One slapped wrist coming up.

Discussion in 'UK and Europe' started by Tony Raven, Dec 16, 2005.

  1. Tony Raven

    Tony Raven Guest

    What do you reckon? £200 and don't do it again or do you think the
    Courts will be more lenient?

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/4535676.stm

    'Santa' party girl dies in crash

    A girl was knocked down and killed as she walked home from a party where
    her father had been playing Santa Claus.

    Charlotte Adams, five, and her mother Jean were hit by a BMW which
    mounted a pavement yards from their home in Clapton, east London, on
    Thursday.

    Mrs Adams is seriously ill in hospital, her husband Martyn and daughter
    Bernadette, 15, were not injured.

    The family said Charlotte's death had left them devastated adding: "This
    has ruined our lives."

    In a statement they said: "We will never be the same again no matter how
    much time goes by.

    "We thought we were home, we thought we were safe and then this car took
    away our precious baby and almost her mother too."

    The accident happened at 2045 BST - two men ran from the car. A man has
    been arrested and is being questioned.

    Flowers were left at the scene on Friday.

    Speaking at the family home, Mr Adams said he, Bernadette and their
    other daughter Maria Chelsey, 17, were in shock.

    "We were coming down the stairs outside the estate, more or less home,
    and the next thing I hear a crunch. I look back and there's a car," he said.

    "I see that my wife has gone flying and Charlotte disappeared. She was
    under the car somewhere.

    "My wife was at the side of the car. She was unconscious. Charlotte had
    just disappeared and I realised she was gone."

    He said his wife, 39, was in intensive care and had six broken ribs.

    Sergeant Jim Mills, from the Collision Investigation Unit, said he was
    astonished that those responsible had not taken responsibility for their
    actions.

    "We would appeal to them to do the right thing and give themselves up to
    police," he said.

    Police said the car was a J-registered BMW 520SE.

    Anyone with information is asked to call police on 020 7321 9913.

    --
    Tony

    "The best way I know of to win an argument is to start by being in the
    right."
    - Lord Hailsham
     
    Tags:


  2. wafflycat

    wafflycat Guest

    "Tony Raven" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    > What do you reckon? £200 and don't do it again or do you think the
    > Courts will be more lenient?


    See down/up there on thread "Its all our fault"

    I noted, "I wonder if the Daily Wail be be running a story on the
    "four-wheeled menances"? Why do I think I'll be having more chance of seeing
    porcine aviation ..."

    Cheers, helen s
     
  3. John Hearns

    John Hearns Guest

    On Fri, 16 Dec 2005 20:30:28 +0000, Tony Raven wrote:

    > What do you reckon? £200 and don't do it again or do you think the Courts
    > will be more lenient?

    Tony, I follow our sentiments, but this is still a bit raw.
    We should pause and reflect a little.

    I don't mean to start a fight with you - far from it. I agree with what
    you say, and have made several comments on this group about hit and run
    drivers.
     
  4. On Fri, 16 Dec 2005 20:30:28 +0000, Tony Raven <[email protected]>
    wrote:

    >'Santa' party girl dies in crash


    My thoughts go out to the friends and family of the 5 year old victim.








    [Trivial point]

    >The accident happened at 2045 BST


    Why has the time been given as BST rather than GMT?
     
  5. John Hearns

    John Hearns Guest

    On Fri, 16 Dec 2005 20:30:28 +0000, Tony Raven wrote:

    > What do you reckon? £200 and don't do it again or do you think the Courts
    > will be more lenient?
    >


    I just heard an item on Radio London on this.
    The term "accident" was used, which is no surprise.
    Then "a red BMW careered onto the pavement" - technically correct
    I suppose but someone was driving this vehicle.
     
  6. wafflycat

    wafflycat Guest

    "John Hearns" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:p[email protected]
    > On Fri, 16 Dec 2005 20:30:28 +0000, Tony Raven wrote:
    >
    >> What do you reckon? £200 and don't do it again or do you think the
    >> Courts
    >> will be more lenient?
    >>

    >
    > I just heard an item on Radio London on this.
    > The term "accident" was used, which is no surprise.
    > Then "a red BMW careered onto the pavement" - technically correct
    > I suppose but someone was driving this vehicle.



    On BBC news this morning, it was also described as an 'accident' and in the
    same breath it went on to say how two people got out of the vehicle and
    ran-off. Cue my blood boiling.....

    Cheers, helen s
     
  7. A.Lee

    A.Lee Guest

    Tony Raven <[email protected]> wrote:

    > What do you reckon? £200 and don't do it again or do you think the
    > Courts will be more lenient?
    > http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/4535676.stm


    Although tragic, this really doesnt have anything to do with cycling,
    this group is going the way of a .advocacy group, where the main aim is
    to moan about powered vehicles bad manners/behaviour.With 1 cross post
    the loons from uk.transport then join in, and what started as a few
    comments ends up as a long thread with no real connection with cycling,
    apart from the fact that everyone uses the roads.
    It is quite easy to start another group with the present hierarchy, say,
    something like uk.rec.cycling.advocacy
    If you'd like to propose a new group, then I would support you.
    Alan
    --
    To reply by e-mail, change the ' + ' to 'plus'.
     
  8. Tony Raven

    Tony Raven Guest

    John Hearns wrote:
    > On Fri, 16 Dec 2005 20:30:28 +0000, Tony Raven wrote:
    >
    >> What do you reckon? £200 and don't do it again or do you think the Courts
    >> will be more lenient?
    >>

    >
    > I just heard an item on Radio London on this.
    > The term "accident" was used, which is no surprise.
    > Then "a red BMW careered onto the pavement" - technically correct
    > I suppose but someone was driving this vehicle.


    Round our way a driver who killed a woman and seriously injured her
    husband while talking on his mobile phone has just had his sentence
    reduced to an 18 month ban and no retest (it was only a two year ban
    before!) The reason? He "could not give customer quotes (for his
    conservatory business) in the evening because he could not drive" Well
    perhaps he should have thought of that before he killed someone.

    --
    Tony

    "The best way I know of to win an argument is to start by being in the
    right."
    - Lord Hailsham
     
  9. wafflycat

    wafflycat Guest

    "A.Lee" <[email protected]+.com> wrote in message
    news:1h7pk6i.19irc14cx0lisN%[email protected]+.com...
    > Tony Raven <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    >> What do you reckon? £200 and don't do it again or do you think the
    >> Courts will be more lenient?
    >> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/4535676.stm

    >
    > Although tragic, this really doesnt have anything to do with cycling,
    > this group is going the way of a .advocacy group, where the main aim is
    > to moan about powered vehicles bad manners/behaviour.With 1 cross post
    > the loons from uk.transport then join in, and what started as a few
    > comments ends up as a long thread with no real connection with cycling,
    > apart from the fact that everyone uses the roads.
    > It is quite easy to start another group with the present hierarchy, say,
    > something like uk.rec.cycling.advocacy
    > If you'd like to propose a new group, then I would support you.
    > Alan
    >


    This does indeed have something to do with cycling as the attitude shown in
    the report is symptomatic of the attitude shown whenever a person is killed
    or injured by a motorist. It is symptomatic of the attitude shown towards
    cyclists generally. Having read & posted on this newsgroup for many a year,
    I do not read it as anti-powered vehicles, but there is a very strong
    attitude of being anti the laid back attitude of the justice system and the
    media when it comes to death & injury caused by people in charge of motor
    vehicles. Do not forget that cyclists can also be motorists and I would
    suggest that most of the posters on the group drive as well as cycle... The
    fact that when we cycle we use the roads makes such a thread relevant to the
    news group as the subject is one we face daily. Indeed I would be
    exceedingly surprised is a cycling newsgroup had no comments to make on how
    death and injury on the roads is dealt with, after all the group is made up
    of people who, when cycling are vulnerable road users, and how matters such
    as death & injury to vulnerable road users is viewed is highly relevant to
    us as cyclists.

    Cheers, helen s
     
  10. David Hansen

    David Hansen Guest

    On Sat, 17 Dec 2005 11:48:42 +0000 (UTC) someone who may be
    "wafflycat" <w*a*ff£y£cat*@£btco*nn£ect.com> wrote this:-

    >This does indeed have something to do with cycling as the attitude shown in
    >the report is symptomatic of the attitude shown whenever a person is killed
    >or injured by a motorist.


    I agree with what you typed and would add two thoughts.

    If the people hit by the motorist had been cycling along the
    pavement, whether a "facility" or not, would the mass media treat it
    slightly differently?

    We have been told that only cyclists are a danger to pedestrians
    walking along the pavement. The mass media are trying to blame the
    car in their descriptions, rather then the driver. They never do so
    with a bike operated by a cyclist.


    --
    David Hansen, Edinburgh
    I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
    http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54
     
  11. On Sat, 17 Dec 2005 09:55:08 +0000, Tony Raven <[email protected]>
    said in <[email protected]>:

    >He "could not give customer quotes (for his
    >conservatory business) in the evening because he could not drive"


    Which is, in any case, Complete Bollocks unless he lives in a place
    where there are no taxis and no unemployed people with driving
    licenses prepared to ferry you round in your own car for a small fee.

    Guy
    --
    http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

    "To every complex problem there is a solution which is
    simple, neat and wrong" - HL Mencken
     
  12. MartinM

    MartinM Guest

    Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:
    > On Sat, 17 Dec 2005 09:55:08 +0000, Tony Raven <[email protected]>
    > said in <[email protected]>:
    >
    > >He "could not give customer quotes (for his
    > >conservatory business) in the evening because he could not drive"

    >
    > Which is, in any case, Complete Bollocks unless he lives in a place
    > where there are no taxis and no unemployed people with driving
    > licenses prepared to ferry you round in your own car for a small fee.


    Anyone who sells conservatories should be consigned to a B ark anyway
    along with the telephone sanitisers; what a load of crap. Masonic
    handshake anyone?
     
  13. wafflycat

    wafflycat Guest

    "Wally" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]

    >
    > There's more to cycling than death and injury on the roads.
    >


    Of course there is, but death and injury on the roads are a part of what
    cyclists face.

    Cheers, helen s
     
  14. archierob

    archierob Guest

    One tends to forget the subtle nuances of jurisprudence when you
    identify a loved one in a mortuary. He/she has been deprived of life
    because someone did not take care or obey the law. It just appears to
    me and many in this NG that the law takes a lenient view or people who
    kill by car negligently than say a mugger who stabs someone to death.
    The end result is the same, heartbreak and broken lives and someone
    dead in a mortuary.

    There is a post further down indicating that we are discussing
    something that has very little to do with cycling and are becoming
    emotive and perhaps losing our way. Not so, we are all citizens, we
    all have the vote, we all sit on juries in judgement of our peers.
     
  15. A.Lee

    A.Lee Guest

    wafflycat <w*a*ff£y£cat*@£btco*nn£ect.com> wrote:
    > "Wally" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > news:[email protected]
    > > There's more to cycling than death and injury on the roads.


    > Of course there is, but death and injury on the roads are a part of what
    > cyclists face.


    When?
    I have travelled many thousands of miles on my bike in the last 25
    years, and only once in that time have I been in a situation where I was
    lucky to escape uninjured.I have been in many minor scrapes in that
    time, and yes there are some real idiots on the road, but overall the
    standard of driving is quite good, and to be honest, i'm sick of the
    constant bitching here about things that are not directly related to
    cycling.If you want(not you personally) to moan about drivers behaviour,
    this really isnt the place for it, many of the recent threads shouldnt
    be here, and to keep the moaners happy, maybe they should start an
    advocacy or similar group in this hierarchy, then this group could be
    used for its main reason - cycling discussion and thoughts.
    This thread is one.Are we going to have a post on here every time
    someone is killed on a road?
    Thats how it seems it is going here.
    Alan.
    --
    To reply by e-mail, change the ' + ' to 'plus'.
     
  16. wafflycat

    wafflycat Guest

    "A.Lee" <[email protected]+.com> wrote in message
    news:1h7q463.11e9d51lqyajeN%[email protected]+.com...
    > wafflycat <w*a*ff£y£cat*@£btco*nn£ect.com> wrote:
    >> "Wally" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    >> news:[email protected]
    >> > There's more to cycling than death and injury on the roads.

    >
    >> Of course there is, but death and injury on the roads are a part of what
    >> cyclists face.

    >
    > When?


    You don't know of anyone killed or injured whilst cycling? Let's see. My
    husband was injured victim of hit-and-run in 04. Recently acquaintance Zak
    Carr was killed... I could go on. That's not to say that cycling is
    inherantly dangerous, but it is *stupid* to ignore the reality that when
    cycling we *are* vulnerable road users and if hit by a terminally unobervant
    twit in a motor vehicle,or in my husband's case, by a driver who
    deliberatley aimed at him and crossed the carriageway to do so, then injury
    or death is a probable outcome when hit by a tonne or more of metal. Yes,
    the benefits of cycling far outweigh the risks, but this is no excuse for
    ignoring risks or wanting to stop discussion of the risks in a cycling
    newsgroup.


    > I have travelled many thousands of miles on my bike in the last 25
    > years, and only once in that time have I been in a situation where I was
    > lucky to escape uninjured.I have been in many minor scrapes in that
    > time, and yes there are some real idiots on the road, but overall the
    > standard of driving is quite good, and to be honest, i'm sick of the
    > constant bitching here about things that are not directly related to
    > cycling.If you want(not you personally) to moan about drivers behaviour,
    > this really isnt the place for it, many of the recent threads shouldnt
    > be here, and to keep the moaners happy, maybe they should start an
    > advocacy or similar group in this hierarchy, then this group could be
    > used for its main reason - cycling discussion and thoughts.
    > This thread is one.Are we going to have a post on here every time
    > someone is killed on a road?
    > Thats how it seems it is going here.
    > Alan.


    Considering there are an average of nine deaths per day on UK roads, no it
    is nothing like a post everytime as you describe. If you don't like such
    posts or any other topic being discussed can I respectfully suggest that you
    1. ignore them or 2. kill-file the posters or 3. delete the threads you
    don't like.

    Cheers, helen s
     
  17. A.Lee

    A.Lee Guest

    archierob <[email protected]> wrote:

    > There is a post further down indicating that we are discussing
    > something that has very little to do with cycling and are becoming
    > emotive and perhaps losing our way. Not so, we are all citizens, we
    > all have the vote, we all sit on juries in judgement of our peers.


    Then take it to a more appropriate group.This case had nothing
    whatsoever to do with cycling, hence there was no need for it to be
    here.
    If the argument was that everyone uses the roads, so it is on-topic,
    then the same could be said for it to be posted in any other group - the
    vast majority of people who use usenet also use the roads/pavement, so
    it would be relevant to them.
    It was posted here as there seems to be a growing trend toward
    condemning anything that is to do with driving a vehicle.
    If people want to moan about driver behaviour, perhaps there should be
    another group for it - uk.transport is a candidate, though better would
    be a new group for such posts.
    Alan.

    --
    To reply by e-mail, change the ' + ' to 'plus'.
     
  18. On Sat, 17 Dec 2005 17:06:50 +0000, [email protected]+.com (A.Lee) said
    in <1h7q4jm.12u7evtguu1xcN%[email protected]+.com>:

    >Then take it to a more appropriate group.This case had nothing
    >whatsoever to do with cycling, hence there was no need for it to be
    >here.


    I beg to differ. The death was caused when a driver lost control of a
    car and mounted the pavement. It is one more datum in the statistics
    which show that, despite the fact no driver *ever* sets out to
    complete all or any significant part of a journey on the footway,
    while many cyclists do just that, you are at massively more risk on
    the footway form cars than from cyclists.

    It's not /very/ relevant, but it is relevant.

    Guy
    --
    http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

    "To every complex problem there is a solution which is
    simple, neat and wrong" - HL Mencken
     
  19. Jim Ley

    Jim Ley Guest

    On Sat, 17 Dec 2005 17:17:07 +0000, "Just zis Guy, you know?"
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    >On Sat, 17 Dec 2005 17:06:50 +0000, [email protected]+.com (A.Lee) said
    >in <1h7q4jm.12u7evtguu1xcN%[email protected]+.com>:
    >>Then take it to a more appropriate group.This case had nothing
    >>whatsoever to do with cycling, hence there was no need for it to be
    >>here.

    >
    >I beg to differ. The death was caused when a driver lost control of a
    >car and mounted the pavement.


    So no cyclst involved, how is it relevant to cycling?

    > It is one more datum in the statistics
    >which show that, despite the fact no driver *ever* sets out to
    >complete all or any significant part of a journey on the footway,
    >while many cyclists do just that, you are at massively more risk on
    >the footway form cars than from cyclists.


    When has that ever been a topic of debate? It's certainly not
    relevant, however much more at risk you are from cars, it doesn't make
    the lower risk of cycling okay, just like it's not okay to carry a 6
    inch knife simply because you're more at risk from a sword.

    It was a completely off-topic post that had nothing to do with
    cycling, I can't understand how your justification makes any sense at
    all, the risks to a pedestrian from a car or bike are not related,
    they're completely independant.

    Jim.
     
  20. On Sat, 17 Dec 2005 17:26:21 GMT, [email protected] (Jim Ley) said in
    <[email protected]>:

    >>I beg to differ. The death was caused when a driver lost control of a
    >>car and mounted the pavement.

    >So no cyclst involved, how is it relevant to cycling?


    A question neatly answered elsewhere in the paragraph you bisected:

    >> It is one more datum in the statistics
    >>which show that, despite the fact no driver *ever* sets out to
    >>complete all or any significant part of a journey on the footway,
    >>while many cyclists do just that, you are at massively more risk on
    >>the footway form cars than from cyclists.


    Like I said, it's not /very/ relevant, but it's relevant.

    Nobody is forcing you to follow this thread.

    Guy
    --
    http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

    "To every complex problem there is a solution which is
    simple, neat and wrong" - HL Mencken
     
Loading...
Loading...