Cyclist on trial for manslaughter- sentenced

Commuting, Day rides, Audax, Incidents, etc.
thirdcrank
Posts: 36776
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: Cyclist on trial for manslaughter- sentenced

Post by thirdcrank »

Psamathe wrote: ...
So do I assume that everything your been saying about this case are from 1st hand information and NOT through what people have written about it? (e.g. you attended the trial, you tested the braking on the bike yourself, etc.)

In reality much of the information we receive and opinion we form is necessarily based on "what others have said". We try to select reliable sources, try to sanity check and cross verify but at the end of the day we all (need to) form opinions beyond our direct personal experience and are dependent on indirect sources. ...


That's not the point I was making. Everything we say tends to be influenced by our own perspective, etc., and that's normal. A criminal trial has this at several levels, such as the way witnesses remember and describe events, how that evidence is summarised by the lawyers especially the judge and how it is all selectively reported by the media. Then there's the discussions on social media, down the pub etc.

Now, as the receivers of this partial - in both senses - information we can either do our best to interpret it by looking for supporting information and remembering the context try to reach conclusions, or we just latch on to the bits that confirm our views. Quoting sources doesn't make them true, of course, but it allows others to see the foundation of what's being said. That's why I asked for the source of your assertion. I suppose I assumed there wasn't one but I would have looked at it carefully if you had pointed to something. My urban myth point was a shorthand way of saying that repeating something can soon promote it to unquestioned fact, taken as read, evry fule kno, whatever.

I take some posters on here more seriously than others but as somebody who, like me, posts often and at length, it's a useful practice to differentiate between personal opinion and "fact." And I'm sure that you knew that without being told, but you did ask. I've put "fact" in quotes because it's a controversial word. Quite a lot of my verbiage is intended to make that difference clear.
==============================================================
PS If there's anything where I've dropped below that standard and anybody sincerely needs more information, I try to give it; with sources.
Ellieb
Posts: 905
Joined: 26 Jul 2008, 7:06pm

Re: Cyclist on trial for manslaughter- sentenced

Post by Ellieb »

A little test for people.
1: Learn to count to 4 seconds reasonably accurately.
2: Cycle along the road at a normal speed,
3: As you pass a lampost or other identifiable road mark, start counting to 4.
4: When you reach 4 use your imagination to visualise a pedestrian stepping into the road when you started counting.
5: Tell me that if that happened a collision would have been completely unavoidable.

I've done this a few times since this case came to court and it is pretty obvious to me that , in the real world, there is plenty of time to safely negotiate the hazard. You can play about with all the hypothetical timings and distances that on paper seem to make what Alliston did reasonable. (to those who are trying to convince themselves of that fact at any rate.) Once you ride it on the road, its pretty obvious why Alliston is guilty.
I would also agree with what meic says. If it takes you a full 2 seconds to actually react to what is going on ahead of you while riding a bike in London then you'd be dead pretty quickly.
thirdcrank
Posts: 36776
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: Cyclist on trial for manslaughter- sentenced

Post by thirdcrank »

bovlomov wrote:... On this point
...I've felt a bit lonely on the "why aren't jaywalkers prosecuted for manslaughter?" theme.

Meic expressed similar views to yours, today. I concurred, perhaps elliptically.


Forgot to reply to this. If it wasn't clear, I was addressing horizon when I made it.
User avatar
bovlomov
Posts: 4202
Joined: 5 Apr 2007, 7:45am
Contact:

Re: Cyclist on trial for manslaughter- sentenced

Post by bovlomov »

meic wrote:A lot of the media reporting was about irrelevancies and a bit of character smearing.
One issue was the mobile phone... <snip>

The same occurred to me. For whatever reason, the matter wasn't pursued by either prosecution or defence, and Alliston's claim has been dismissed as an outright lie. Perhaps it was a lie. After all, phone usage is easy enough to check (if she was on the phone top someone else, or checking her Facebook, the phone would record it). Or perhaps the defence didn't see any advantage in arguing the point.
User avatar
bovlomov
Posts: 4202
Joined: 5 Apr 2007, 7:45am
Contact:

Re: Cyclist on trial for manslaughter- sentenced

Post by bovlomov »

thirdcrank wrote:
bovlomov wrote:... On this point
...I've felt a bit lonely on the "why aren't jaywalkers prosecuted for manslaughter?" theme.

Meic expressed similar views to yours, today. I concurred, perhaps elliptically.


Forgot to reply to this. If it wasn't clear, I was addressing horizon when I made it.

Yes, I know. I just thought I'd make the point that you weren't entirely alone in your attitude to jaywalking legislation.
thirdcrank
Posts: 36776
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: Cyclist on trial for manslaughter- sentenced

Post by thirdcrank »

bovlomov wrote:... Or perhaps the defence didn't see any advantage in arguing the point.


Without a transcript we can't be sure but this wasn't a civil claim so it's the defendant on trial. Given the rest of the evidence, I'm not sure that either side would have seen much benefit although had the prosecution known that she had been using her phone, they would have been required to disclose it to the defence. My own impression is that the defence counsel decided that his client's best defence would be to spend as little time as possible on the facts and to concentrate on gaining the sympathy of the jury for a troubled young man, faced with the possibility of a life sentence for manslaughter. I don't think the prosecution had much to gain by trying to present him as a liar, especially as the broad facts seem to have been agreed. As I keep posting, a lot of the prosecution case was built on his own description of events which he couldn't see would not help him.

Earlier you imagined a CPS conference when in fact I expect there would have been one senior CPS lawyer reading the case papers and referring them back to the senior investigating officer for clarification etc. The real fly-on-the-wall reality telly might well have been when the defence QC received his instructions from the instructing solicitor. He must have felt he'd been set a real challenge. (Serious subject so I won't offer a Bob Newhart sketch spoof.)

Anyway, that's how our system works: it's a search for guilt, rather than the truth, although it depends on the latter to be certain of the former. A lot of it's spin, and it has its roots long before we had spin doctors
Bonefishblues
Posts: 11010
Joined: 7 Jul 2014, 9:45pm
Location: Near Bicester Oxon

Re: Cyclist on trial for manslaughter- sentenced

Post by Bonefishblues »

thirdcrank wrote:
bovlomov wrote:... Or perhaps the defence didn't see any advantage in arguing the point.


Without a transcript we can't be sure but this wasn't a civil claim so it's the defendant on trial. Given the rest of the evidence, I'm not sure that either side would have seen much benefit although had the prosecution known that she had been using her phone, they would have been required to disclose it to the defence. My own impression is that the defence counsel decided that his client's best defence would be to spend as little time as possible on the facts and to concentrate on gaining the sympathy of the jury for a troubled young man, faced with the possibility of a life sentence for manslaughter. I don't think the prosecution had much to gain by trying to present him as a liar, especially as the broad facts seem to have been agreed. As I keep posting, a lot of the prosecution case was built on his own description of events which he couldn't see would not help him.

Earlier you imagined a CPS conference when in fact I expect there would have been one senior CPS lawyer reading the case papers and referring them back to the senior investigating officer for clarification etc. The real fly-on-the-wall reality telly might well have been when the defence QC received his instructions from the instructing solicitor. He must have felt he'd been set a real challenge. (Serious subject so I won't offer a Bob Newhart sketch spoof.)

Anyway, that's how our system works: it's a search for guilt, rather than the truth, although it depends on the latter to be certain of the former. A lot of it's spin, and it has its roots long before we had spin doctors

In many respects the Defence may feel quite satisfied with the outcome, his having been cleared of the more serious charge. I know which end of this I would have preferred to be on, given, as you say, the richness of evidence provided by the Defendent himself.
User avatar
bovlomov
Posts: 4202
Joined: 5 Apr 2007, 7:45am
Contact:

Re: Cyclist on trial for manslaughter- sentenced

Post by bovlomov »

thirdcrank wrote:Anyway, that's how our system works: it's a search for guilt, rather than the truth, although it depends on the latter to be certain of the former. A lot of it's spin, and it has its roots long before we had spin doctors

I know it's how our system works, but it's rather frustrating. At the end of a trial we are often left wondering "...but what actually happened?"
ianrobo
Posts: 512
Joined: 12 Jan 2017, 9:52pm

Re: Cyclist on trial for manslaughter- sentenced

Post by ianrobo »

thirdcrank wrote:Anyway, that's how our system works: it's a search for guilt, rather than the truth, although it depends on the latter to be certain of the former. A lot of it's spin, and it has its roots long before we had spin doctors


and it depends on ensuring the jury are with you. In a jury system just play the card 'it could have been you' applicable to pedestrians and drivers but not to cyclists as there are relatively few of us.

Same reason so many get off all together and light sentences for drivers, the system is bust because as you say it is not a test of the facts and evidence, too much other stuff comes into it now.

Do I propose trials in front of a bench of judges, yes,, 100% in social media age where all emails are available then the days of juries should be finished.
thirdcrank
Posts: 36776
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: Cyclist on trial for manslaughter- sentenced

Post by thirdcrank »

bovlomov wrote: ... I know it's how our system works, but it's rather frustrating. At the end of a trial we are often left wondering "...but what actually happened?"


Although the rules of evidence have been changed quite a bit recently, some effort goes into preventing the jury from finding out everything that happened. This is one of the things that must contribute to "perverse" verdicts and certainly leads to individual jurors doing their own research, to the horror of the lawyers. It's fundamental to our adversarial system but not the way to get to the "facts."

There must be different ways of measuring legal systems but on public satisfaction, the inquisitorial systems used in much of Europe seem to leave people feeling happier. Not popular with our own learned friends though, which is perhaps why the term inquisitorial, with it's implications of the rack and thumbscrews was coined. At one point we were heading in that direction (not the thumbscrews) which may be why some members of the Supreme Court were recently pilloried for allegedly being pro-€urope. So, we've voted to keep our system and that seems to be pretty much that.
Psamathe
Posts: 17650
Joined: 10 Jan 2014, 8:56pm

Re: Cyclist on trial for manslaughter- sentenced

Post by Psamathe »

bovlomov wrote:
meic wrote:A lot of the media reporting was about irrelevancies and a bit of character smearing.
One issue was the mobile phone... <snip>

The same occurred to me. For whatever reason, the matter wasn't pursued by either prosecution or defence, and Alliston's claim has been dismissed as an outright lie. Perhaps it was a lie. After all, phone usage is easy enough to check (if she was on the phone top someone else, or checking her Facebook, the phone would record it)....

I think it is easy enough to prove/demonstrate somebody was using their phone but not so easy to prove/demonstrate that they were not. If they were doing something online (Twitter, Facebook, etc.) then there may be the online audit trail to demonstrate the activity. However, some phone use can be entirely offline (e.g. looking at your calendar, choosing a new downloaded music track to play, etc.) and that offline use can be just as distracting yet leaves no online audit trail.

Ian
Psamathe
Posts: 17650
Joined: 10 Jan 2014, 8:56pm

Re: Cyclist on trial for manslaughter- sentenced

Post by Psamathe »

thirdcrank wrote:......
There must be different ways of measuring legal systems but on public satisfaction, the inquisitorial systems used in much of Europe seem to leave people feeling happier. Not popular with our own learned friends though, which is perhaps why the term inquisitorial, with it's implications of the rack and thumbscrews was coined. At one point we were heading in that direction (not the thumbscrews) which may be why some members of the Supreme Court were recently pilloried for allegedly being pro-€urope. So, we've voted to keep our system and that seems to be pretty much that.

(Genuine question, not trying to make a point hidden as a question) Is it the case that the inquisitorial system makes an outcome more susceptible to the quality and abilities of the defendant representation and prosecution representation. Get a good defence barrister who can think quickly, put on a good performance against a novice prosecution and valid evidence could be discredited (and vice versa) ... or have I been watching too many TV court dramas?

I have noticed a few people raising concerns over the defence representation, surprised some evidence was not contested and surprised that certain aspects of defence were not raised and wondering it the defence was trying to play strategically to avoid mentioning certain aspects.

Ian
thirdcrank
Posts: 36776
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: Cyclist on trial for manslaughter- sentenced

Post by thirdcrank »

Psamathe wrote: ... (Genuine question, not trying to make a point hidden as a question) Is it the case that the inquisitorial system makes an outcome more susceptible to the quality and abilities of the defendant representation and prosecution representation. Get a good defence barrister who can think quickly, put on a good performance against a novice prosecution and valid evidence could be discredited (and vice versa) ... or have I been watching too many TV court dramas?

I have noticed a few people raising concerns over the defence representation, surprised some evidence was not contested and surprised that certain aspects of defence were not raised and wondering it the defence was trying to play strategically to avoid mentioning certain aspects. ...


I don't have any particular knowledge of other systems but I believe that a common feature is the detective force is directed by the judiciary and that the lower tiers of the judiciary are rather like what we might think of as senior detectives. I believe much less weight is attached to the "guilty mind" and more to establishing what happened. I cannot give many examples but one involves bouncing cheques. Less an issue now with the demise of cheques, but here you can bounce cheques with impunity if you know what to say and can stand the bank charges. In France it's apparently what we would call an "absolute offence" and nobody does it. So, a lot of lesser offences are dealt with by way of the police dishing out the penalty. More serious stuff is investigated by magistrates who are really prosecutors. The central point being that the system seeks to ascertain what happened and then considers that in the light of the penal code. From what others have posted on here before, the same court can pass both criminal and civil awards on the same evidence. ie Once you know what happened, dish out punishment and compo on the same "facts."

I think the type of advocacy chosen in E&W depends on the type of case. There are some barristers who specialise in persuading juries. If you think about it, if the police, CPS and judge do their jobs correctly, there's not much else to attempt because the evidence should be overwhelming. (If the evidence is corrupt, then jury trial has historically been very poor at detecting it.) The usual example is George Carman representing Ken Dodd on tax evasion charges. eg "There are accountants who are comedians, but my client is a comedian, not an accountant, ho, ho, ho," (Twiddles bits on back of wig.) Others specialise more in persuading judges on points of law, especially in cases heard without a jury.

In this case both sides were represented by Queen's Counsel: top dogs. I think you'd have to be present throughout to see which was the better performer, so to speak, but remember that the next case in which they appear, the prosecutor could be instructed by the defence and vice versa.

It's a system designed to protect people from the gallows and worse, not necessarily what you might devise if you were starting afresh now, but little likelihood of much change in the next few centuries. And TV dramas offer no insight at all. IMO.
User avatar
mjr
Posts: 20308
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: Cyclist on trial for manslaughter- sentenced

Post by mjr »

Psamathe wrote:(Genuine question, not trying to make a point hidden as a question) Is it the case that the inquisitorial system makes an outcome more susceptible to the quality and abilities of the defendant representation and prosecution representation. Get a good defence barrister who can think quickly, put on a good performance against a novice prosecution and valid evidence could be discredited (and vice versa) ... or have I been watching too many TV court dramas?

I wonder if that says "inquisitorial system" (French-ish) when it means "adversarial system" (UK/US-ish). Apart from some BBC Four and More 4 imports, and the excellent dramas on TV5 on Freesat or similar, then UK viewers are unlikely to have seen the inquisitorial system in TV dramas much. Having a good defence lawyer probably helps in any system, but in many cases, I suspect even having a lawyer might make an investigating magistrate look more closely and I think their judges can mostly still overrule lawyers if they're trying to pull a fast one, while I think prosecuting lawyers in our system can only challenge (and rather more politely than in most US courts... no shouting "objection!" :lol:)
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.
Psamathe
Posts: 17650
Joined: 10 Jan 2014, 8:56pm

Re: Cyclist on trial for manslaughter- sentenced

Post by Psamathe »

thirdcrank wrote:......In France it's apparently what we would call an "absolute offence" and nobody does it. .....

It is and from personal experience, bounce one cheque and all you accounts (will all banks) become blocked. When I lived in France I had two bank accounts with different banks and when I moved back to UK I closed one and kept the other open (for outstanding bills). But then 3 months later somebody tried to cash a cheque I'd written 9 months previously on the now closed bank account ... as account had been closed cheque bounced and all my French accounts were blocked; I could not put money into the closed account to clear the cheque as the account was closed (complete Catch 22). And I then got my final tax bill from French Tax Man and could not pay it because all my accounts were blocked!!

Ian
Post Reply