		Cycling Forums > Other Stuff > Commuting and Road Safety
CTC denounces 'paltry sentence' for driver

Welcome to CyclingForums.com

You are currently viewing our website as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions. You will have to register before you can post to this thread.

By joining our free online community you will have access to post new topics, communicate privately with other cyclingforums.com members (PM), respond to polls, upload photos and access other special features like product reviews and classifieds.

CTC denounces 'paltry sentence' for driver

Thread Tools

Search this Thread

Display Modes

18-01.-2003, 12:23 PM

steve

Administrator

Join Date: Aug 2001

Location: Below Australia -20 years

Posts: 1,993

CTC denounces 'paltry sentence' for driver

Quote:

Cycle Touring and Campaigning (CTC) has condemned the 'paltry' sentence handed out to a driver after her actions caused a cyclist's death. The woman was not banned from driving and was fined just £135 with six penalty points when she pleaded guilty to careless driving after her car hit cyclist Jason Salter causing him fatal head injuries in a crash in Norfolk, UK last August.

The driver attempted to overtake 17-year-old Jason as traffic approached but gave him too little room and did not even cross the central white line. The woman said Jason wobbled as she passed him and lost control of his bike but admitted in court that she should have waited before overtaking. He died of his injuries the day after the crash.

Rule 139 of the Highway Code states that drivers should "give motorcyclists, cyclists and horse riders at least as much room as you would a car when overtaking."

CTC recently backed plans by the Director of Public Prosecutions David Calvert-Smith to encourage prosecutors to bring tougher charges when custody is justified.

"The court in this case has sent out a frightening message: it is fine to drive in a way that you know will endanger others," said Roger Geffen, Campaigns and Policy Manager. "The driver has been largely absolved of responsibility for Jason's death despite admitting in court that her action was wrong. The least that the court should have done was ban this woman from driving. The message for government is clear: motorists must be forced to take more responsibility for road safety."

For more information on CTC's efforts, see www.ctc.org.uk

__________________
Steve

CyclingForums.com

25-01.-2003, 01:29 PM	#2
Chris_L Moderator Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Gold Coast Posts: 74	This is why I can't understand why anyone would ever use a gun or a knife for murder. If you just use a car, you'll get let off. Think about this - if Martin Bryant had run over 36 people in a car, he probably would never have gone to prison either. __________________ Stop the world... This is where I get off.

03-02.-2003, 06:52 AM	#3
ant evans Member Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Cardiff, Wales Posts: 95	A conviction of murder requires the prosecution to show intent to kill. That's why most motorists can only be done for lesser charges based on proving negligence, and why Fitzpatrick got 45 years (probably subject to appeal): http://www.chicagocriticalmass.org/mcbride_trib2.html What we need is a lot less tolerance for negligent driving, not more murder charges that won't stick. My ideal solution is to apply the same testing and safety regime to driving as we do to aviation... but the economics of the motor industry and the much-cherished freedom of people to drive badly mean that this is a pipe dream. :-( __________________ drivers = smokers

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode