£2,200.00 for the taking of a life?
Less than half of the value of his bike the man was fined for killing a teenager by yelling at her to get out of the way and then running into her deliberately when she didn't move fast enough.
And a judge says he can't send the b*****d to prison because there is no 'legislation in place'! What does that mean, for Heaven's sake? He killed the girl. It was not pre-meditated murder but it was CERTAINLY manslaughter and for manslaughter he should have got a prison sentence!
I DO NOT UNDERSTAND!
juliacornwal Thurs 10/07/08 11:38
To subscribe to this question you need to
sign in to the AnswerBank or register
if you are not already a member. All you need is a valid email address to register.
|
|
That's because you don't have the whole picture.
According to the evidence at the trial she stepped out of the road and onto the pavement and then stepped back in front of him at the last moment - presumably some silly game of chicken or the like.
That's why the CPS didn't feel they had enough evidence for a manslaughter charge.
I dare say you just read the "edited highlights" somewhere probably designed to make you angry?
|
|
|
Question Author
'presumably some game of chicken'? Maybe she was alarmed at the speed with which the bike was coming towards her? And I've read the wwws. below but I still don't think he was suitably punished for what he did. The bike cost twice as much as the fine - so he can't be exactly hard up, and the girl died.
Perhaps, then, if this was no more than 'a tragic accident' they should change the rules of time trials and hold them in places where there are no pedestrians.
I'm sorry, but to me it was inappropriate and made a mockery of the girl's life and her parents love for her!
|
|
|
he was riding on the FOOTPATHhe should have been charged with murder....if he would have done this to one of my kids id be the 1 in court now cos id kill the B***ARD...
|
|
|
Interested as to how you know that stoke:
On Monday, the court heard that he could have swerved to avoid the girl.
Howard was cycling on the road when he approached the group but the court heard conflicting evidence about whether he mounted the kerb at any point during the incident.
|
|
|
ONEYEDVIC,if you read the link you posted the mother of the girl states and i quote ''he was on the footpath,where she should have been safe'' .........yes riding on the footpath now that puts a whole diffrent aspect to this story dont you think?
|
|
|
The mother is entitled to say what ever she wants - I don't even think that she was there.
The quote that I gave comes from this article. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/beds/bucks/ herts/7496370.stm
It is not as clear cut as you would like to think it is. It appears that there are different accounts about where he was cycling.
Still, I am sure you know best, having been in the court and listened to all the testimonies.
|
|
|
He did yell something like 'Get out of the way because I'm not stopping', so wherever he was, on the road or on the pavement, he clearly had no intention of stopping.
|
|
|
She'd also been drinking at the skatepark.
Which is often a haunt of underage drinkers
(I live 2 miles outside Buckingham - as oppose to 15 miles "down the road" in Milton Keynes)
and there was CCTV evidence so I'd imagine that the CPS had a good hard look at the facts and evidence and decided that a manslaughter charge would not stick.
I really don't see what relevance the value of his bike was - he certainly wasn't rich living in Western Avenue
|
|
|
She deliberately stepped in front of the cycle which was on the road. The (underage) girl had been drinking cans Stella in a nearby park which may have accounted for her dangerous behaviour. The cyclist was reckless by assuming she was sober and would have the sense to get back on the pavement.
There was CCTV film of the incident, and based on this, a charge of dangerous cycling (for which there cannot be a jail term) was layed rather than a charge for manslaughter.
Pedestrian deaths in the UK: (1998-2005):
Death involving motor vehicles 6312
Death involving cyclists 22
Can you spot where your indignation should be aimed?
|
|
|
at the end of the day he should have stopped,whether he was on the road or the pavement....she did not deserve to die did she?...he had brakes on the bike he should have used them.....he was responsible for his own actions...he could have prevented this BY STOPPING...
|
|
|
stkoe, did you rad any of the responses.
The victim may have stepped in front of him.
|
|
|
There is no argument that he should have stopped or steered around the girl. That is why he was found guilty of Dangerous Cycling.
On the other hand, the girl was responsible for her own actions. Deliberately going onto the road in front of an oncoming vehicle was asking for trouble.
|
|
|
if he had time to shout ''MOVE IM NOT STOPPING'' he had time to apply his brakes.......
|
|
|
stokemaveric
Everyone agrees that.
Maybe stopping amongst a gang of drunk teenagers didn't seem like a good idea at the time. Still, no excuse for steering around the mob.
|
|
|
Still, no excuse for not steering around the mob.
|
|
|
I think the council here have done a similar thing to where we live, mixed roads, cycling freindly paths and pedestrian pavements all together without any clear warning, if you look at where this happened it was on a bit of pavement which was connecting a road with a cycle path, I would like to think, he shouted get out of the way because he knew he was going fast and to stop suddenly would have been dangerous to him, usually if someone shouts get out of the way, the norm would be to do this, I think it was a tragic situation & a dilemma that if he came across again would think about. When someone is hit by a golf ball and killed and the bloke didn't shout "fore" is that manslaughter?
|
|
|
Gromit :-''Pedestrian deaths in the UK: (1998-2005):
Death involving motor vehicles 6312
Death involving cyclists 22 ''
Good one ,mate.
|
|
Problem Mortgage | Loans | Loans | Refinance | Xbox Mod Chip
