Cyclist on trial for manslaughter- sentenced

Commuting, Day rides, Audax, Incidents, etc.
JohnW
Posts: 6667
Joined: 6 Jan 2007, 9:12pm
Location: Yorkshire

Re: Cyclist on trial for manslaughter

Post by JohnW »

thirdcrank wrote:Here's a bit more about the defence's closing speech eg

.......................
After summing up, Judge Wendy Joseph told the Old Bailey jury: “It’s hard to think of a case that’s more likely to rouse your emotions. A young man who was 18 at the time. A woman in her 40s with her life ahead of her.

“Put to one side feelings of emotion, feelings of sympathy, feelings of revulsion, feelings of prejudice.”

http://www.hackneygazette.co.uk/news/cr ... -1-5157690


Oh yes? - well, that's what she said, but I for one believe that it was an attempt to instruct the exact opposite and to foster feelings of prejudice and revulsion and possibly a bit of sexism in what she doesn't say. She'll also be a motorist. Judges have more power that they'll admit - to me this is dreadful. But that's just me - my opinion - I'm a long way away, wasn't there - just as the judge wasn't there on the street when it happened.

Personally I'm not happy about the rider having no front brake - for both legal and practical reasons - but I've had several occasions when pedestrians have stepped out within inches of me. Luckily I've not hit anyone (yet - and fingers crossed).
Bonefishblues
Posts: 11010
Joined: 7 Jul 2014, 9:45pm
Location: Near Bicester Oxon

Re: Cyclist on trial for manslaughter

Post by Bonefishblues »

JohnW wrote:
thirdcrank wrote:Here's a bit more about the defence's closing speech eg

.......................
After summing up, Judge Wendy Joseph told the Old Bailey jury: “It’s hard to think of a case that’s more likely to rouse your emotions. A young man who was 18 at the time. A woman in her 40s with her life ahead of her.

“Put to one side feelings of emotion, feelings of sympathy, feelings of revulsion, feelings of prejudice.”

http://www.hackneygazette.co.uk/news/cr ... -1-5157690


Oh yes? - well, that's what she said, but I for one believe that it was an attempt to instruct the exact opposite and to foster feelings of prejudice and revulsion and possibly a bit of sexism in what she doesn't say. She'll also be a motorist. Judges have more power that they'll admit - to me this is dreadful. But that's just me - my opinion - I'm a long way away, wasn't there - just as the judge wasn't there on the street when it happened.

Personally I'm not happy about the rider having no front brake - for both legal and practical reasons - but I've had several occasions when pedestrians have stepped out within inches of me. Luckily I've not hit anyone (yet - and fingers crossed).

Why do you think this, and what would her motivation be?
User avatar
[XAP]Bob
Posts: 19793
Joined: 26 Sep 2008, 4:12pm

Re: Cyclist on trial for manslaughter

Post by [XAP]Bob »

feelings of prejudice


Erm - isn't half the point that we don't "feel" prejudice...
A shortcut has to be a challenge, otherwise it would just be the way. No situation is so dire that panic cannot make it worse.
There are two kinds of people in this world: those can extrapolate from incomplete data.
User avatar
The utility cyclist
Posts: 3607
Joined: 22 Aug 2016, 12:28pm
Location: The first garden city

Re: Cyclist on trial for manslaughter

Post by The utility cyclist »

She already has inbuilt prejudices against people on bicycles, this is a fact of life in the UK.

Do you think a 60 year old female (say a church go-er/cancer specialist highlighted to the jury) would be in the dock at all if she had run into someone at 10mph who had crossed her path, do you think the treatment this young man is getting would be the same and would the judge have said what she did when instructing the jury and how she did if it was an older female being accused, not a cat in hells chance.

How do you explain why they introduced death by careless driving (when they found jurors reluctant to convict for dangerous), why do so many motorists get off completely (Helen measures and Gail Purcell amongst many is a good example) or ridiculously lenient sentences handed out by judges (fines for killing someone despite faulty brakes/excess alcohol etc) but by comparison people on bicycles whom are in similar if not less aggravating circumstances are given jail time more often (as a %) than those in motorvehicles even if they (motorists) are indeed found guilty at all by the jury full of motorists that also have an inbuilt bias/ill feeling toward people on bikes?

The way she has worded what she said does exactly the opposite otherwise she had no need to say what she did how she did.
She specifically highlighted exactly what you wouldn't if you were instructing lawfully a jury to ignore emotions, by definition of what she said she made it an emotive subject to linger/be a reminder, it's abhorrent and borderline perverting the course of justice. :twisted:
Bonefishblues
Posts: 11010
Joined: 7 Jul 2014, 9:45pm
Location: Near Bicester Oxon

Re: Cyclist on trial for manslaughter

Post by Bonefishblues »

So instructing a Jury to consider only the law and the evidence and set aside all other matters and considerations borders on peverting the course of justice when done by a Judge.

There is therefore no hope :shock:
JohnW
Posts: 6667
Joined: 6 Jan 2007, 9:12pm
Location: Yorkshire

Re: Cyclist on trial for manslaughter

Post by JohnW »

Bonefishblues wrote:
JohnW wrote:
thirdcrank wrote:Here's a bit more about the defence's closing speech eg

.......................
http://www.hackneygazette.co.uk/news/cr ... -1-5157690


Oh yes? - well, that's what she said, but I for one believe that it was an attempt to instruct the exact opposite and to foster feelings of prejudice and revulsion and possibly a bit of sexism in what she doesn't say. She'll also be a motorist. Judges have more power that they'll admit - to me this is dreadful. But that's just me - my opinion - I'm a long way away, wasn't there - just as the judge wasn't there on the street when it happened.

Personally I'm not happy about the rider having no front brake - for both legal and practical reasons - but I've had several occasions when pedestrians have stepped out within inches of me. Luckily I've not hit anyone (yet - and fingers crossed).

Why do you think this, and what would her motivation be?


I think that the above post from 'The Utility Cyclist' sums it up very well indeed - but in answer to your question I'll pose a question - why would she give directions to the jury in those terms (which I personally interpret as very positive terminology indeed)? Why would she assume/believe that the jury had : "feelings of emotion, feelings of sympathy, feelings of revulsion, feelings of prejudice"? Why would she draw attention to ".......a 40 years old woman with her life in front of her.............."? for any reason but to generate sympathy for her?

My personal opinion, based on the report of what she said is that the judge was prejudiced and wished to take revenge upon the young lad. I've already said that riding a fixie with no brake at all would certainly not be my choice, nor my assessment of common sense - but to me the judge's rhetoric simply opens the door to the glorification of the massed ranks of the anti-cyclist brigades.
User avatar
The utility cyclist
Posts: 3607
Joined: 22 Aug 2016, 12:28pm
Location: The first garden city

Re: Cyclist on trial for manslaughter

Post by The utility cyclist »

Bonefishblues wrote:So instructing a Jury to consider only the law and the evidence and set aside all other matters and considerations borders on peverting the course of justice when done by a Judge.

There is therefore no hope :shock:

Just because you can't understand basic human psychology doesn't mean that others that do are beyond hope ...
JohnW
Posts: 6667
Joined: 6 Jan 2007, 9:12pm
Location: Yorkshire

Re: Cyclist on trial for manslaughter

Post by JohnW »

Bonefishblues wrote:So instructing a Jury to consider only the law and the evidence and set aside all other matters and considerations borders on peverting the course of justice when done by a Judge.

There is therefore no hope :shock:


In my personal opinion, this judges words, in this specific case, were unnecessary if she'd meant them literally. My personal view is such that human nature is such that they would generate an opposite inner response in the jury!

I think you're right - there is very little hope.

Of course, the converse view is that she could have detected prejudice, revulsion etc etc in the demeanour of the jury and been sincerely warning them against that - but in that case, why would she generate sympathy for the "..........40 years old woman (victim) with all her life in front of her............"?

Just as an aside - but if it had been a car that had hit her, would the motorist be sueing her for denting his wing whilst jaywalking?
thirdcrank
Posts: 36776
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: Cyclist on trial for manslaughter

Post by thirdcrank »

I see the jury has split the difference
Not guilty of manslaughter, guilty of furious cycling
User avatar
661-Pete
Posts: 10593
Joined: 22 Nov 2012, 8:45pm
Location: Sussex

Re: Cyclist on trial for manslaughter

Post by 661-Pete »

That seems the least-worst outcome, in my opinion. However, the 'wanton and furious driving' derives from an archaic law, I believe - maybe it needs updating.

Some comments taken from the BBC article:
Alliston was riding a fixie - a fixed-wheel bicycle with no front brake used by track racing cyclists...
is a misrepresentation. Most fixies do have a front brake. A fixie - provided it has a front brake - is not illegal. I don't like them myself - but that's no reason to criticise others for using them on the roads.
Mrs Briggs' family said they plan to campaign for tougher cycling laws to protect pedestrians.
Undertstandable, and this comment usually appears at the end of any court case involving a cyclist. But surely the laws are adequate as they stand?
Suppose that this room is a lift. The support breaks and down we go with ever-increasing velocity.
Let us pass the time by performing physical experiments...
--- Arthur Eddington (creator of the Eddington Number).
User avatar
bovlomov
Posts: 4202
Joined: 5 Apr 2007, 7:45am
Contact:

Re: Cyclist on trial for manslaughter

Post by bovlomov »

The Guardian has once again decided that Alliston's lack of helmet is a newsworthy feature of the case.
(EDIT: The BBC and MailOnline didn't)

Mrs Briggs' family said they plan to campaign for tougher cycling laws to protect pedestrians.

Campaigning for tougher motoring laws to protect pedestrians would be more useful.
Last edited by bovlomov on 23 Aug 2017, 5:01pm, edited 1 time in total.
Farrina
Posts: 118
Joined: 26 Nov 2012, 8:15pm

Cyclist on trial for manslaughter

Post by Farrina »

Martin Porter, the well know cycling QC, has commented on the case here.

He's not happy ... describing it as "the Alliston mis-trial"

http://thecyclingsilk.blogspot.co.uk/2017/08/the-alliston-mis-trial.html#links
Last edited by Farrina on 23 Aug 2017, 5:02pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
[XAP]Bob
Posts: 19793
Joined: 26 Sep 2008, 4:12pm

Re: Cyclist on trial for manslaughter

Post by [XAP]Bob »

thirdcrank wrote:I see the jury has split the difference
Not guilty of manslaughter, guilty of furious cycling


That seems more reasonable than I was expecting - although having just read Martin Porter's blog I may retract that later, there are a number of magistrates charges that could have been laid.

I'm shocked, shocked I tell you, that there is no universal call for pedestrian helmets.
A shortcut has to be a challenge, otherwise it would just be the way. No situation is so dire that panic cannot make it worse.
There are two kinds of people in this world: those can extrapolate from incomplete data.
User avatar
The utility cyclist
Posts: 3607
Joined: 22 Aug 2016, 12:28pm
Location: The first garden city

Re: Cyclist on trial for manslaughter

Post by The utility cyclist »

And the judge has stated "I have not seen one iota of remorse from Mr Alliston at all at any stage", that is also a lie is it not? There simply is no hope for a fair trail/sentence when you have clear and obvious prejudice in court not only by the jury which is innate but also by the judges themselves.
Sickening double standards/application of the law/accountability.

Yes, if only the deceased had being wearing a helmet this would be somewhat different but still he would have being in front of the beak even if she had survived being knocked into at 10mph :roll:

We (as people riding bikes) are absolutely stuffed! We now have further prejudice and a much much higher standard of accountability than any other group, god forbid if what happened to me and many others if those people had died when a collision was unavoidable despite braking, despite warnings and that the other person does something totally unpredictable.

If you don't come to a complete halt and have brakes that can stop you on a tuppenny bit and have reactions greater than a foruma one driver/100m sprinter when in the presence of any pedestrians within 30metres of you than you are screwed (by the system/new level of accountability) if there is a collision.
User avatar
661-Pete
Posts: 10593
Joined: 22 Nov 2012, 8:45pm
Location: Sussex

Re: Cyclist on trial for manslaughter

Post by 661-Pete »

'Pedestrian helmets' may be a bit far-fetched, but why not a specific law against jaywalking? Laws like this are in force in other countries (e.g. USA), so why not here?

I don't know what the statistics are for cyclist-pedestrian collisions in the road (as opposed to pavement or cycle path), in countries in which anti-jaywalking laws exist. Perhaps someone can fill us in.

I recall now a near-miss incident which I witnessed when I was a small child. Not involving a cyclist. I and a number of schoolfriends were walking home from school. There was at least one adult (not my parent - don't remember if it was another parent or a teacher) walking with us. Suddenly one of the children spotted a friend of hers across the road. She dashed into the road without looking, completely forgetting her 'kerb drill', straight into the path of an oncoming car. The accompanying adult managed to grab her and pull her back, whilst the car driver did an emergency stop. No harm done: just a near miss.

Or so one would have thought.

Next morning, at assembly, the head teacher had that unfortunate little girl stand before the whole school while she admonished her in no uncertain terms, at the same time warning all the rest of us how dangerous the roads were. She told the girl (who was in tears by this time) how thoroughly ashamed of herself she should be, how lucky she was that the taxi driver had such good brakes (I remember her re-iterating this point - that the car in question was a taxi - as if taxi drivers were somehow better than 'ordinary' drivers...). All this went on for quite some time.

This all happened in the mid 1950s when I was at primary school. What would have been the outcome today? Are children of today being indoctrinated thus?
Suppose that this room is a lift. The support breaks and down we go with ever-increasing velocity.
Let us pass the time by performing physical experiments...
--- Arthur Eddington (creator of the Eddington Number).
Post Reply