Woman Blamed Fully For Crash ...

[joko]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2572989/Woman-BMW-driver-killed-two-toddlers-ploughing-pushchairs-crashing-car-distracted-phone-call.html

am i missing something in this case?

it appears that they are pretty much 100% blaming this woman for the death of these toddlers - but she hit them only because her car was hit by another driver who ran a red light!

it seems the mans pathetic excuses of 'misconstruing the green light' and 'being confused by roadworks' etc, means they seem to think he is practically innocent!

i realise he has since died in unrelated circumstances so cannot be tried in court.

apparently she was on a hands free phone, and was going 36 in a 30 - both of which i agree are technically wrong - (i suspect she sped up momentarily to get through amber light) but had the man not run the red light and shunted her into the kids, there would have been no accident!
Of course she should shoulder some blame but i cant understand why they aren't slamming the mini driver too.

what do you think?

[anotheoldgit]

pixie373

/// Because i feel she's getting the rough end of the stick. She didn't cause the accident. ///

Because she allegedly was partially to blame, but then she is only on trial and it is for the jury to decide.

/// I can't see why everyone is criticising her, rather than him. He may have died since- that doesn't change the facts, though. ///

On the contrary it seems almost everyone is not criticising her but making excuses for her, at least on AB.

But if you want to turn this into a Female/Male thing go ahead and criticise the dead man if that levels things out a little, because we don't want to appear sexist now do we?

[anotheoldgit]

Or even racist, since it has already been brought to our attention.

[askyourgran]

I can't see a Mini Cooper shunting a BMW far, I reckon she should have slowed up long before she did, the Mini was probably following her tail lights but the driver should of course be part of the blame. However, she is the one who actually did the damage.

[Prudie]

The Mini driver had run a red light and was crossing in front of her, not behind her.

[askyourgran]

Thanks Prudie, I've just been re-reading the link, I had it in mind that the mini was behind her. Evasive action too much speed too late.

[Svejk]

Hit the nail on the head, AOG. I suspect there'd be scant support, around these parts, for a 20yr old, white working class lad in the same circumstances.
And why do you insist on calling it a hands-free phone when 3 witnesses saw her holding it?

[Prudie]

I totally fail to see why anyone thinks race/gender/social class has been considered by posters on here before they formed their opinions?
If she were holding a phone that would put an entirely different light on it. This report doesn't mention 3 witnesses, just 1 who wouldn't have been objective. I've only read the attached report.

[Gromit]

// why do you insist on calling it a hands-free phone when 3 witnesses saw her holding it? //

Because we are basing our answers on evidence given in court. That said the phone was hands-free. So far that has not been disputed in court.


// Mr Thomas said Mr Andrews had driven his Mini across the junction from Hinckley Road towards Braunstone Gate. The confusion was caused by a green filter light that prompted the driver in front of him to set off to turn left, the court heard.

The jury was then told how Mistry was also at fault.

The police investigation into the crash found she had been travelling at 36.6mph, while the limit at the junction is 30mph.

The jury was also told Mistry was in the middle of a phone call – using a hands-free device – and she crossed the junction on amber, less than a second before the light turned to red. //

http://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/HORROR-TODDLERS-HIT-CAR/story-20761145-detail/story.html#ixzz2v5zjLUtX

[joko]

maybe she picked the phone up as soon as the car stopped to call an ambulance? or maybe the force of the crash knocked it out of its holder and she picked it up ... maybe she could hear her friend shouting after hearing the commotion ...?

i really don't think that none of this could have happened if she was only going 30mph - 36mph is hardly tear-arsing round the streets and its only 6mph faster - not exactly a massive amount.

the point is, if she had been going 30mph, and not been on the phone, this accident could still have happened - because the mini hit her... the mini ran a red light, the mini should not have been there at all, and if he hadnt done that she would have carried on as normal and those kids would be alive...

[Gromit]

I wonder if we will get the defence side of this story?

[Gromit]

FYI

She is charged with two counts of Dangerous Driving. These are the sentencing guidelines.

https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/s_to_u/sentencing_manual/death_by_dangerous_driving/

Having read it, I would think she is level 3.

[jno]

I'd say her driving was level 3 but it still wouldn't have caused the accident on its own. Custody would be harsh. She went through an amber light; someone else went through a red light and hit her. It's all very well saying she was going too fast to take evasive action; most drivers would be hard put to avoid someone crossing their path on a red light, at any speed.

[Gromit]

Level 3 guideliness say she can be sentenced as a case of careless driving.

The criteria and rates are here.

https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/s_to_u/sentencing_manual/causing_death_by_careless_or_inconsiderate_driving/

I still reckon she will get 36 months suspended. Maybe community service.

[jno]

that would be my thinking if I was Judge Judy, or whoever is handling the case.

If she actually had a phone in her hand, though, it would be worse.

[anotheoldgit]

Gromit

/// I wonder if we will get the defence side of this story? ///

It is a continuing trial why wouldn't we?

[Gromit]

AOG

Well, we will see.

[jomifl]

If she hadn't been driving over the speed limit she wouldn't have been in a position to be hit by the other car..

[Gromit]

Jomifl

It is too complicated of an calculation for me to work out, but, are you sure that going 6mph less for a second or two would have avoided an impact?

[joko]

if she had been driving at 30mph but she'd left home 2 minutes earlier she would have been in the path of the mini - if she'd left two minutes later, she'd have had to stop at the lights and maybe another car would have been hit by the mini - its a pointless argument - its all just what ifs ...
the only definite unacceptable wrong doing is running a red light, and apparently being unable to understand common traffic light signals ... which is what the mini did ...

[Gromit]

Apologies for misleading everyone.

She has been charged with Dangerous Driving, not Death by Dangerous Driving, which is the sentencing guidelines above.

Here are the Dangerous Driving Sentencing Guidelines.

https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/s_to_u/sentencing_manual/dangerous_driving/