Driver tries to kill cyclist, hits building.

[spen666]

It's an interesting question, if I attempt to harm you in way which is very likely to result in your death, but at that time my mental state is not decided on if I want to kill or just injure you i.e. I am just in an uncontrollable rage. Is it attempted murder or not?

I understand where you are coming from, but there is insufficient evidence here of any intent even to cause serious harm, let alone more.

By over hyping the story bandying about murder or attempted murder without any evidence to back it up all we end up doing is alienating people and not getting the public support we should get.

 

[jarlrmai]

How? She was scared for her children's safety and attempted to ram him with a car? I think that's bullshit but I bet that what the defence is once the dust has settled.

 

[spen666]

It says in the article that she had children in the car! As she wasn't a big enough t*** already!!

Having children in the car is not evidence of attempted murder or attempted GBH, in fact it appears on the face of it that its not evidence of anything other than they had children in the car

 

[spen666]

How? She was scared for her children's safety and attempted to ram him with a car? I think that's bullshit but I bet that what the defence is once the dust has settled.

How what?

 

[glenn forger]

Apologised at the scene, which is not what insurers advise.

 

[BSRU]

Apologised at the scene, which is not what insurers advise.

No that's admitting liability is not allowed, even when it's clearly your fault.

 

[Sods_Laur]

It can't be much else.

To prove attempted murder, the Crown would have to convince a jury the woman wanted to kill the cyclist.

We don't know the circumstances, but if she ran him over once and stopped, she's not - beyond reasonable doubt - trying to kill him - why not reverse and have another go?

However, anyone who deliberately drives a car into a cyclist - even if 'only' once - is almost certainly trying to injure the cyclist.

Exactly, which is why a charge of attempted GBH is often preferred to, and easier to convict for, than attempted murder.

 

[glenn forger]

No that's admitting liability is not allowed, even when it's clearly your fault.

Yeah, an apology implies fault, I'm sure it says in the docs don't apologise but it's too hot to Google.

 

[BSRU]

Yeah, an apology implies fault, I'm sure it says in the docs don't apologise but it's too hot to Google.

Understandable

 

[jarlrmai]

That bus driver got 17 months for GBH for a very similar incident.

 

[Profpointy]

That bus driver got 17 months for GBH for a very similar incident.

yes, but he's working class, so needs keeping in his place. A well-to-do middle class mother defending her children against a lycra lout - he had it coming

 

[glenn forger]

She'll get killer driver Dr Helen Measures' brief, the one who specialises in this sort of stuff.

The "in fear for my family's life" excuse seemed to have worked for that New York Range Rover driver who fled some bikers, killing one. That was a bunch of bikers though, not a disabled chap on a bike.

 

[jarlrmai]

Was that the one where a gang of bikers were brake testing him and when he hit the bike, they tried to enter the vehicle?

 

[glenn forger]

Yeah, completely different I know but I wonder how far you could take the argument, say the Range Rover driver ploughed through a school playground to escape? Where do you draw the line.

 

[Markymark]

I saw that clip of the guy in America (assuming its the same one). I'd have feared for my safety and got the hell out of there too. He didn't ram them on purpose but he fled without worrying who he knocked off. They surrounded his car and were banging on the windows if I remember.