PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

"wanton or furious driving",
freddy1
post Thu, 17 Aug 2017 - 18:06
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 3,714
Joined: 4 Jan 2007
Member No.: 9,897



nice to see laws dating back to 1861 being used

guy on a "racing" push bike mows a woman down , bike has not or never was fitted with a front brake , , in court "He told the court he had had no idea there was a legal requirement for his bike to have a front brake."

sigh ,

The court heard that Brunelle is a stunt cyclist who makes videos in which he rides around cities including London "doing dangerous stuff" such as weaving in and out of traffic.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-40960346
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
3 Pages V  < 1 2 3  
Start new topic
Replies (40 - 45)
Advertisement
post Thu, 17 Aug 2017 - 18:06
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
Fredd
post Thu, 21 Sep 2017 - 07:37
Post #41


Webmaster
Group Icon

Group: Root Admin
Posts: 6,846
Joined: 30 Mar 2003
From: Wokingham, UK
Member No.: 2



QUOTE (Richy320 @ Thu, 21 Sep 2017 - 08:00) *
An alternative view from a QC

Convincingly argued by a QC as you'd expect, albeit one who self-describes as:
QUOTE
Martin Porter QC is a personal injury lawyer and cycling advocate. This is an edited version of a post from his blog, The Cycling Lawyer.

...and already linked to in post #30.

QUOTE (Richy320 @ Thu, 21 Sep 2017 - 08:00) *
It was a witch hunt against a cyclist for a minor infraction that had had tragic consequences.

There are plenty who disagree with every part of that, except for it having tragic consequences.


--------------------
Regards,
Fredd

__________________________________________________________________________
Pepipoo relies on you
to keep this site running!
Donate to Pepipoo now using your
Visa, Mastercard, debit card or PayPal account
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
The Rookie
post Thu, 21 Sep 2017 - 10:24
Post #42


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 37,590
Joined: 9 Sep 2003
From: Warwickshire
Member No.: 317



And the Secret Barristers viewpoint https://thesecretbarrister.com/2017/09/20/s...h-on-the-roads/ (admittedly based of Porter's reveiw)


--------------------
There is no such thing as a law abiding motorist, just those who have been scammed and those yet to be scammed!

S172's
Rookies 1-0 Kent

Council PCN's
Rookies 1-0 Warwick
Rookies 1-0 Birmingham

PPC PCN's
Rookies 8-0 PPC's
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DancingDad
post Thu, 21 Sep 2017 - 11:35
Post #43


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 17,903
Joined: 28 Jun 2010
From: Area 51
Member No.: 38,559



QUOTE (Richy320 @ Thu, 21 Sep 2017 - 08:00) *
An alternative view from a QC

Alliston prosecution

It was a witch hunt against a cyclist for a minor infraction that had had tragic consequences.


QUOTE
Motorist would not have landed cyclist's 'wanton and furious driving' charge


I've read it through and while I can understand the arguments put forward, maybe even agree with some, I fail on the headline above.

Absolutely correct, a motorist would not have been charged with wanton and furious.
Because other charges are available is the simplistic but taking the implication that a motorist would not have been charged....

If a pedestrian had died as a result of a collision with a car and it turned out that the brakes had been disabled/removed/tampered with/not working properly, the motorist would have had the book thrown at them.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
PASTMYBEST
post Thu, 21 Sep 2017 - 11:39
Post #44


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 11,243
Joined: 6 Nov 2014
Member No.: 74,048



QUOTE (The Rookie @ Thu, 21 Sep 2017 - 11:24) *
And the Secret Barristers viewpoint https://thesecretbarrister.com/2017/09/20/s...h-on-the-roads/ (admittedly based of Porter's reveiw)



That was a good read.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ford poplar
post Thu, 21 Sep 2017 - 11:44
Post #45


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 3,627
Joined: 20 Dec 2008
Member No.: 24,962



HMG are considering new Laws for cyclists.
Whilst a pedal cycle is not an MV it is classified as a 'carriage'. Also there has been an increase in 'battery-assisted' bikes so speeds can often exceed 10mph.
So what new Laws should be applicable to cyclists?
Bike must be 'roadworthy' (MOT)?
Causing death of another road user?
Inconsiderate driving/riding?
Compulsory Insurance?
Cycling Prof Test for any cyclist >10 yo
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
The Rookie
post Thu, 21 Sep 2017 - 14:45
Post #46


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 37,590
Joined: 9 Sep 2003
From: Warwickshire
Member No.: 317



QUOTE (ford poplar @ Thu, 21 Sep 2017 - 12:44) *
Whilst a pedal cycle is not an MV it is classified as a 'carriage'. Also there has been an increase in 'battery-assisted' bikes so speeds can often exceed 10mph.

E-bikes are limited to 25kph, I can comfortably exceed that as an average speed without a battery and motor, so no change there then really!

I'm wondering if similar offences will be created for pedestrians who injure other road users by steeping off the kerb without looking?


--------------------
There is no such thing as a law abiding motorist, just those who have been scammed and those yet to be scammed!

S172's
Rookies 1-0 Kent

Council PCN's
Rookies 1-0 Warwick
Rookies 1-0 Birmingham

PPC PCN's
Rookies 8-0 PPC's
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

3 Pages V  < 1 2 3
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



Advertisement

Advertise here!

RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: Friday, 23rd February 2018 - 14:48
Pepipoo uses cookies. You can find details of the cookies we use here along with links to information on how to manage them.
Please click the button to accept our cookies and hide this message. We’ll also assume that you’re happy to accept them if you continue to use the site.