I don't understand this

Commuting, Day rides, Audax, Incidents, etc.

User avatar
meic
Posts: 19355
Joined: 1 Feb 2007, 9:37pm
Location: Caerfyrddin (Carmarthen)

Re: I don't understand this

Postby meic » 22 Nov 2013, 8:02pm

Well she couldnt see him, her view was obscured, not her fault.
Even if it was because she put her hand over her eyes. :roll:
Yma o Hyd

User avatar
661-Pete
Posts: 9811
Joined: 22 Nov 2012, 8:45pm
Location: Sussex

Re: I don't understand this

Postby 661-Pete » 22 Nov 2013, 8:10pm

Most cars have sun flaps, don't they?
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
gaz
Posts: 14113
Joined: 9 Mar 2007, 12:09pm
Location: Kent, lorry park of England

Re: I don't understand this

Postby gaz » 22 Nov 2013, 8:18pm

I wouldn't have expected any different an outcome from our legal system. I can't understand it either. :(
Missing, presumed fed.

Vorpal
Moderator
Posts: 18496
Joined: 19 Jan 2009, 3:34pm
Location: Not there ;)

Re: I don't understand this

Postby Vorpal » 22 Nov 2013, 8:41pm

So sad. RIP Mr. Blore.
“In some ways, it is easier to be a dissident, for then one is without responsibility.”
― Nelson Mandela, Long Walk to Freedom

User avatar
NATURAL ANKLING
Posts: 12354
Joined: 24 Oct 2012, 10:43pm
Location: English Riviera

Re: I don't understand this

Postby NATURAL ANKLING » 23 Nov 2013, 1:11am

Hi,
Well I will remember that line when I crash in the mist, my headlights were dazzaling me :?
Sad ............
NA Thinks Just End 2 End Return + Bivvy
You'll Still Find Me At The Top Of A Hill
Please forgive the poor Grammar I blame it on my mobile and phat thinkers.

User avatar
ArMoRothair
Posts: 351
Joined: 20 Jun 2013, 10:55am
Location: Londinium

Re: I don't understand this

Postby ArMoRothair » 23 Nov 2013, 3:22pm

The report in the Daily Wail is at pains to point out he wasn't wearing a helmet; obviously all his fault then.

Postboxer
Posts: 1713
Joined: 24 Jul 2013, 5:19pm

Re: I don't understand this

Postby Postboxer » 23 Nov 2013, 6:36pm

The photo shows a very straight road, if that is actually the correct location, either the sun was in her face the whole time, so she should have been going slower, or it was sometimes in her face and sometimes not, in which case she should have noticed the cyclist ahead on the straight road. Seems to be pretty inexcusable.

flat tyre
Posts: 534
Joined: 18 Jul 2008, 1:01pm

Re: I don't understand this

Postby flat tyre » 23 Nov 2013, 8:37pm

I really don't understand the findings either. Surely, if you can't see where you're going you are supposed to slow down or even stop.

User avatar
NATURAL ANKLING
Posts: 12354
Joined: 24 Oct 2012, 10:43pm
Location: English Riviera

Re: I don't understand this

Postby NATURAL ANKLING » 23 Nov 2013, 8:54pm

Hi,
flat tyre wrote:I really don't understand the findings either. Surely, if you can't see where you're going you are supposed to slow down or even stop.

You would think so would'nt you :!:

I must be loosing my marbles :twisted: If you said that, what would the defence reply be :?: .............Oh no charges so nothing to answer.....job done :D ....................
NA Thinks Just End 2 End Return + Bivvy
You'll Still Find Me At The Top Of A Hill
Please forgive the poor Grammar I blame it on my mobile and phat thinkers.

thirdcrank
Posts: 30113
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: I don't understand this

Postby thirdcrank » 23 Nov 2013, 10:18pm

I'm hardly up-to-date over cautioning policy, but two things have always been required ie there must be sufficient evidence to prove the offence,and the suspect must freely admit it. As I used to explain to people to whom I was administering a formal caution, it's an official form of disposal of a case as an alternative to prosecution, when it's felt that a prosecution is unnecessary or inappropriate.

Obviously, there are various reasons for administering a caution but when there's been a death, anything to do with the minor nature of the case must surely be ruled out. That only leaves things peculiar to the suspect. Plucking an example from fresh air, I think if somebody were to be terminally ill with cancer, a prosecution might be inappropriate.

I've known the CPS to take what I can only describe as a flexible approach to the cautioning policy requirements, but in a case such as this, if they thought that a jury would be unlikely to convict, then I should have thought that "no action" on the grounds of insufficient evidence would be the correct - but regrettable - course.

In short, I don't really understand it either.

I presume that either, the reason for the caution was not disclosed to the inquest, which seems unlikely because I'd have expected at least some report of protests from next-of-kin etc., or else there's been some sort of gagging order. I see that the linked report in the DM says they are not accepting comments for legal reasons.

User avatar
jonbott
Posts: 246
Joined: 7 Feb 2008, 12:42pm
Location: cornwall home of the hills!

Re: I don't understand this

Postby jonbott » 24 Nov 2013, 7:42pm

very sad incident :(
I`m def too old for this!

reohn2
Posts: 40180
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: I don't understand this

Postby reohn2 » 24 Nov 2013, 8:55pm

Thread title:- I don't understand this
Nor me
-----------------------------------------------------------

iviehoff
Posts: 2411
Joined: 20 Jan 2009, 4:38pm

Re: I don't understand this

Postby iviehoff » 25 Nov 2013, 11:36am

There is precedent from an earlier case where a driver was dazzled by low sun and drove over a cyclist, and it went to full trial and the driver being acquitted. So in view of that, I think the police are limited in what they can do in this situation until someone rewrites the law.

Police cautioned Ms Jones, but brought no charges.

A caution means that the accused accepts they are guilty of an offence, but no sentence is applied. This goes onto your criminal record. It is not clear for what offense they were cautioned, it ought to be causing death by careless driving. Given that CDbCD doesn't usually merit a custodial sentence, maybe the police felt it was better to get a caution accepted rather than proceed with a case where there was a risk of an acquittal. But being the Daily Mail, it is possible that they used the word "caution" to mean "the policeman told him not to do it again".