the
course of justice - a prospect which, I am sure, would concentrate the mind
of the one who wasn't driving but who is covering up for the one who was.

There is no 'improvement' that you need to make to English law, to plug
this 'loophole', for there is no 'loophole' here. What there is, however,
is yet another manifestation of the institutionalized culture of impunity
under which car drivers are allowed - sometimes literally [1] - to get
away with murder when the victim is a cyclist.

[1] if you'll excuse the momentary incorrect use of 'literally'...
--
john smith |MA (Hons)|MPhil (Hons)|CAPES (mention très bien)|LLB (Hons)
'It never gets any easier. You just get faster'
(Greg LeMond (1961 - ))

Brutal driver walks
 

Peter Parry wrote:
On Tue, 9 Feb 2016 07:50:31 -0800 (PST), Tom Crispin
wrote:

If the CPS have taken the correct legal decision not to further pursue
the matter, then there is something wrong with the law.

Why? There is no evidence that this was anything more than an unfortunate
accident possibly caused by the driver being distracted.

Hahaha !!!!!

It is obvious from an impartial viewing of the YouTube video that the
driver aimed at the cyclist. The behaviour of the two co-conspirators
since the incident, in covering up for each other, only serves to
demonstrate this all the more amply.

--
john smith |MA (Hons)|MPhil (Hons)|CAPES (mention très bien)|LLB (Hons)
'It never gets any easier. You just get faster'
(Greg LeMond (1961 - ))

Brutal driver walks
 

On Tuesday, 9 February 2016 19:34:03 UTC, John Smith wrote:


There is no 'improvement' that you need to make to English law, to plug
this 'loophole', for there is no 'loophole' here. What there is, however,
is yet another manifestation of the institutionalized culture of impunity
under which car drivers are allowed - sometimes literally [1] - to get
away with murder when the victim is a cyclist.

One can be certain that had the injured party been the Chief Constable's son then the wriggling perp would have been tracked down and jailed - no problem.

Brutal driver walks
 

Alycidon
On Tuesday, 9 February 2016 19:34:03 UTC, John Smith wrote:

There is no 'improvement' that you need to make to English law, to plug
this 'loophole', for there is no 'loophole' here. What there is,
however, is yet another manifestation of the institutionalized culture
of impunity under which car drivers are allowed - sometimes literally
[1] - to get away with murder when the victim is a cyclist.

One can be certain that had the injured party been the Chief Constable's
son then the wriggling perp would have been tracked down and jailed - no
problem.

Absolutely certain.

What's needed is someone who has nothing to lose. And a friendly copper
who'll provide the name and address of the two cowards. Then let natural
justice take its course.

--
john smith |MA (Hons)|MPhil (Hons)|CAPES (mention très bien)|LLB (Hons)
'It never gets any easier. You just get faster'
(Greg LeMond (1961 - ))

Brutal driver walks
 

On Tue, 9 Feb 2016 22:03:05 +0000, John Smith
wrote:

One can be certain that had the injured party been the Chief Constable's
son then the wriggling perp would have been tracked down and jailed - no
problem.

Absolutely certain.

Stereo conspiracy theorists - was Elvis a witness?

Brutal driver walks
 

On 09/02/2016 22:03, John Smith wrote:
Alycidon
On Tuesday, 9 February 2016 19:34:03 UTC, John Smith wrote:

There is no 'improvement' that you need to make to English law, to plug
this 'loophole', for there is no 'loophole' here. What there is,
however, is yet another manifestation of the institutionalized culture
of impunity under which car drivers are allowed - sometimes literally
[1] - to get away with murder when the victim is a cyclist.

One can be certain that had the injured party been the Chief Constable's
son then the wriggling perp would have been tracked down and jailed - no
problem.

Absolutely certain.

What's needed is someone who has nothing to lose. And a friendly copper
who'll provide the name and address of the two cowards. Then let natural
justice take its course.

You don't understand the meaning of (term of art) "natural justice", do you?

Brutal driver walks
 

Peter Parry wrote:
On Tue, 9 Feb 2016 22:03:05 +0000, John Smith
wrote:

One can be certain that had the injured party been the Chief
Constable's son then the wriggling perp would have been tracked down
and jailed - no problem.

Absolutely certain.

Stereo conspiracy theorists - was Elvis a witness?

Oh, really? Really? That's all you've got, when someone suggests a
politically motivated decision to prosecute or not to prosecute, is to try
to shut us up with the 'conspiracy theory' canard?

LOL ... and they say car drivers can't argue..

--
john smith |MA (Hons)|MPhil (Hons)|CAPES (mention très bien)|LLB (Hons)
'It never gets any easier. You just get faster'
(Greg LeMond (1961 - ))

Brutal driver walks
 

On 10/02/2016 09:59, John Smith wrote:
Peter Parry wrote:
On Tue, 9 Feb 2016 22:03:05 +0000, John Smith
wrote:

One can be certain that had the injured party been the Chief
Constable's son then the wriggling perp would have been tracked down
and jailed - no problem.

Absolutely certain.

Stereo conspiracy theorists - was Elvis a witness?

Oh, really? Really? That's all you've got, when someone suggests a
politically motivated decision to prosecute or not to prosecute, is to try
to shut us up with the 'conspiracy theory' canard?

LOL ... and they say car drivers can't argue..

Please... please... don't even THINK of shutting up with your conspiracy
theories - they're too entertaining to be curtailed.

It's all a plot to wipe out cyclists, isn't it?

It HAS to be, shirley?