Driver view of Jason MacIntyre's fatal accident.

[snorri]

unfortunate incident like this one and subsequently jailed for their momentary lapse of concentration.

There has been no suggestion of a "momentary lapse of concentration" in this case.

 

[domtyler]

Oh yes. If you've done something and it's your fault, you take the punishment. It isn't always the fault of the driver, but when it is, punishment should be made. I include me in that, by the way. IMO the current law on drivers being at fault when causing death is far, far too lenient.

In general this is true, but in this specific case I think the judge got it right. I was surprised to hear that the family were baying for blood.

 

[wafflycat]

Dom, you really do come out with the most crass comments on occasion. The family are not 'baying for blood' What the BBC article says is this:

"The family of Jason MacIntyre, 34, had wanted Robert McTaggart, 36, prosecuted on charges of culpable homicide, or causing death by dangerous driving."

Hardly baying for blood.

 

[yello]

He claimed the cyclist was not wearing high-visibility clothing and was in a "hunkered down" position, making his body size very small.

I've never heard the latter excuse used and how would he have known unless he saw him?

My thoughts exactly when I read the article.

 

[snorri]

I think the judge got it right.

There was no judge involved in this case.
According to the radio report the PF sought a charge of dangerous driving, but the Crown office in Edinburgh reduced the charge to careless driving. When interviewed on radio the father reckoned the driver could have had the cyclist in view for 16 seconds.

 

[yenrod]

"The short road into the council depot cuts across the cycle track at right angles and I would have expected any cyclists to watch for vehicles on this road and wait until they have passed. I can only assume Jason did not notice me swinging off the main road into the side road.


In other words the stupid f u c k e r was drivnig too fast and hes mentions that Jason (respects) was not looking for cars:

(I'm refering to the driver as DICK)

DICK was in totoal ignorance of the FACT that he needs to respect other road users not use the veicle as a battering ram. I know for a fact he has flouted one law straight away: not being aware of those around him = otherwise he would not have hit anyone never mind Jason (respects).

That bastard needs locking away !

And the lowest of the low goes further by saying:

"I don't want to cause further upset but I don't believe there was anything wrong with my driving."

BEGGARS BELIEF - HE'LL REPENT ONE DAY - WHEN HE'S DEAD :?:

 

[yenrod]

Theirs no debate in this - he simply needs locking away

He's a danger to himself and humanity.

Nothing more

 

[Disgruntled Goat]

£500 and a six month ban for killing someone because they weren't paying attention. There is a lot I could say, but I won't as I'm sure most people will share my revulsion at the leiniancy of this sentence.

A women keeps stum about her husband faking his canoe-related 'suicide' and defrauds a company for £250,000 and gets six years.

Kill someones father,husband and son and you get £500 fine.

Is that how much a cyclist is worth these days?

 

[spindrift]

£500 and a six month ban for killing someone because they weren't paying attention. There is a lot I could say, but I won't as I'm sure most people will share my revulsion at the leiniancy of this sentence.

A women keeps stum about her husband faking his canoe-related 'suicide' and defrauds a company for £250,000 and gets six years.

Kill someones father,husband and son and you get £500 fine.

Is that how much a cyclist is worth these days?

Exactly. Why the reference to hi vis?

Why claim the cyclist was "tucked in" and therefore hard to see?

Does that mean any child can be killed on the roads by a sloppy, inattentive, killer driver and get away scot free with a fine less than the cost of the bike?

The mitigation put forward is sickening, I cannot believe this verdict.

 

[gazzaputt]

A total disgrace.

Again this country shows total disregard for human life if you cycle.

 

[spindrift]

Police investigations had found that Mr MacIntyre would have been
visible for a full 16 seconds if he had been cycling at the 30mph
estimated by another witness."

http://tinyurl.com/6qy4fz

http://www.theherald.co.uk/news/news/display.var.2420620.0.Driver_who...

The victim's father said that
"the local procurator-fiscal recommended dangerous driving charges but
that the Crown Office downgraded the charge to careless driving,
despite an appeal from the family.

"The Crown Office view is that this standard of driving falls below
normal standards. We are of the view that this standard of driving
falls far below normal standards and is deserving of a more serious
charge."

He refused to accept that to drive along a road unaware of oncoming
traffic for 16 seconds, to cross in front of oncoming traffic thereby
causing death, amounted only to careless driving. That the Crown
Office did, he said, "was a terrifying indictment on our society"."

The Press and Journal says:-

"There is great deal of difference between a driver who is guilty of a
momentary lapse of concentration and one who drives in a deliberately
reckless manner without regard for the lethal consequences. However,
the results are the same for the families left behind in terms of
their grief and lifelong suffering. They do not grade the drivers’
actions. They do not understand the subtle distinctions in the law
which can have such a great bearing on cases. Many argue that it is
another weakness in the law which discriminates against the victims."

http://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/Article.aspx/777542?UserKey=0

Beyond belief.

 

[John the Monkey]

Is that how much a cyclist is worth these days?

To be fair, I don't think it's just cyclists - killing someone on the road seems to be acceptable (unless you do it whilst under the influence).

There also seems to be a huge gap between the public perception of how dangerous their vehicle is to others, and how much attention is required whilst driving it, and reality as well, I'd say (if people genuinely knew, surely we wouldn't see them on mobiles, or fiddling with their radios, or passing too close, etc).

Look at the post a while back about the article in one of the London papers (about the guy who wasn't cycling anymore). He gets knocked off by a woman who freely admits to him that she was messing with her cd player at the time - she'll be drving still, and I doubt very much that her behaviour while doing so has changed.

 

[soulful dog]

Cyclist Jason Bottomley fell off his bike after he hit a pothole on a road near Huddersfield. His right ear was almost severed and his racing cycle was badly damaged. Although he only claimed £250 to cover the cost of repairs, the council refused to pay out. When he involved a solicitor, he won £6,000 for personal injuries as well as the repair bill.
Source: BBC Inside Out

I know that claiming damages is a different thing, but how on earth can it be right that someone is awarded £6000 for injuring their ear and damaging their bike in a pothole, when someone dies and all that happens is that the courts ban the guy from driving for six months and fine him £500?

Where's the justice in that and why should Mr MacIntyre's family have to consider some kind of claim to get proper justice?

 

[spindrift]

The driver claimed he didn't see jason, but also claimed he thought he was on the cycle path.

The killer driver has opted to pay the fine at £50 a month.

 

[simon l& and a half]

this is a revolting case - almost on a par with the North Wales one.