Arrogant cyclist slaughters innocent mother

Status
Not open for further replies.


monkeytassle said:
Depends on how the sentencing from a law passed in 1861 is construed 150 years later.
Click to expand...
Wanton and Furious Driving
The offence of wanton and furious driving under section 35 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861 is committed when bodily harm (i.e. injury) is caused to any person as a result of the manner of driving of a suspect and is not limited to motor vehicles but covers any kind of vehicle or carriage including bicycles.

It is an offence triable only on indictment (except when committed by a youth).

The offence carries a maximum penalty of 2 years' imprisonment and/or an unlimited fine. Penalty points and discretionary disqualification can be imposed by the courts under section 28 of the Road Safety Act 2006.

The offence can only be committed if the driver has a degree of subjective recklessness so far as the foreseeabilty of causing injury is concerned. In other words, he or she must appreciate that harm was possible or probable as a result of the manner of driving: see R v Okosi [1996] CLR 666.
 
pavarotti1980 said:
Wanton and Furious Driving
The offence of wanton and furious driving under section 35 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861 is committed when bodily harm (i.e. injury) is caused to any person as a result of the manner of driving of a suspect and is not limited to motor vehicles but covers any kind of vehicle or carriage including bicycles.

It is an offence triable only on indictment (except when committed by a youth).

The offence carries a maximum penalty of 2 years' imprisonment and/or an unlimited fine. Penalty points and discretionary disqualification can be imposed by the courts under section 28 of the Road Safety Act 2006.

The offence can only be committed if the driver has a degree of subjective recklessness so far as the foreseeabilty of causing injury is concerned. In other words, he or she must appreciate that harm was possible or probable as a result of the manner of driving: see R v Okosi [1996] CLR 666.
Click to expand...
There's your answer to bird then. I hadn't realised there was a recent update.
 
safccfas said:
Is he a monumental cock? Yes.
Was he at fault for her death? No.
Was she at fault for her own death? Yes.

As harsh as it sounds she should have looked before she stepped out.
Click to expand...

He shouted at her twice to get out of the way but failed to stop or avoid collision, aye she should have been more aware and looked but it sounds like he could have prevented the collision
 
U22 said:
He shouted at her twice to get out of the way but failed to stop or avoid collision, aye she should have been more aware and looked but it sounds like he could have prevented the collision
Click to expand...
She could have as well. She suffered the ultimate price for her fault. Doesn't mean he should. Right decision imo
 
U22 said:
He shouted at her twice to get out of the way but failed to stop or avoid collision, aye she should have been more aware and looked but it sounds like he could have prevented the collision
Click to expand...

I'm not 100 percent on this but I'm fairly sure it's not the road users responsibility to avoid a collision with a pedestrian on a road.

Like I said earlier. He is a bell end but it was her fault imo
 
cruze said:
She could have as well. She suffered the ultimate price for her fault. Doesn't mean he should. Right decision imo
Click to expand...

Agree she could of , however she didn't see him or else she would have but he could see her.

safccfas said:
I'm not 100 percent on this but I'm fairly sure it's not the road users responsibility to avoid a collision with a pedestrian on a road.

Like I said earlier. He is a bell end but it was her fault imo
Click to expand...

Not sure on this myself, it all depends on for me, could he have avoided the collision? If he could, then he should be charged with manslaughter. Again, she is certainly not blameless.
 
Not sure, manslaughter seemed harsh.

If someone stepped out in front of a car while pissing about on a phone and it turned out you knew your breaks were fucked you'd end up in the dock though.
 
They were both negligent in their actions. Had she been cycling on the phone with brakes in working order and he'd died having stepped out onto the road without consideration would she be facing manslaughter?

Would it have gone to court had she had not sustantained injuries and died?

Would he have faced those charges and are they the result of not being able to charge manslaughter
 
pavarotti1980 said:
Wanton and Furious Driving
The offence of wanton and furious driving under section 35 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861 is committed when bodily harm (i.e. injury) is caused to any person as a result of the manner of driving of a suspect and is not limited to motor vehicles but covers any kind of vehicle or carriage including bicycles.

It is an offence triable only on indictment (except when committed by a youth).

The offence carries a maximum penalty of 2 years' imprisonment and/or an unlimited fine. Penalty points and discretionary disqualification can be imposed by the courts under section 28 of the Road Safety Act 2006.

The offence can only be committed if the driver has a degree of subjective recklessness so far as the foreseeabilty of causing injury is concerned. In other words, he or she must appreciate that harm was possible or probable as a result of the manner of driving: see R v Okosi [1996] CLR 666.
Click to expand...
 
Wonder if someone rips that stupid piercing below his eye out when he goes to prison?
 
safccfas said:
Is he a monumental cock? Yes.
Was he at fault for her death? No.
Was she at fault for her own death? Yes.

As harsh as it sounds she should have looked before she stepped out.
Click to expand...
He was riding an illegal bike without adequate brakes and riding it at high speed. Had he been riding a normal bike at a more normal speed he could have slowed enough to possibly not kill her. He's at fault.
 
John Steed said:
He was riding an illegal bike without adequate brakes and riding it at high speed. Had he been riding a normal bike at a more normal speed he could have slowed enough to possibly not kill her. He's at fault.
Click to expand...

High speed? 18mph? :confused:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top