fastpedaller wrote: 5 Aug 2025, 10:59am
Absolutely tragic. Cases such as these highlight the failure of a jury system where 'mass acceptance' and 'normalisation' of an action or process affect the outcome.
He was clearly distracted by using the phone - the evidence is there, and a judge (without a car-centric, phone using, biased jury) would convict on the evidence.
The use of mobile phones has become an addiction for many. The technology exists to block the driver of a vehicle from using the phone whilst driving, but the huge telecoms companies would never allow it to happen.
I can't believe the victim-blamers' comments that cyclists shouldn't be 'racing on the road' - failing to understand that even in their tin box they could be the next victim of a phone-watching idiot.
Im flabbergasted by the juries decision, but as you say I suppose I shouldnt be, I see the evidence out on the roads on a fairly frequent basis that mobile phone use is just endemic among some drivers and accepted as much as changing the radio station, even though it too of course would fall under dangerous driving as an avoidable distraction if you killed someone in the process.
but yeah just how ? how did the jury fail to understand the law which I thought was pretty clear theres no acceptable use of a mobile phone whilst driving part.
though clearly if selected from the likes of the victim blamers, they dont understand someone driving a vehicle at 60mph that isnt paying attention, theyre driving straight into the back of you whether you are a cyclist, or a car driver and crashes at those speeds can just be as fatal or life changing for the people in the car and others who get collected up in it.
