Court hears how cyclist killed as driver searched for sat-nav

As it was pointed out in an earlier news item, it's a certain type of person who will own and drive a BMW, oddly it's a 47 year old man driving a BMW that has caused some controversy in an earlier thread. He or she will have an office or a sales type career, possibly spending hours on the road. I noted that "the motorist was on his way home from a meeting", so suggesting he has this very type of job. Lets assume he was late, forgetting where he was headed as he raced, not to miss his client. BMW's are suitcase shaped to match the cases carried by their drivers, Shaped this way maybe to appeal to the thousands on thousands of business, sales and management staff who drive them. Imagine any of the annoying
'Apprentice ' contestants if you would. The fact that more of these type of cars are involved in RTA is simply because they spend more time on the road than any other sector of society. Does it matter what care he drove? Well, i guess it would to the poor fellow who lost his life, as to his family and friends. If only mr salesman had got up earlier, or stopped for a coffee then maybe Arthur Platt would still be around. Or if the car behind him at that point was someone else taking care to look where they were going not playing around in his foorwell looking for a sat nav.

What i would say is the terminology with RTA's and their subsequent fines and records, are wrong. "I left my keys at home" is careless, "i dropped my phone in the loo", that's also careless, driving into the back of someone with enough force to kill them is apart from being deeply sad, is an act of cold hearted negligence.

BMW's, or more to the point, their drivers seem to be making quite a stir on these news comments

Does it really matter as to what make of car the murderer drove, what needless piece of electronic junk the murderer claims fell into the footwell or whether the murderer can see beyond the end of his bonnet.
The grim reality here is that another cyclist has been murdered on the roads of Britain and another murderer will be incarcerated for the crime, sorry, that should be fined £250 and told to pay more attention next time in case he might hit a car.

just went and sat in my car (a vw golf btw ...) and tried
to reach into the passenger foot well whilst sat in the
drivers seat .... now, either i'm an odd shape or he has
bloody long arms. I was completely unable to even reach
the mat let alone pick up something rolling around in
the foot well (I tried a compact camera) without lying so
far over the gear lever was in my ribs ....

Took his eye off the road for a second .... a complete
crock !

I hope the prosecution asks this jerk why he didn't pull over to pick up and fix his sat-nav. With all this discussion about exactly how long his eyes are off the road, they're neglecting that he really should have pulled over in the first place.

I find that people adjusting iPods is equally dangerous. Since the newer ones have touch screens with buttons you can't "feel" any more, you have to look down at the screen to change a song. I've seen far, far too many people doing this in their cars.

But IME twats are more drawn to owning BMWs.

IIRC a woman driver used 'a spider scared me' as an excuse for killing a cyclist. Will any old lame excuse get these people off the hook? Looks that way to me.

Is the make of car unimportant? Does experience not suggest that certain makes of vehicles appeal to drivers who are more likely to carry out risk taking behaviour or have lower awareness for other road users?

Discuss.

The make of car and the item involved are irrelevant.

What's more important is how anyone, in their right mind, can claim that reaching down into the footwell of a car whilst they are driving it is merely 'careless' and not dangerous.

It should be obvious to any careful, competent driver that an act like this is blatantly, inexcusably dangerous. It appears the CPS agree and they should be praised and supported for pressing for a more serious charge.

Bez - I nearly got squeezed off the road by a driver in a BMW this morning. If I'd been on my bicycle I would've been in real trouble, luckily I was on my motorbike this time and was able to accelerate away. Lots of people drive cars poorly but BMW drivers seem to be involved in a disproportionately high number of incidents and this is the case whether I'm on one of my bicycles, my motorbike or in my car.

Look at some of the other comments in various threads on this website that refer to BMWs. I'm not the only one saying how many bad BMW drivers there are in particular - looks like the majority of people posting on the site have had run-ins with BMWs at some point in fact.

Yes I'm predjudiced against BMWs but that's been arrived at through my experience of how these cars are driven and the large numbers of muppets who own them.

Some years ago I was even offered a free BMW by a family member (an old 3 series) - I turned it down largely because I didn't want to be seen as a BMW driver - better no car than a BMW.

"I note that the driver was in a BMW. I don't think that's a coincidence. I did see a piece on the Daily Telegraph's motoring section about the UK's 'unluckiets' cars which have a disproportionately high number of insurance claims. There weren't any BMWs"

And your point is what? That you're prejudiced against BMWs?

Why are motorists so dependent on their stupid Sat Navs? Can't they remember the route to drive to Sainsburys? There was a story on the BBC yesterday that tourists were frequently driving their cars into the North Sea because their satnavs told them to - and they did.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tyne-13830017

the odds are in favour of the motorist getting off lightly, unfotunately not good odds for cyclists.

I note that the driver was in a BMW. I don't think that's a coincidence. I did see a piece on the Daily Telegraph's motoring section about the UK's 'unluckiets' cars which have a disproportionately high number of insurance claims. There weren't any BMWs but the Volvo XC90 was in at no2 - about 15% of the XC90s on UK roads have been involved in an accident and had an insurance claim.

I've got a satnav and it has fallen off its holder before now while I've been at the wheel. I find it's not so hard to stick it back in waiting at traffic lights or pulling over to the side of the road.

It's worth noting that when car radios were first launched in the 1930s there was some resistance with people claiming they would affect safety and allow drivers to be distracted. Who now questions fitting a stereo to a car? And yet how many accidents have occurred when someone has reached for a cassette or CD or to change radio stations?

He claims to have taken his eyes off the road for 1 second. That's 30 yards at 60 mph or 15 yards at 30mph. Which means either that he can't see other road users just a few yards ahead, or he did see the cyclist and decided this was a good time to dig in the footwell. There's no third option.

Whichever of those is the case, clearly he's incapable of driving safely and shouldn't be allowed onto the road.

In Japan satnavs can only be set or adjusted when the engine is switched off. If they can do that in Japan, why not here?

When sat navs first appeared, it was one of the most obvious things in the world that they would be a detriment to road safety. Yet it was also obvious that they would make a metric shitload of money for the owners of sat nav companies, car accessory retailers, and ultimately the tax man. So guess which desire won out? The death of Mr. Platt is, I'm sorry to say, an acceptable loss to the global markets. Mr. Cook, meanwhile, is just an idiot, so slavishly dependent on his gizmos that he'll risk other people's lives to stop it getting scratched up in the passenger side foot well.

don't care what they convict him of as long has he's not allowed in the driving seat for a long time

What a terrible waste of a good man trying to help others.