Driver "didn't see" cyclist crossing road before "completely avoidable" fatal collision

quiff wrote:

As I've said before, I completely understand the weary cynicism, but...

dodpeters wrote:

Just didn’t see is simply the socially acceptable version of didn’t bother looking

It's clearly not socially acceptable - a collision investigation report concluded she had failed to look adequately before pulling out of the junction; she was charged with causing death by careless or inconsiderate driving; and she received a sentence. You may not think the sentence is appropriate, but being convicted is usually a good indicator that your actions were not considered socially acceptable.  

Maybe not socially acceptable, but acceptable in the "justice" system?
When this new driver killed people on the other side of a blind bend the coroner deemed it totally unavoidable as the driver couldn't possibly have seen the people and apparently being on drugs and everything was all totally fine and normal.
I wonder if any of this has anything to do with the killer driver's parents being coppers?
https://www.getreading.co.uk/news/reading-berkshire-news/teenager-who-ki...

ChrisB200SX wrote:

Maybe not socially acceptable, but acceptable in the "justice" system?

When this new driver killed people on the other side of a blind bend the coroner deemed it totally unavoidable as the driver couldn't possibly have seen the people and apparently being on drugs and everything was all totally fine and normal.
I wonder if any of this has anything to do with the killer driver's parents being coppers?
https://www.getreading.co.uk/news/reading-berkshire-news/teenager-who-ki...

"you don't slow down for the possibility of someone being on the other side of a blind corner".

Well, that's exactly what you do. If I didn't adopt this approach, I would have had many collisions by now.

ChrisB200SX wrote:

quiff wrote:

As I've said before, I completely understand the weary cynicism, but...

dodpeters wrote:

Just didn’t see is simply the socially acceptable version of didn’t bother looking

It's clearly not socially acceptable - a collision investigation report concluded she had failed to look adequately before pulling out of the junction; she was charged with causing death by careless or inconsiderate driving; and she received a sentence. You may not think the sentence is appropriate, but being convicted is usually a good indicator that your actions were not considered socially acceptable.  

Maybe not socially acceptable, but acceptable in the "justice" system?
When this new driver killed people on the other side of a blind bend the coroner deemed it totally unavoidable as the driver couldn't possibly have seen the people and apparently being on drugs and everything was all totally fine and normal.
I wonder if any of this has anything to do with the killer driver's parents being coppers?
https://www.getreading.co.uk/news/reading-berkshire-news/teenager-who-ki...

So having just passed his test, he's driving a powerful car (the least powerful A5 has 158BHP), at midnight, nearly double the permitted drug level, with traces of opiate codeine in his system and basically they say the accident was unavoidable! Totally avoidable, but hey his parents WERE both coppers so he must be a good egg.

Apparently, he was using the Audi lent to him by his dad, so its going to be a lot more than 158BHP, as his BMW was being repaired following another accident. So he's had two accidents in two months and he thinks he's a good enough driver to smoke cannabis and still handle a high power car.

He also agreed with his dad to be home by midnight, considering that the crash happened at midnight, I'm guessing he was flooring it in order not to be bollocked by his dad (and possibly lose use of the car). But for some reason, they could not determine the speed of his car at the time of the accident. Normally skid marks etc are a good indicator, so I'm guessing he didn't brake hard.

I've always said, if you want to kill with impunity these days, use a car.

quiff wrote:

As I've said before, I completely understand the weary cynicism, but...

dodpeters wrote:

Just didn’t see is simply the socially acceptable version of didn’t bother looking

It's clearly not socially acceptable - a collision investigation report concluded she had failed to look adequately before pulling out of the junction; she was charged with causing death by careless or inconsiderate driving; and she received a sentence. You may not think the sentence is appropriate, but being convicted is usually a good indicator that your actions were not considered socially acceptable.  

I think sociablly acceptable is a fair shout. The UK public is willing to put up with 1800 deaths or so a year in exchange for car usage.

quiff wrote:

As I've said before, I completely understand the weary cynicism, but...

dodpeters wrote:

Just didn’t see is simply the socially acceptable version of didn’t bother looking

It's clearly not socially acceptable - a collision investigation report concluded she had failed to look adequately before pulling out of the junction; she was charged with causing death by careless or inconsiderate driving; and she received a sentence. You may not think the sentence is appropriate, but being convicted is usually a good indicator that your actions were not considered socially acceptable.  

The charge isn't correct, by definition it's dangerous driving at the very least, manslaughter should be closer the mark given the standard applied to people on bikes for less worse behaviour.

CPS/government have turned the whole killing/maiming of human beings into a sick joke that makes light of that, it IS socially acceptable because it barely gets a murmour when a motorist kills another human being on our streets, even less so when it's a person on a bike. That's IF the case even gets to court, police as shown by the non prosecution of Gail Purcell and many before her show us that absolving motorists of their crimes is the done thing by the very people who are there to uphold the laws of the land, you don't get more 'socially acceptable' than that do you!

It's also factually correct that it's become socially acceptable to the masses to state 'they deserve it' (death or injury). Only last week did I hear exactly that from a PCSO who was a former driving instructor who was sat in my van going around to see our clients. i found his words abhorrent but sadly not out the ordinary.

dobbo996 wrote:

Just yesterday morning, about 10am, I was crossing a road on a zebra crossing on foot. There were no cars coming so off I went. I was about halfway across when I saw a car approaching. I stopped walking because it was obvious the driver hadn't seen me, as he was staring fixedly ahead. No eye contact. No turn of the head. As I stepped back, the car passed just ahead of me. The driver's window was open so I shouted, very loudly, "Oi!", right next to his lughole. His reaction was priceless. He jumped out of his skin. He had no idea I was there. This is a roundabout in a town centre with a zebra crossings on each of the four exit roads. Visibility is good. These crossings are  always busy with people so drivers know they should be paying attention. I'm sure, had he hit and killed me, the incident would have been labelled as an 'accident' and the driver would have gotten away with very light tap on the wrist. "Be more careful next time, okay? Now off you go".

Killing with a car is so normal, so everyday, so ordinary, so...dull, it hardly raises a ripple of concern or interest. Just 'one of those things', apparently. 

A couple of years back, I was heading to a BMX training sessionin the local park  with my eldest. He pressed the button and we waited at the pedestrian crossing for the green man. When the lights changed we were just about to cross when a Mercedes 4x4 drove through the red light, its driver utterly unaware. I had just enough time to grab my son's collar as he began moving forward. It wasn't the best way to stop him. but at least he didn't go under the wheels of the Mercedes, which sailed on, its driver utterly unaware that he'd come very close to causing (at the very least) serious injury.

Yep, he was on his phone.

dodpeters wrote:

Just didn’t see is simply the socially acceptable version of didn’t bother looking

if she simply can’t see she simply shouldn’t be allowed to drive.

I simply can’t see why anyone who has been responsible for someone else’s death in this sort of way is allowed to keep their licence. Would someone who shot somebody else that they simply couldn’t see be allowed to keep their gun licence?

dodpeters wrote:

Just didn’t see is simply the socially acceptable version of didn’t bother looking

Looking at google maps, it looks like Sun Street is just a car park precinct rather than a "proper" road.  Perfect visibility along a straight road.

I admit to some surprise that she "just didn't see", but then wasn't that what Gail Purcell, the driver who ran into the back of Mick Mason, also said? (although didn't GP add that she'd thought that there might have been a sack of potatoes falling from the sky...)