Cyclist Assault Conviction

[Nigel-YZ1]

Ban both from driving for life.

 

[Banjo]

[QUOTE 1823572, member: 9609"]Justice seems to be handled so differently when cars are involved, if this attack had been made with a knife, she would be off to Broadmoor.[/quote]

If I stabbed a burglar in my house at 4am I would be very lucky to get away with it despite the crap spouted by home secretary /prime minister about it. Deliberately run over a cyclist and noone seems to give a $hi£

 

[Crankarm]

I'm going to defend us here. The charge has nothing to do with the police, especially in S18. We only get to 'choose' the charge in minor stuff where there's nothing lesser anyway. It's all a decision solely made by CPS.

If it was up to the police, a lot more charges would be laid, and a lot more charges would be raised. Even then, speaking from experience of the days when we could make our own charging decisions, CPS used to lower or drop it if they were scared it wasn't a guaranteed result.

Thanks for your explanation. But surely there are instances where evidence presented to the CPS can be more compelling?

 

[Sara_H]

I wonder if I were to aim a gun at the defendant to scare her and it accidently went off and injured her if the judge would be so lenient.
I have, after all, suffered with depression a bit in the past, and I feel a bit pissed off today.

 

[Crankarm]

I think they are being directed to be lenient as the prison population is already full to bursting point...

How much is it costing us tax payers to keep 'lifers' inside again?

I believe this was a problem in Japan a few years ago. They solved it by executing a few of the lifers who had committed the most heinous crimes.

 

[gaz]

I think they are being directed to be lenient as the prison population is already full to bursting point...

How much is it costing us tax payers to keep 'lifers' inside again?

Around 8 years ago i think it was £26,000 pa for each inmate.

 

[CopperCyclist]

Thanks for your explanation. But surely there are instances where evidence presented to the CPS can be more compelling?

We can present and suggest, but I can assure you, in the vast majority - I'd say 98% of the times - we're presenting for the higher charge. We do this knowing we won't get it, but with the presumption of 'aim for a section 47 and cps will authorise a 39, aim for a 39 and they may not authorise a charge at all'.

If you're suggesting that the quality of the investigating was at fault and not everything gained that could have been, I'll accept this happens - hell, we've heard examples on this forum. However, something that can be said for CPS is once they authorise a charge, they ask for EVERYTHING. No stone unturned everything. Sometimes excessively so*. Hence I can comfortably say that if a charge has resulted, then the police will have presented everything that possibly could have been to CPS, and the charge and subsequent prosecution is purely theirs to either take credit, or be blamed for.

*The 'excessive' example I can quote is a good one. A thirty pound shoplifting from M&S where in interview he suggested that a member of staff had suggested he could take the item of clothing out to the car park to show his partner in the car, and this is what he was doing, as opposed to stealing it - something he had over a hundred (no joke) previous convictions for. The CPS lawyer requested a statement from every member of staff that was on duty at the time to disprove this. This turned out to be twenty something staff members, and the Superintendant took the unusual approach on hearing of this of choosing to simply drop the case, as they didn't believe it to be in the publics interest wasting that amount of time. They did try challenging the decision, suggesting maybe a statement from the manager confirming this would not be store policy or practice, but CPS wouldn't back down.

 

[CopperCyclist]

Around 8 years ago i think it was £26,000 pa for each inmate.

I recall it being similar. Which, when stretched over the number of taxpayers, isn't a lot, and is something I'd willingly pay to keep people who have done something worthy of a life sentence inside prison.

 

[CopperCyclist]

I think they are being directed to be lenient as the prison population is already full to bursting point...

How much is it costing us tax payers to keep 'lifers' inside again?

Yep, and the governments argument for not building more prisons is it would take a couple of years to build them from scratch, so it's it a quick fix.

Funny, I'm sure we had the same issue more than two years ago...

 

[cloggsy]

Around 8 years ago i think it was £26,000 pa for each inmate.

Funny that; it costs just 9p to produce a 9mm bullet... Hmmmm

 

[Headgardener]

Couldn't the government "persuade" a load of inmates to build their own prision/s thereby giving them something to do as well? Must be plenty of builders and related trades locked up just have to put them to work.

 

[A London Cyclist]

Not to sure which forum to post this in but the outcome of a particulary nasty incident against a cyclist was reached in court today in Swansea,see what you think,i was pretty disgusted at the leniency against the charged

http://www.thisissouthwales.co.uk/R...-hit-cyclist/story-15909167-detail/story.html

It is disgusting that the Law appears to be no deterent for these idiots. I was almost killed last night by a lorry pulling out on a roundabout - it was all I could do to stop going under his wheels. Let's see how yet another complaint to RoadSafe ends up - I've also informed his company:
View: http://youtu.be/9__e_EkKYfc
(Video of the incident if you'd like to see it!)

 

[gambatte]

I was almost killed last night by a lorry pulling out on a roundabout - it was all I could do to stop going under his wheels. Let's see how yet another complaint to RoadSafe ends up - I've also informed his company

Nothing to do with the pull out, just curiosity, any reason you entered the RAB in the nearside (left turn) lane rather than moving over one?

 

[benb]

I particularly hate the excuse "M'lud, yes my client committed the theft, but in his defence he is a drug addict stealing to fund his habit". Surely it should be the prosecutor saying "M'lud, the accused is not just a thief, but also a drug user stealing to fund his habit".

I see where you're coming from, but IMHO, drug addiction (but not the attendant robbery) should be a public health issue rather than a criminal one. That is, sending someone to prison just because they are a drug addict is rather counterproductive.

But that's probbly just me being a wooly liberal.

 

[benb]

It seems one can invent an illness and get away with it. I'd like to know if her 'depression' had already been diagnosed, as the court refers that she must see psychology outpatients - I suspect the 'illness' was used as an excuse.

It no longer surprises me. There are lawyers who specialise in 'defending' people and will get them the least 'punishment' when they have clearly done something wrong. I've got one of these 'scum firms' against me in my civil case.

Yes, quite. Everyone is entitled to proper defence, but why should we allow this desperate scrabbling for excuses, once it's clear they are guilty? I think mitigation arguments should only be allowed when the defendant has pled guilty.