Cps v Highways England |
Helping the motorist get justice 
Helping the motorist get justice
Cps v Highways England |
 Thu, 11 Feb 2021 - 21:50
Post
#1
|
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 23,121 Joined: 3 Dec 2010 Member No.: 42,618  |
Would love to see them prosecute this, unlikely I know but we can hope
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south...kshire-56030027 -------------------- I am not on the "motorists's side", nor am I on the "police/CPS/council's" side, I am simply in favour of the rule of law.
Section 6 of the Interpretation Act 1978 applies to everything I post as it would apply to an Act of Parliament. No, I am not a lawyer. I do not charge any fees, please stop asking me what my fees are. |
 |
 
|
 |
| Advertisement |
Thu, 11 Feb 2021 - 21:50
Post
#
|
 Advertise here! |
|
|
|
|
|
Thu, 11 Feb 2021 - 22:47
Post
#2
|
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 4,524 Joined: 5 Jan 2007 From: England Member No.: 9,919 |
Yes so would i.
|
|
|
|
|
Tue, 23 Feb 2021 - 17:04
Post
#3
|
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 635 Joined: 17 Nov 2015 Member No.: 80,686 |
I'd love to see HE disbanded and replaced with a competent organisation..................sadly it'll never happen and even if it did the ridiculous TUPE laws means it'd only mean rearranging the deckchairs on the Titanic.
On the specific case though, did the victim move behind the barriers and the car somersaulted the barriers to collide with her? If she stood on the carriageway there potentially contributory negligence at play with HE will use? |
|
|
|
|
Tue, 23 Feb 2021 - 17:49
Post
#4
|
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 23,121 Joined: 3 Dec 2010 Member No.: 42,618 |
QUOTE (TMC Towcester @ Tue, 23 Feb 2021 - 17:04)  I'd love to see HE disbanded and replaced with a competent organisation..................sadly it'll never happen and even if it did the ridiculous TUPE laws means it'd only mean rearranging the deckchairs on the Titanic. On the specific case though, did the victim move behind the barriers and the car somersaulted the barriers to collide with her? If she stood on the carriageway there potentially contributory negligence at play with HE will use? I don't think contributory negligence is relevant to a criminal case? -------------------- I am not on the "motorists's side", nor am I on the "police/CPS/council's" side, I am simply in favour of the rule of law.
Section 6 of the Interpretation Act 1978 applies to everything I post as it would apply to an Act of Parliament. No, I am not a lawyer. I do not charge any fees, please stop asking me what my fees are. |
|
|
|
|
Wed, 24 Feb 2021 - 23:51
Post
#5
|
|
 Member Group: Members Posts: 2,031 Joined: 4 Mar 2017 Member No.: 90,659 |
Seeing as the main arguments seem to be
1. Smart motorways are unsafe. 2. Busy roads without hard shoulders are unsafe. are both pointless arguments it seems unlikely to go anywhere. Adjusted for traffic volume smart motorways are safer than normal motorways. And there are thousands of HE-managed trunk roads without hard shoulders. -------------------- Scores on doors
Me 1 - 0 Avon & Somerset Me 1 - 1 Thames Valley Me 1 - 0 Oxford University Hospitals/Trethowans (parking) |
|
|
|
|
Thu, 25 Feb 2021 - 07:53
Post
#6
|
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 4,524 Joined: 5 Jan 2007 From: England Member No.: 9,919 |
QUOTE (notmeatloaf @ Wed, 24 Feb 2021 - 23:51) Seeing as the main arguments seem to be 1. Smart motorways are unsafe. 2. Busy roads without hard shoulders are unsafe. are both pointless arguments it seems unlikely to go anywhere. Adjusted for traffic volume smart motorways are safer than normal motorways. And there are thousands of HE-managed trunk roads without hard shoulders. Speaking as someone who knows a person killed (one of 3) while broken down on a motoway in a "red X" lane. They woukd not have died if they'd been on a hard shoulder. I would say youre talking bo!!ox |
|
|
|
|
Thu, 25 Feb 2021 - 11:41
Post
#7
|
|
 Member Group: Members Posts: 47,291 Joined: 9 Sep 2003 From: Warwickshire Member No.: 317 |
QUOTE (notmeatloaf @ Wed, 24 Feb 2021 - 23:51) Seeing as the main arguments seem to be 1. Smart motorways are unsafe. 2. Busy roads without hard shoulders are unsafe. are both pointless arguments it seems unlikely to go anywhere. Adjusted for traffic volume smart motorways are safer than normal motorways. And there are thousands of HE-managed trunk roads without hard shoulders. I thought the point the coroner was making was the lack of monitoring and prompt lane closure when the car broke down. A road with fast moving traffic and no 'escape lane' makes that much more critical. -------------------- 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 10-0 PPC's |
|
|
|
|
Thu, 25 Feb 2021 - 21:50
Post
#8
|
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 4,524 Joined: 5 Jan 2007 From: England Member No.: 9,919 |
QUOTE (The Rookie @ Thu, 25 Feb 2021 - 11:41) QUOTE (notmeatloaf @ Wed, 24 Feb 2021 - 23:51) Seeing as the main arguments seem to be 1. Smart motorways are unsafe. 2. Busy roads without hard shoulders are unsafe. are both pointless arguments it seems unlikely to go anywhere. Adjusted for traffic volume smart motorways are safer than normal motorways. And there are thousands of HE-managed trunk roads without hard shoulders. I thought the point the coroner was making was the lack of monitoring and prompt lane closure when the car broke down. A road with fast moving traffic and no 'escape lane' makes that much more critical. One of the cases put forward where people died there was a delay of some 17 minutes between stopping and the warnings being displayed which was after the poor people had been hit! Breaking down is one problem but when theres a serious accident on an all lanes running motorway it takes just minutes for the traffic to back up and block access by emergency services. No amount of laybys, cameras, radar or anything else will rectify that. The claim of possible corporate manslaughter should stand agaist those who not only promoted the smart idea but lied to ministers about their safety and what they were going to build. This post has been edited by mickR: Fri, 26 Feb 2021 - 00:01 |
|
|
|
|
Fri, 26 Feb 2021 - 08:42
Post
#9
|
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 47,291 Joined: 9 Sep 2003 From: Warwickshire Member No.: 317 |
And the backlash..... "MPs investigate ditching smart motorways"
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-56198979 This post has been edited by The Rookie: Fri, 26 Feb 2021 - 08:43 -------------------- 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 10-0 PPC's |
|
|
|
|
Fri, 26 Feb 2021 - 16:33
Post
#10
|
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 23,121 Joined: 3 Dec 2010 Member No.: 42,618 |
Well let's be honest, the issue isn't smart motorways per-se, rather it's motorways without a hard shoulder. Smart motorways with a hard shoulder would likely be the safest setup.
-------------------- I am not on the "motorists's side", nor am I on the "police/CPS/council's" side, I am simply in favour of the rule of law.
Section 6 of the Interpretation Act 1978 applies to everything I post as it would apply to an Act of Parliament. No, I am not a lawyer. I do not charge any fees, please stop asking me what my fees are. |
|
|
|
|
Fri, 26 Feb 2021 - 18:22
Post
#11
|
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 4,524 Joined: 5 Jan 2007 From: England Member No.: 9,919 |
QUOTE (cp8759 @ Fri, 26 Feb 2021 - 16:33) Well let's be honest, the issue isn't smart motorways per-se, rather it's motorways without a hard shoulder. Smart motorways with a hard shoulder would likely be the safest setup. I have to agree |
|
|
|
|
Mon, 1 Mar 2021 - 09:10
Post
#12
|
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 47,291 Joined: 9 Sep 2003 From: Warwickshire Member No.: 317 |
QUOTE (cp8759 @ Fri, 26 Feb 2021 - 16:33) Well let's be honest, the issue isn't smart motorways per-se, rather it's motorways without a hard shoulder. Smart motorways with a hard shoulder would likely be the safest setup. When smart motorways first came in, the hard shoulder was only used as a running lane when speeds were reduced and we didn't see the issues we have now, I think that was viable, the current situation not. -------------------- 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 10-0 PPC's |
|
|
|
|
Mon, 1 Mar 2021 - 17:57
Post
#13
|
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 1,276 Joined: 28 Mar 2014 From: Corby Member No.: 69,758 |
QUOTE (The Rookie @ Mon, 1 Mar 2021 - 09:10) QUOTE (cp8759 @ Fri, 26 Feb 2021 - 16:33) Well let's be honest, the issue isn't smart motorways per-se, rather it's motorways without a hard shoulder. Smart motorways with a hard shoulder would likely be the safest setup. When smart motorways first came in, the hard shoulder was only used as a running lane when speeds were reduced and we didn't see the issues we have now, I think that was viable, the current situation not. What's the difference between a D3 section of the A14 vs a D4 (not D4M) section of a motorway? Don't get it. Does a blue sign make a road so much more dangerous? |
|
|
|
|
Mon, 1 Mar 2021 - 23:10
Post
#14
|
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 23,121 Joined: 3 Dec 2010 Member No.: 42,618 |
QUOTE (typefish @ Mon, 1 Mar 2021 - 17:57) Don't get it. Does a blue sign make a road so much more dangerous? Well motorways have higher speed limits for some vehicles, so yes. -------------------- I am not on the "motorists's side", nor am I on the "police/CPS/council's" side, I am simply in favour of the rule of law.
Section 6 of the Interpretation Act 1978 applies to everything I post as it would apply to an Act of Parliament. No, I am not a lawyer. I do not charge any fees, please stop asking me what my fees are. |
|
|
|
 |
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: Thursday, 4th March 2021 - 05:56 |
