On 6 May, 19:16, David Hansen wrote:
The law has failed again, another sentence which would be a joke if
it was no so serious.

http://www.dunfermlinepress.com/news/roundup/articles/2010/05/06/4000...

The case also demonstrates that the usual suspects are wrong when
they whine about speed limits. Had the criminal been driving at or
below the speed limit, 40 mph, rather than between 50 and 60 mph,
then it is unlikely that he would have crashed into the cyclist.

As usual the criminal tried to blame the victim. Not only claiming
that the cyclist was on the wrong side of the road but also that the
cyclist did not have lights on his vehicle. Both claims were lies.

--
* David Hansen, Edinburgh
*I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
*http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000...#pt3-pb3-l1g54

To negotiate a bend isn't tantamount to murder, it is either dangerous
driving or undue care and attention. The laws punish on the actions,
not the consequences unless the actions can be proven to be carried
out with intent. He comes across as a badly trained knob who cannot
control his temper. I can think of a few on here who also fit that
description.