No! just no point punishing a dead guy! hes DEAD!!! what part of DEAD dont you get... she however is alive and still guilty of speeding!
Harsh or not...possible custodian sentance?
- Thread starter thepharcyde
- Start date
No! just no point punishing a dead guy! hes DEAD!!! what part of DEAD dont you get... she however is alive and still guilty of speeding!
Hard to say without knowing her usual driving habits. On the one had it could be harsh as I'm sure we're all guilty of lapses in concentration when driving with the vast majority resulting in no problems. Certainly I have accelerated towards traffic lights instead of slowing down as per the rule book. Though I'm strict with not using the mobile phone.
On the other hand its just one of those rules of life. Get caught doing something wrong at the same time as the crap hits the fan and your going to get shafted for it regardless. Be it while driving or at work, play or school.
On the other hand its just one of those rules of life. Get caught doing something wrong at the same time as the crap hits the fan and your going to get shafted for it regardless. Be it while driving or at work, play or school.
So did he.
I know that stretch of road it is 3 lanes wide. I would not want to chance jumping the red lights there.
There was obviously blame on both sides, he paid the ultimate price and she got 4 years!
![[huzeeee]](/styles/overclockers/avatars/3.png){kind=avatar}
IMO she should get the normal punishment for speeding and using her mobile at the same time, the cyclist was riding with as little care and attention as the woman or else he wouldnt have ridden infront of her. 2 very stupid people in the wrong place at the wrong time i see the blame as being totally 50/50 and i dont think the woman should be punished to harshly.
Aye, as I argued for when she was first found guilty, do her for what she was guilty for, but the cyclists death was primarily caused by him jumping a red light. If it was her that had jumped a red light and hit and killed someone speeding I would have said throw the book at her.[huzeeee];11203708 said:
Sad thing is I know of a case where someone I knew killed someone when well over the drink limit and on drugs and only received a 3 year sentence.
- Joined
- 17 Mar 2004
- Posts
- 8,259
Just talking about this with my g/f who thinks the 4 years is fully justified to which I disagree. Poor cow IMO, I think the thought of having killed someone is enough of a punishment without being banged up for it. The guy minus a crash helmet ran a red light his choice. V.sad he was killed but he also commited a bigger infridgement IMO RIP though 
she should be out pretty soon?
she should be out pretty soon?
Who said anything about punishing a dead person? Utter nonsense, please don't divert the argument. I simply want to know why you think all blame for the accident shifts to the car driver after the cyclist rode through a red light? Obviously the woman was negligent if she was indeed speeding and using the phone (though there seems to be no proof of this) and she will pay the price for this.
Its quite simple really, had the cyclist not broken the law by ignoring a red light he would almost certainly still be alive. Had the woman not been speeding and possibly been using her phone, the cyclist would very likely still be alive, (as long as he didn't try the same brain dead manoeuvre at another junction). Two parties, both guilty of breaking the law, both contributed to the accident. The cyclist absolutely should not have been going through the junction, the woman should have been paying far more attention to the road.
are you trying to say that she should then receive all the blame, because we cant blame him, because hes dead, for making a choice and being stupid?
So next time someone gets caught speeding we should whack them in jail for a few years... they havnt killed anyone, but they have commited the same offense.
No one is punishing the guy, we're merely pointing out that she should not be receiving such harsh punishments when it is the dead persons fault also.
Using your same rationale lets say i break into your house, you shoot me with an unregistered gun or something.. you then get done for cold blooded murder, because im dead and nothings my fault any more, because im dead and cant be blamed anymore. .feel sorry for the dead guy
This is my point, im not saying hes not guilty for jumping the light... just he would not have been hit by her, or been hit at a much slower speed, had she not been speeding! Thus he might still be alive.
But the point is, when you jump a red light you can still be hit and killed by people who aren't breaking the law. To be found guilty of something in a criminal court you must be found guilty beyond reasonable doubt. The fact he could have still died if he was hit by someone doing 30 instead 40 throws that out the window. Him jumping a red light was the only thing that would guarantee that an accident could have happened in this manner.
If he if didn't jump the light and she still hit and killed him then yes she would be guilty of death by dangerous driving.
Both parties are guilty in this accident, him of jumping lights and her for speeding and dangerous driving (using her phone), the result of which killed the cyclist... she deserves jail time. No point arguing it, it has been decided by a court of her peers...
Juries make mistakes all the time, I wouldn't be surprised if she appealed against this.