• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

The CUK jury decide - guilty or not?

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    The CUK jury decide - guilty or not?

    Driver 'ran over drunk student as he lay asleep in the road' - Telegraph

    -------------------------------------------------------------
    Miss Jackson later told police she thought she had run over the body of a badger, having had no idea the dark mound in the road was a person.

    Mr Dry said: "By her account she had not been aware of the object until she was on top of it, with no time to brake. She said she first became aware of it a metre away.

    "She accepts she had things on her mind and may have been chatting to her passenger and may have been distracted.

    "It is the crown's case she cannot have been paying proper attention given her failure to see the danger and take appropriate action."

    Miss Cook, of Willington, County Durham, denies causing death by careless driving and the trial continues.
    -------------------------------------------------------------

    Personally I say guilty. I get fed up with people driving a car like they are out walking. They are in control of a dangerous weapon and should act accordingly.

    #2
    Guilty of driving without due care and attention.

    10:15 at night in March isn't pitch black so would still be light and a person is big enough for you to see, mitigating circumstances are if I see an animal in the road and can't stop in time I hit it, sorry but swerving etc. to avoid an animal only puts you and other road users at risk. Also the druck has to take some of the blame too
    Originally posted by Stevie Wonder Boy
    I can't see any way to do it can you please advise?

    I want my account deleted and all of my information removed, I want to invoke my right to be forgotten.

    Comment


      #3
      Originally posted by SimonMac View Post
      Guilty of driving without due care and attention.

      10:15 at night in March isn't pitch black so would still be light and a person is big enough for you to see, mitigating circumstances are if I see an animal in the road and can't stop in time I hit it, sorry but swerving etc. to avoid an animal only puts you and other road users at risk. Also the druck has to take some of the blame too
      It was March 20th, so would have been pretty dark. Also March 20, 2015 — Total Solar Eclipse was the eclipse.
      What happens in General, stays in General.
      You know what they say about assumptions!

      Comment


        #4
        The important legal point here is not that she caused the death. It's that she's being accused of careless driving.

        It's an addendum that the death was caused by that carelessness. They need to prove she wasn't driving carefully - being distracted and not seeing an object in your path until about a metre away sounds pretty careless - and that her driving in this way caused the death. She's not being accused of dangerous driving or manslaughter.

        Comment


          #5
          Originally posted by Ticktock View Post
          The important legal point here is not that she caused the death. It's that she's being accused of careless driving.

          It's an addendum that the death was caused by that carelessness. They need to prove she wasn't driving carefully - being distracted and not seeing an object in your path until about a metre away sounds pretty careless - and that her driving in this way caused the death. She's not being accused of dangerous driving or manslaughter.
          I had this once before, came driving down the road in the dark to see something in the road, so slowed down. On approaching it was a teenage lad lying in the road egged on by his mates. I had to slow down, stop, get out, grab him by the scruff and drag him out of the road with a 'you f*****g idiot to which he gave me a mouthful.

          Wish I'd run the little tulip over.
          What happens in General, stays in General.
          You know what they say about assumptions!

          Comment


            #6
            Was she driving carelessly? I'd say yes.

            Did her careless driving cause death? Yes.

            Guilty.
            Best Forum Advisor 2014
            Work in the public sector? You can read my FAQ here
            Click here to get 15% off your first year's IPSE membership

            Comment


              #7
              High quality reporting there

              Miss Jackson later told police she thought she had run over the body of a badger, having had no idea the dark mound in the road was a person.

              Mr Dry said: "By her account she had not been aware of the object until she was on top of it, with no time to brake. She said she first became aware of it a metre away.

              "She accepts she had things on her mind and may have been chatting to her passenger and may have been distracted.

              "It is the crown's case she cannot have been paying proper attention given her failure to see the danger and take appropriate action."

              Miss Cook, of Willington, County Durham, denies causing death by careless driving and the trial continues.
              They could at least keep the defendant's surname consistent...
              merely at clientco for the entertainment

              Comment


                #8
                Originally posted by eek View Post
                High quality reporting there



                They could at least keep the defendant's surname consistent...
                Torygraph is the new DailyMail.

                Comment


                  #9
                  Not guilty. It's a road.

                  Cars are legally required to have lights, and indeed you can be prosecuted for not using them. Why are we saying that a driver should reasonably be expected to see a person lying in the road when they're not reasonably expected to see a 1 1/2 tonne lump of metal?
                  Will work inside IR35. Or for food.

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Other drivers stopped to remove what they could only see in the darkness was some kind of obstacle.
                    But when police reconstructed the scene they found a mannequin used to stand in for Mr Cook's motionless form was visible 123 metres ahead, giving them nine seconds to stop.
                    He was visible, the guy was a moron but it looks like she was not paying full attention to the road.
                    "He's actually ripped" - Jared Padalecki

                    https://youtu.be/l-PUnsCL590?list=PL...dNeCyi9a&t=615

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X