Pays to have friends in the right places

[Oldfart 0]

Totally fecking disgusted

http://www.visordown.com/motorcycle-news--general-news/policewoman-escapes-prosecution-after-killing-biker/22331.html

[fr499y 0]

1 word

BULLSHIT. They wonder why they have a bad name? they will protect themselves and give little shit to everyone else. Throw the book at her the same way as any other driver!!

[Oldfart 0]

Just found this report

“Two drivers who were the closest to the collision stated that when Ms Carpenter pulled out her manoeuvre was safe and did not inconvenience them. This supported Ms Carpenter’s account, which stated that she checked both ways before pulling out”

It sure inconvenienced the biker. The b*tch killed him. Evidently she turned up to court laughing about it and actually lied initially about what she had done. Hope his family sue her arse off!!!

[bladerunner 0]

she states she had the phone in her lap after answering a brief incoming call, the offence is holding a mobile phone whilst in control of a motor vehicle,so how did she answer the phone, she must have had hold of it therefore she committed an offence.but what does the truth have to do with it when its only another pesky biker..

[Grumpyowl 0]

Nothing more I can add.

The Law is out off touch with modern life

[Chadatious 0]

terrible!

[lee1 1]

The bottom part of the statement

However, Dorset Police’s accident investigator PC John Hayward, speaking to Bournemouth Coroner’s Court, said: ‘The use of her mobile phone can only have been a distraction and has very likely contributed to her not seeing the motorcyclist.'

should be enough to convict her of causeing death by careless driveing,its the guys family I feel sorry for

its a sad state of affairs when the law wont uphold the law

[Stue11 0]

Same as the drink drive law.....because theres a limit folk will try and drink whithin it...if i had my way i'd ban all usage of mobiles whether it be a stupid ear piece or an hands free then theres no arguements simples

[Oldfart 0]

The strange thing is you see police on their own mobiles and radios when driving. Saw one in Nottm today but sadly it seems as though they are above the law. I agree with you Stue but a survey of car drivers said that 80% couldnt see a problem with texting while driving!!!

[Macie_UK 0]

My (probably biased) opinion is that if it was the other way around the outcome may have been different - not to mention annoyance that the reporter felt the need to specify that the biker wasn't speeding, but as far as the court goes it's all about the burden of proof.

Yes it's tragic, she initially lied and it's another common case of a biker suffering greater loss than the car driver that was allegedly at fault, but:

Answering a mobile phone in itself is not an offence and neither is talking on one. Whilst it may be a distraction, that alone can't be enough to constitute a conviction for causing death by dangerous or careless surely?

The thing that gets me is simply the lack of consistency. There have been a lot of cases of motorists pulling out in front of bikers causing injury or worse, all with fairly similar circumstances but with convictions ranging from nothing at all to jail time. Obviously the DCA / careless or dangerous offence penalty is upgraded when there is a fatality, but other than that how do you get consistency?

Should every 'SMIDSY' constitute a 'careless driving' charge, regardless of road conditions? Personally I think that it should, but all you will get then is "well I did see him, but misjudged his speed / the gap" and then your into a new can of worms ruling on personal perception and judgement.

What should the driving distraction laws cover? Banning all use of mobiles whilst driving may in itself be a bit simplistic - I often get more distracted listening to (or shouting at!) the radio than taking a call, do we ban car stereos too? Having the heater on full whack might make you a bit drowsy - do we stop fitting those too?

Yes you can technically get done for fiddling with your stereo whilst driving - or anything where they can say that you're not in full control of the vehicle, but does anyone really, truly believe that taking a swig of pop whilst your car is stationary is such a bad thing?

Whatever the particular laws, there has always been a perceived inconsistency in sentencing and that's just in motoring. Start comparing driving convictions with other crimes and to many people it just gets even more off-kilter.

Still feel sorry for the biker and his family though and I suppose a civil case quite likely to follow.

Just my 2p.

[BanditMike 0]

Most of it already been said. However, Macie_UK has a point:

"Should every 'SMIDSY' constitute a 'careless driving' charge, regardless of road conditions? Personally I think that it should, but all you will get then is "well I did see him, but misjudged his speed / the gap" and then your into a new can of worms ruling on personal perception and judgement."

Same as Stue:

"Same as the drink drive law.....because theres a limit folk will try and drink whithin it...if i had my way i'd ban all usage of mobiles whether it be a stupid ear piece or an hands free then theres no arguements simples"

I agree with both. Maybe it's what we need. Too many people on the road, both cars and, unfortunately, bikes as well seem unable to properly judge distances and are unable to look ahead and assess what is likely to happen. I don't know how you'd do it, but this should be monitored. I think we've all been behind the guy doing 50, or even 40, on a mainline trunk road with a 70 limit!