Heard something terrible today

[Guest Kether]

QUOTE (Aaron @ May 26 2004, 15:46)

I think its B now...

Unless you inject it.

[Rascal]

I hate hearing knews like this, it makes me so mad and it's sad because it will never change. However the political and judistical side of things can change but goverment/judges (whoever makes these decisions) are not dealing with it.

 

Currently road accidents are treated as...road accidents, rather than in a majority of cases a crime scene. The police do their job and clean up the scene and get everything moving again rather than saving vital evidence or holding an investigation with a crime scene investigator.

 

The punishment a person gets for a hit and run or speeding offence is just not enough. A ban and a short prison sentance does not make up for what these people do. I believe that in some cases these people should be tried for Manslaughter or Murder.

 

My best mates brother was left for dead when he was knocked off his bike by a drunk in her car who then fled, she had no insurance. Luckily an off duty police officer noticed her battered car and sorry state and pulled her over. Ali was left with serious head injuries, broken ribs and generally battered to hell. In the end he had to have part of his brain removed. You could never imagine the trauma everyone went through with this unless you have been there yourself. It's horrendous. Thank god we still have Ali and he is doing fine. The woman however is back out there driving around!

[LiquidEyes]

QUOTE (Rascal @ May 28 2004, 12:37)

I believe that in some cases these people should be tried for Manslaughter or Murder.

Umm ... I don't know about "murder" ... but yeah, if someone drives recklessly and causes death, then it can amount to manslaughter.

[squeakage]

QUOTE (LiquidEyes @ May 28 2004, 12:41)

QUOTE (Rascal @ May 28 2004, 12:37) I believe that in some cases these people should be tried for Manslaughter or Murder. Umm ... I don't know about "murder" ... but yeah, if someone drives recklessly and causes death, then it can amount to manslaughter. Isn't it just death by dangerous driving (i dont mean "just" but u know)   i may be wrong

[Alex]

My mates in Prison for three and a half years for being involved in an car accident were another man died.

 

He was told that he was doing 15 mph over the speed limit (55 in a 40), he has no recollection of the accident as he suffered quite a blow to the head and had to be cut free from the car, he still suffers from a speech stammer as a conciquence of the head blow.

 

Not too long after that the family of the man who died wanted "justice".

 

One year on from the accident, he was sent to prison for three and a half years, with the family making out that he had set out that morning to go out and kill their son intentionally, yeah right.

 

He has gone from a well paid job with prospects to prison, where he is paid to sit around and watch TV everyday by the tax payer. When he is released his prospects of obtaining a job are pretty bad. Who would have thought a trip to the shops would have led to a trip to Prison?

 

The road he was doing 55mph on was not too long before the accident a 60 mph road.

[Louise]

im sure if you were the family of the victim you would want justice aswell........after all he did break the speed limit, not by a couple of MPH either, what does it matter if the speed limit was 60mph months before, it was obviously reduced for a reason?

 

 

[Alex]

The law is not supposed to be an eye for an eye.

 

Funny how speed wasn't the cause of the accident, it was another car on the wrong side of the road. At 40 or 55 the man would have died (with a closing combined speed of 80-95mph), the speed limit was taken down without warning and has caught out a lot of people out for speeding (a wonderful revenue building excercise for the council, the accident rate hasn't slowed at all).

 

Justice? Why would I want justice? Justice for an accident? I would not feel like I have achieved anything other than ruining someone elses life? Or is that the idea, eye for eye, tooth for a tooth a life for a life. What a load of bullshit. I am above all that petty medieval concept of justice.

 

All that this has achieved one person has lost a life and another has lost a good job, he now has little chance of returning to.

 

Justice this is not.

[russelldust]

QUOTE (Alex @ May 29 2004, 13:52)

The law is not supposed to be an eye for an eye. Funny how speed wasn't the cause of the accident, it was another car on the wrong side of the road. At 40 or 55 the man would have died (with a closing combined speed of 80-95mph), the speed limit was taken down without warning and has caught out a lot of people out for speeding (a wonderful revenue building excercise for the council, the accident rate hasn't slowed at all). Justice? Why would I want justice? Justice for an accident? I would not feel like I have achieved anything other than ruining someone elses life? Or is that the idea, eye for eye, tooth for a tooth a life for a life. What a load of bullshit. I am above all that petty medieval concept of justice. All that this has achieved one person has lost a life and another has lost a good job, he now has little chance of returning to. Justice this is not.

was he over the limit or not?

[Louise]

 

so in my oppinion there is no point trying to justifie his behavior, obviously he didnt go out to kill someone that day but he broke the law, his actions killed someone, if he wasnt speeding things could have been a lot different......it was 15mph over the limit, not 1 or 2, he chose to do that speed.

 

i know that if it was my child/husband or other family member that had been killed that i wouldnt say, 'its ok, he didnt mean it, he was breaking the law but it was only speeding, it could have happened to anyone'...........

 

and yes i do know what its like having a friend cause an accident.........all to well

 

SPEEDING......read it, you might learn something

Edited May 30, 2004 by Louise

[LiquidEyes]

Alex,

 

I do see where you're coming from, and admittedly the fact that he has suffered amnesia is a fucker for his defence.

 

Naturally as his mate you are going to stick up for him. I personally despise the "eye for an eye" approach to justice - if one person's life has already been fucked up, I don't necessarily thing the solution is to fuck up another person's as well - yep it's very medieval.

 

Having said that - he was breaking the limit substantially ... so you can't really see the matter as totally "black and white"...?

 

I suppose if another, greater factor (e.g. the fact that someone else was on the wrong side of the road!!) was taken into account, and the amount by which he was speeding was put in perspective of the total collision speed, then you could say he was slightly less culpable for the outcome of the incident. But unless there are other factors you haven't stated, surely you don't think he is blameless?

 

Point taken though - I don't think the law should ever set out to satisfy people's desire for vengeance.

Edited May 30, 2004 by LiquidEyes

[LiquidEyes]

Oh yeah, and I hate the idea of finding someone to blame just for the sake of it.

 

E.g. in a case of "corporate manslaughter", why does one person (typically quite senior) have to take all the rap for say a train accident? IMHO it just seems to be a dumbing-down of the law to appease the general public's need for rapid closure on a matter. Not all things can be pinned on a single person - I think everyone needs to take responsibility for their part in the proceedings, right down to the worker who did shoddy work on the railtrack (or whatever).

[russelldust]

QUOTE (LiquidEyes @ May 30 2004, 10:50)

Oh yeah, and I hate the idea of finding someone to blame just for the sake of it. E.g. in a case of "corporate manslaughter", why does one person (typically quite senior) have to take all the rap for say a train accident? IMHO it just seems to be a dumbing-down of the law to appease the general public's need for rapid closure on a matter. Not all things can be pinned on a single person - I think everyone needs to take responsibility for their part in the proceedings, right down to the worker who did shoddy work on the railtrack (or whatever).

I disagree on that Andy...

someone has to be ultimately responsible for things such as train safety

 

(virtually no-one in the UK ever goes to prison for any corporate manslaughter type charges)...

 

If the chief executive of railtrack concludes that if they reduce maintenance and safety checks on the rails they can increase profits, dividends and ultimately further enrich themselves, knowing full well that this will increase the number of accidents (i.e. in terms of probabilities) then he should be prosecuted for that.

 

(this is basically what happened with railtrack)

 

I am probably the most capitalist person around so it's definitely not a case of 'go for the fat cat', much as we were talking about personal responsibility the other day i also think professional responsibility is vital.

[Alex]

QUOTE (russelldust @ May 30 2004, 07:46)

QUOTE (Alex @ May 29 2004, 13:52) The law is not supposed to be an eye for an eye. Funny how speed wasn't the cause of the accident, it was another car on the wrong side of the road.  At 40 or 55 the man would have died (with a closing combined speed of 80-95mph), the speed limit was taken down without warning and has caught out a lot of people out for speeding (a wonderful revenue building excercise for the council, the accident rate hasn't slowed at all). Justice?  Why would I want justice?  Justice for an accident?  I would not feel like I have achieved anything other than ruining someone elses life?  Or is that the idea, eye for eye, tooth for a tooth a life for a life.  What a load of bullshit.  I am above all that petty medieval concept of justice. All that this has achieved one person has lost a life and another has lost a good job, he now has little chance of returning to. Justice this is not. was he over the limit or not? No. Stone cold sober.

[russelldust]

he was very very unlucky

[Alex]

QUOTE (LiquidEyes @ May 30 2004, 10:42)

Alex, I do see where you're coming from, and admittedly the fact that he has suffered amnesia is a fucker for his defence. Naturally as his mate you are going to stick up for him. I personally despise the "eye for an eye" approach to justice - if one person's life has already been fucked up, I don't necessarily thing the solution is to fuck up another person's as well - yep it's very medieval. Having said that - he was breaking the limit substantially ... so you can't really see the matter as totally "black and white"...? I suppose if another, greater factor (e.g. the fact that someone else was on the wrong side of the road!!) was taken into account, and the amount by which he was speeding was put in perspective of the total collision speed, then you could say he was slightly less culpable for the outcome of the incident. But unless there are other factors you haven't stated, surely you don't think he is blameless? Point taken though - I don't think the law should ever set out to satisfy people's desire for vengeance.

I do think he should be punished, a hefty fine (can go towards better road safety, etc...) and a substantial driving ban, but prison isn't the answer. His current sentance seems to imply he intended to kill that man. There is no such thing as an accident in law anymore.

 

He's currently stuck with people who have stabbed policemen, are in for assualt, burglary, drug dealing, etc... They are in for short times and often end up coming back in after release, knowing exactly how the law operates and that it's an occupational hazard. A great place to learn right from wrong.

 

He is currently being sued for by the family for the accident, I guess they haven't punished him enough yet. Maybe a public hanging will put their minds at rest.

 

The one thing that has got myself and all of my friends in trouble with the law is driving.

 

I have recently learnt that there are 10,000 people in Prison for burglary and 15,000 people in Prison for various motoring offences. I think it's time to re-think private transport, unify speed limits, make roads safer (clearly sign posted) dangerous junctions improved or moved to a safer position (e.g. not after a blind hill top) and police to actually be a visual deterant to excessive speed instead of hiding speed camaras everywhere (they aren't working in my county, each year there are more installed and each year the death toll on the roads increases).