A place to record lenient sentencing for motorvehicle....

reohn2
Posts: 39691
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: A place to record lenient sentencing for motorvehicle....

Postby reohn2 » 26 May 2020, 8:25am

Words fail me.
-----------------------------------------------------------
I cycle therefore I am.

Manc33
Posts: 1665
Joined: 25 Apr 2015, 9:37pm

Re: A place to record lenient sentencing for motorvehicle....

Postby Manc33 » 4 Jun 2020, 1:23pm

"killed two pedestrians while driving his parents’ powerful Audi A5 after smoking cannabis with friends"

Why do they think smoking cannabis would have anything to do with how irresponsible someone's driving is?

This certainly applies to drinking, but not to cannabis.

It was shown years ago that if anything, people drove more carefully after smoking it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LZyDoMqReLQ

It's about time they legalized it, perhaps we wouldn't have as many alcoholics.

Later on in the same article it says "taking cannabis" - are these people living in 1950 or what.
When two cyclists get married, they should throw anodized cable crimps instead of confetti.

Vorpal
Moderator
Posts: 18285
Joined: 19 Jan 2009, 3:34pm
Location: Not there ;)

Re: A place to record lenient sentencing for motorvehicle....

Postby Vorpal » 4 Jun 2020, 4:59pm

Manc33 wrote:"killed two pedestrians while driving his parents’ powerful Audi A5 after smoking cannabis with friends"

Why do they think smoking cannabis would have anything to do with how irresponsible someone's driving is?

This certainly applies to drinking, but not to cannabis.

It was shown years ago that if anything, people drove more carefully after smoking it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LZyDoMqReLQ

It's about time they legalized it, perhaps we wouldn't have as many alcoholics.

Later on in the same article it says "taking cannabis" - are these people living in 1950 or what.

Stoned drivers are more careful because they are aware they are impaired. They are generally lower risk drivers than those who are alcohol impaired, but that doesn't mean that they are lower risk than unimpaired drivers.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2722956/
https://www.verywellmind.com/how-does-m ... ving-63533
“In some ways, it is easier to be a dissident, for then one is without responsibility.”
― Nelson Mandela, Long Walk to Freedom

fastpedaller
Posts: 2518
Joined: 10 Jul 2014, 1:12pm
Location: Norfolk

Re: A place to record lenient sentencing for motorvehicle....

Postby fastpedaller » 13 Jun 2020, 7:17pm

Local Newspaper report nobody to face charges - Cyclist basically run down by car and no action taken, tragic for the family and made all the worse by lack of action. Police don't care IMHO.

https://www.edp24.co.uk/news/crime/deva ... -1-6698918

Cyril Haearn
Posts: 13765
Joined: 30 Nov 2013, 11:26am
Location: Leafy suburbia

Re: A place to record lenient sentencing for motorvehicle....

Postby Cyril Haearn » 13 Jun 2020, 7:23pm

The cops should have to explain why they are doing nothing
Entertainer, intellectual, idealist, PoB, 30120
Cycling-of course, but it is far better on a Gillott
We love safety cameras, we hate bullies

Bonefishblues
Posts: 8114
Joined: 7 Jul 2014, 9:45pm
Location: Near Bicester Oxon

Re: A place to record lenient sentencing for motorvehicle....

Postby Bonefishblues » 13 Jun 2020, 7:39pm

The police have investigated. Presumably the CPS wouldn't take the case forward, they being the decision-makers in that regard.

That is how our system works, yet it's the Police who don't care and who have to explain themselves, seemingly.

fastpedaller
Posts: 2518
Joined: 10 Jul 2014, 1:12pm
Location: Norfolk

Re: A place to record lenient sentencing for motorvehicle....

Postby fastpedaller » 13 Jun 2020, 9:30pm

Bonefishblues wrote:The police have investigated. Presumably the CPS wouldn't take the case forward, they being the decision-makers in that regard.

That is how our system works, yet it's the Police who don't care and who have to explain themselves, seemingly.

The article mentions Police but no mention of CPS, but I see the point you are making. Either way the legal system is failing cyclists

Jdsk
Posts: 1309
Joined: 5 Mar 2019, 5:42pm

Re: A place to record lenient sentencing for motorvehicle....

Postby Jdsk » 13 Jun 2020, 9:37pm

fastpedaller wrote:Either way the legal system is failing cyclists

What's your estimate of the chance of a successful conviction with the burden of proof being "beyond reasonable doubt", please?

Thanks

Jonathan

fastpedaller
Posts: 2518
Joined: 10 Jul 2014, 1:12pm
Location: Norfolk

Re: A place to record lenient sentencing for motorvehicle....

Postby fastpedaller » 13 Jun 2020, 10:58pm

Jdsk wrote:
fastpedaller wrote:Either way the legal system is failing cyclists

What's your estimate of the chance of a successful conviction with the burden of proof being "beyond reasonable doubt", please?

Thanks

Jonathan

One or both of the cars killed him, or do you think he was struck by lightning or something?

mikeymo
Posts: 1201
Joined: 27 Sep 2016, 6:23pm

Re: A place to record lenient sentencing for motorvehicle....

Postby mikeymo » 20 Jun 2020, 1:34pm

Jdsk wrote:
fastpedaller wrote:Either way the legal system is failing cyclists

What's your estimate of the chance of a successful conviction with the burden of proof being "beyond reasonable doubt", please?

Thanks

Jonathan


I don't think that is how judges direct juries any more. It wasn't in 2010 what I sat on three juries. "The prosecution must prove its case. They do that by making you sure of it". Or something like that, was what they said. I think it was an appeal court case that brought about the change in wording. Let me have a look:

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Crim/2009/2563.html

But the meaning is the same, apparently:

https://thecritic.co.uk/no-the-burden-of-proof-has-not-been-changed/

I don't know if you've ever been on a jury, but I found the approaches of some of my fellow jurors bizarre, to be honest. And the phrase "beyond all reasonable doubt" would have been a lot more useful than "making you sure".

mikeymo
Posts: 1201
Joined: 27 Sep 2016, 6:23pm

Re: A place to record lenient sentencing for motorvehicle....

Postby mikeymo » 20 Jun 2020, 1:45pm

Bonefishblues wrote:The police have investigated. Presumably the CPS wouldn't take the case forward, they being the decision-makers in that regard.

That is how our system works, yet it's the Police who don't care and who have to explain themselves, seemingly.


I don't know any police officers well, but I get the impression that many are just as frustrated at the unwillingness of the CPS to take cases forward. Especially as it will be the visible, uniformed Police who get the blame, rather than the anonymous CPS.

I've given a few witness statements, and it's hugely time consuming for the officers. To then have the case turned down by the CPS must be dispiriting. So it might be that officers, or their senior officers, decide early on not to investigate further, because they think that after hours of preparation the case will only get rejected by the CPS. Not good, I agree, but easy to see how, with limited resources, that would happen.

fastpedaller
Posts: 2518
Joined: 10 Jul 2014, 1:12pm
Location: Norfolk

Re: A place to record lenient sentencing for motorvehicle....

Postby fastpedaller » 20 Jun 2020, 2:06pm

The one time I've been on a jury (6 years ago) it became apparent that Police had missed several opportunities in evidence gathering. the outcome was that we (the Jury) were unable to reach a decision on 3 of the 6 charges the defendant faced. Frustrating that we couldn't (with the evidence available) reach 'certainty' about those 3 charges, and we had to conclude NG on those 3. We were sensible (In that we as a group weren't 'trying to convict' but were trying to get at the truth). It was a low level assault case, and one of the 'witnesses' was involved in the fight - we wondered if he was also facing charges at a later date, because he appeared to us to be guilty of at least some wrongdoing - had the Police 'ignored' some evidence which would have implicated him more than the accused? we'll never know. It brought it home to many of us that the 'Jury job' wasn't easy, and to be on a more involved/serious outcome case would be very difficult indeed.

mikeymo
Posts: 1201
Joined: 27 Sep 2016, 6:23pm

Re: A place to record lenient sentencing for motorvehicle....

Postby mikeymo » 20 Jun 2020, 2:54pm

fastpedaller wrote:The one time I've been on a jury (6 years ago) it became apparent that Police had missed several opportunities in evidence gathering. the outcome was that we (the Jury) were unable to reach a decision on 3 of the 6 charges the defendant faced. Frustrating that we couldn't (with the evidence available) reach 'certainty' about those 3 charges, and we had to conclude NG on those 3. We were sensible (In that we as a group weren't 'trying to convict' but were trying to get at the truth). It was a low level assault case, and one of the 'witnesses' was involved in the fight - we wondered if he was also facing charges at a later date, because he appeared to us to be guilty of at least some wrongdoing - had the Police 'ignored' some evidence which would have implicated him more than the accused? we'll never know. It brought it home to many of us that the 'Jury job' wasn't easy, and to be on a more involved/serious outcome case would be very difficult indeed.


My experience was the complete opposite. In one of the cases I was astonished at the steps the police officers took to collect evidence.

Jdsk
Posts: 1309
Joined: 5 Mar 2019, 5:42pm

Re: A place to record lenient sentencing for motorvehicle....

Postby Jdsk » 20 Jun 2020, 4:36pm

mikeymo wrote:
Jdsk wrote:
fastpedaller wrote:Either way the legal system is failing cyclists

What's your estimate of the chance of a successful conviction with the burden of proof being "beyond reasonable doubt", please?

Thanks

Jonathan


I don't think that is how judges direct juries any more. It wasn't in 2010 what I sat on three juries. "The prosecution must prove its case. They do that by making you sure of it". Or something like that, was what they said. I think it was an appeal court case that brought about the change in wording. Let me have a look:

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Crim/2009/2563.html

But the meaning is the same, apparently:

https://thecritic.co.uk/no-the-burden-of-proof-has-not-been-changed/

I don't know if you've ever been on a jury, but I found the approaches of some of my fellow jurors bizarre, to be honest. And the phrase "beyond all reasonable doubt" would have been a lot more useful than "making you sure".

Yes. The threshold hasn't changed but the direction commonly given has.

Jonathan