Gillett's life is worth $2000 + 8 months driving suspension



J

jim

Guest
BUTTON IT knuckle-head!! Its a stupid and unseemly conclusion you draw.

A higher penalty for inexperience would make little difference to either
Gillet or the future of road safety. But would surely have buggered up the
poor woman's life even more than it already is.

Grow up.


"endroll" <endroll[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]
>
> ...it would appear...
>
> http://tinyurl.com/ajynz
>
>
> --
> endroll
>
 

cfsmtb

New Member
Apr 11, 2003
4,963
0
0
jim said:
BUTTON IT knuckle-head!! Its a stupid and unseemly conclusion you draw.

A higher penalty for inexperience would make little difference to either
Gillet or the future of road safety. But would surely have buggered up the
poor woman's life even more than it already is.

Grow up.

Eh? Have a think about the issues before indulging in meanless hyberbole or going for the ad hominem response.
 
D

Donga

Guest
Slightly inaccurate too, as there was expected to be a sizeable civil
damages settlement.
 
J

jim

Guest
"csfetc"

Hyperbole? - Nothing here meets any test for such that I am aware of? Happy
for enlightenment.

Responses peppered with poorly contextualised latin do not make them more
credible. On the contrary.

Regards

"cfsmtb" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]
>
> jim Wrote:
>> BUTTON IT knuckle-head!! Its a stupid and unseemly conclusion you
>> draw.
>>
>> A higher penalty for inexperience would make little difference to
>> either
>> Gillet or the future of road safety. But would surely have buggered up
>> the
>> poor woman's life even more than it already is.
>>
>> Grow up.
>>
>>

>
> Eh? Have a think about the issues before indulging in meanless
> hyberbole or going for the ad hominem response.
>
>
> --
> cfsmtb
>
 
J

Jock

Guest
Don't mention the war!

Same ineffective legal (lack of justice) system there as we suffer here. I
feel sorry for the family but I am not surprised. Until it's a family
member of someone that matters that is run over, it will go on in an
ineffective, lopsided way.
Jock

"cfsmtb" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]
|
| Your thoughts?
|
|
| --
| cfsmtb
|
 

cfsmtb

New Member
Apr 11, 2003
4,963
0
0
Jeez - all the palpable skepticism here!!!!

Hang on, that whinging sounds familiar..

:D :D :D :D
 

cfsmtb

New Member
Apr 11, 2003
4,963
0
0
It's just not fair
http://www.theadvertiser.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5936,18041899%5E911,00.html
Chris Tinkler. 05feb06

THE PARENTS of champion cyclist Amy Gillett, who was tragically killed in a road accident in Germany last year, have criticised an "appalling" penalty for the driver of the car that ran into her.

Stefanie Magner, who lost control of her Volvo before ploughing into the Australian Institute of Sport road cycling team, has been fined $2300 and had her licence suspended for eight months.

The accident, on a country road on July 19 last year, left Gillett, 29, dead and badly injured five teammates. The 18-year-old Ms Magner was expected to face involuntary manslaughter charges.

However, a German prosecutor said on Friday night a judge had signed off on the fine and licence suspension.

The decision was met with disbelief and anger yesterday from Gillett's parents, Denis and Mary Safe, still coming to terms with their daughter's death.

"We are absolutely staggered by the generosity to the girl," Mr Safe said.

"It is appalling that she could go out and kill our beautiful daughter and maim the other girls, some of them seriously for life, and walk away with not even a slap on the wrist.

"Any fair-minded person would think the sentence was ridiculously light.

"We are not looking for revenge, but one would hope for justice and there is no justice in this.

"We think about Amy every minute of every hour of every day and when this sort of situation comes up the grief is even more painful, if that is possible."

The prosecutor claimed the investigation had found no drugs involved and the inexperienced driver had not been speeding.

But Mr Safe said he could not believe Ms Magner had not been speeding.

"The surviving girls saw it unfolding in front of them. They saw a speeding, out-of-control car coming down the highway and they saw it kill Amy and then plough into them," he said.

Mr Safe said, despite the family's devastation, they would not appeal as it would not do them "any good".

He also said there were similarities with the Eugene McGee case – McGee was fined $3100 and disqualified from driving for killing cyclist Ian Humphrey in a hit-run accident near Freeling in November, 2003.

"It springs to mind how cyclists can be treated so poorly," he said.

"Someone goes out and kills my daughter and gets nothing."

Ms Magner's grandfather previously had said she remembered nothing of the crash and was full of sadness and remorse. Magner had only been driving for two weeks before the crash.

Australian cyclists Alexis Rhodes, Louise Yaxley, Katie Brown, Lorian Graham, and Kate Nichols – all on a training ride with Gillett – were badly injured.

Brown, who suffered a severed kneecap, ruptured tendons, broken ribs, collapsed lung and nearly had her left leg amputated, said Magner would be serving a life sentence of her own.

"She has her own issues to think about in remembering what she did," Brown said.

"Our lives have been turned upside down and Amy's life has been taken, so Stefanie has to live with that."
 
P

Plodder

Guest
--
Frank
[email protected]
Drop DACKS to reply
"Jock" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> Don't mention the war!
>
> Same ineffective legal (lack of justice) system there as we suffer here.

I
> feel sorry for the family but I am not surprised. Until it's a family
> member of someone that matters that is run over, it will go on in an
> ineffective, lopsided way.
> Jock
>
> "cfsmtb" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]
> |
> | Your thoughts?
> |
> |
> | --
> | cfsmtb


Same old response - think of the family. But family responses vary
enormously from a recent case here of someone pleading for leniency for the
driver of a car in which their son died in a street drag racing crash to
other families baying for blood. OK, you might think it's ineffective and
lopsided, but all you're really saying is that if it was you in that
situation you'd react in a certain way. You can't know how any other family
is or would react. Please don't speak for the family when you don't know
them and have no idea how they are feeling. I've lost family member in a
car crash and am thoroughly ****** off at how people assume they know how I
feel and should respond. Don't.

As far as a lack of justice is concerned, before you claim that lack, please
identify which model of justice you refer to; restorative, distributive,
economic (are you saying Gillett's life was worth a certain sum? If so, how
much?), or other models of justice.

The term imposed was set by people who investigated the event and determined
an appropriate penalty in their judgement. You and I didn't. We saw the
reports in the papers (an unimpeachable source, eh?). Until you know the
facts around the event, including getting a feel for the level of remorse
and circumstances around the driver, please don't rant about what YOU feel
is a lack of justice. If you want to make different judgements, become a
judge. If you want to change the way judgements are made, lobby the
legislators. Otherwise, simply express YOUR opinion, don't speak for others
unless you know theirs.

Nuff - off out for a spin.

Cheers,

Frank
 
D

dewatf

Guest
On Sat, 4 Feb 2006 23:55:41 +1100, cfsmtb
<[email protected]> wrote:

>Eh? Have a think about the issues before indulging in meanless
>hyberbole or going for the ad hominem response.


He did, you haven't.

Gillett's life is not to be measure in a road traffic offense. That is
nonsense and also offensive.

The girl was found guilty of losing control of her car on a corner,
and sentenced accordingly. The same sentence for that should be handed
out to anyone who does that, that is a fundemental principle of the
law.

The fact that in this case there happened to be a bunch of cyclists
instead of a car on the other side of the road it just bad luck and a
terrible tragedy. If the girl makes the same mistake and runs of the
road into paddock how should she be punished?
Should her punisment for identical accidents be dependant on random
circumstance, on how unhappy they make someone else.

Gillet's parents are never going to be satisfied, no matter how much
the girl's life is ruined for an accident.

dewatf.
 

cfsmtb

New Member
Apr 11, 2003
4,963
0
0
dewatf said:
Gillet's parents are never going to be satisfied, no matter how much
the girl's life is ruined for an accident.

Oh dear God, and why should they? You're a heartless troll dewatf.
 

cfsmtb

New Member
Apr 11, 2003
4,963
0
0
Plodder said:
Same old response - think of the family. But family responses vary
enormously from a recent case here of someone pleading for leniency for the
driver of a car in which their son died in a street drag racing crash to
other families baying for blood. OK, you might think it's ineffective and
lopsided, but all you're really saying is that if it was you in that
situation you'd react in a certain way. You can't know how any other family
is or would react.


Apologies to Jock if this is out of context, but his wife was run over in March 05 by a driver on a clear roadway. To you, his opinion may not have legal standing or it may not change the situation, but he's bloody well entitled to his POV.
 
Z

Zebee Johnstone

Guest
In aus.bicycle on Sun, 5 Feb 2006 17:53:34 +1100
cfsmtb <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Apologies to Jock if this is out of context, but his wife was run over
> in March 05 by a driver on a clear roadway. To you, his opinion may not
> have legal standing or it may not change the situation, but he's bloody
> well entitled to his POV.


No one said he wasn't. What was said was "not everyone reacts like
that".

I also note that in case of an offence where the jury feels "could
have been me" they are less likely to find guilty if the penalties are
draconian.

Doesn't even have to be "could have been me", just has to be a bit of
doubt that it was coldblooded and deliberate. This was noted when the
death penalty was in force - much reluctance to convict except in very
clear and extreme cases.

Zebee
 
T

TimC

Guest
On 2006-02-05, Zebee Johnstone (aka Bruce)
was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
> Doesn't even have to be "could have been me", just has to be a bit of
> doubt that it was coldblooded and deliberate. This was noted when the
> death penalty was in force - much reluctance to convict except in very
> clear and extreme cases.


Except in Texas:

"Allright ma, we just killed another one!"

--
TimC
Is it because do me reconcile my life that I say perhaps your plans
could have caused this that you are going through all this that you
came to me? --emacs doctor to TimC
 
J

Jules

Guest
cfsmtb wrote:

> It's just not fair


So you clearly have an opinion on this judgement; care to
(substantially) elaborate?
 
J

Jules

Guest
Jules wrote:
> cfsmtb wrote:
>
>> It's just not fair


ahh.. It's the title of the article.

Never mind then ;-)
 
C

Claude

Guest
"endroll" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]
>
> ...it would appear...
>
> http://tinyurl.com/ajynz



Irrespective of whether the driver should have been given a more punitive
sentence (or not), what's really offensive is the idea that a victim's life
can be 'measured' by the penalty imposed on the perpetrator. This idea -
pursued zealously by the 'tabloid' media - is illogical and morally
offensive. So, are we to believe that if the driver were given, say, a
seven year sentence for manslaughter, that Amy Gillett's life was worth only
seven years gaol time? How can the richness of a person's life be
'measured' in such an inane way? Its just insulting and offensive to think
this way.
 
D

dave

Guest
dewatf wrote:
> On Sat, 4 Feb 2006 23:55:41 +1100, cfsmtb
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>>Eh? Have a think about the issues before indulging in meanless
>>hyberbole or going for the ad hominem response.

>
>
> He did, you haven't.
>
> Gillett's life is not to be measure in a road traffic offense. That is
> nonsense and also offensive.
>
> The girl was found guilty of losing control of her car on a corner,
> and sentenced accordingly. The same sentence for that should be handed
> out to anyone who does that, that is a fundemental principle of the
> law.
>
> The fact that in this case there happened to be a bunch of cyclists
> instead of a car on the other side of the road it just bad luck and a
> terrible tragedy. If the girl makes the same mistake and runs of the
> road into paddock how should she be punished?
> Should her punisment for identical accidents be dependant on random
> circumstance, on how unhappy they make someone else.
>
> Gillet's parents are never going to be satisfied, no matter how much
> the girl's life is ruined for an accident.
>
> dewatf.
>
>

Well yeah she should be treated differently. For 2 reasons. 1) if you
are going to be silly on an empty road that you can see is empty.. and
you screw up with just you at risk it should be treated far more
leniently than being silly on a corner that you cant see around and so
others are at risk.

2) is that people got hurt. Some people are going to write off a car
every year they have a licence and yet never hurt anyone. Some people
are going to be involved in 2 or 3 fatal accidents in their lives ..
some people are going to be at fault in two or 3 fatal accident. Are
all these people to be treated the same? I say no. It doesnt matter
why some people are involved in multiple injury accidents (or multiple
comma injury accidents). Any one who believes that we don;t have
natural selection for luck is kidding themselfs. We as people who would
like to stay alive want these people not driving.

I personaly would like to see people who hurt other people on the roads
sentenced to using a more vulnerable form of transport for a while..
where the person most at risk from their mistakes is them. Sentence
them to lose their car licence and allow em a motorcycle licence for a
few years. It will push the motorcycle accident rate up but cut down
the number clobbered by out of control volvo;s and 4WDs I think. Or in
this case sentence her to lose her licence untill she has done 2000
miles on the road on a pushy. With log books and affidavits from
witnesses to prove it.

Or how about a two strikes and your out rule. Put 2 people in hospital
in your life (other than yourself) and lose your licence for good

Anyway thats what I think

Dave
 

Similar threads