Father feels he was denied justice over son’s death.

[ebikeerwidnes]

I always think of my Grandad
We persuaded him to stop driving when he commented that he had been on a drive into North Wales and it got dark
He wasn;t sure - in the dark - whether his headlights were working or not so pulled over
He still couldn;t tell from outside the car even directly in front of the car so put his eye almost up to the headlight - at which point he could see it was on!!!

He was probably about an hours drive from home at this point and made it home!!!

His eye tests said that his eyesight was still OK to drive - he just couldn't see at night.

 

[markemark]

Do you have the data handy?

Sure.

86+ is the highest rate category, followed by 17-24. 71-75 male is behind pretty much all male groups <50

 

[Alex321]

Sure.

86+ is the highest rate category, followed by 17-24. 71-75 male is behind pretty much all male groups <50

There is a massive increase from age 81+ and even the 76-80 is higher than any other group over the age of 35.

 

[markemark]

There is a massive increase from age 81+ and even the 76-80 is higher than any other group over the age of 35.

Indeed. I think these are taking into account the number of drivers, ie the rates. But if you assume there’s massively more <50 than >80 the dangers to everyone is by far the younger groups based on rates and multiplied by the number of them.

 

[matticus]

A father saw his son’s killer walk free from court after a 74 year old driver was convicted of causing death by careless driving by failing to swerve to avoid cyclist David Jones feels he should of been convicted of the more serious charge of causing death by dangerous driving.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-65087228

Given the thread title, I think it's important to add the Father's comments:

Tony said he wanted to speak out for others going through the same thing and - although he disagrees with the suspended sentence - he does not intent to appeal against it.

"It's not going to fetch him back," he said.

 

[froze]

Personally I don't believe in this hierarchy or careless or dangerous. You are either driving safely and diligently, or you are not. Taking a life on the road should be a mandatory custodial sentence, and lifetime revocation of any licence. Society treats road crime with appalling leniency, almost if its somehow a bit forgivable or understandable, like whoops-a-daisy it could happen to any driver through no real fault of their own.

But I'm preaching to the choir here. Slick hits the nail on the head.

Look, I know this subject is very emotional stuff, and I understand your hate towards those that kill others while driving, I get it, but the reality is that most fatalities are just accidents, the driver wasn't drunk, they weren't being intentionally careless, they simply made a mistake, which we are human after all, and to be human is to error, no one is perfect. So to put a person in jail for life for an accident where a mistake was made is crazy to invoke a harsh penalty on someone for.

In the case of a drunk or drugged out person, that person should spend a long time in jail, like at least 20 years for killing someone, because they intentionally went out driving while intoxicated, thus whatever damage or killing they do they intentionally did it. Or 50 plus years for someone who intentionally hits cyclists even if sober.

Old people don't realize they're getting old, they think their fine, and some are, but some are not, those should have their license revoked forever, a problem with revoking a license is that they will just drive anyways, we see this every day with people who got their license suspended for drunk driving, and they'll drive anyway, they don't care. I think someone who causes two fatalities while drunk should be locked up forever, 20 years for the first offense, life for the second.

Besides, the person causing the fatality will have a huge lawsuit from the family to deal with, which could take everything they worked for all their life away from them.

By the way, stay out of Florida riding a bike, Florida has the highest bicycle fatality rate of any state in the nation due to all the old retired people down there.

But restricting licenses does not work the least bit, a person who intentionally causes an accident needs to be locked up for a long while, that will keep them off the road, and hopefully make them think twice before they drink and drive.

 

[markemark]

Look, I know this subject is very emotional stuff, and I understand your hate towards those that kill others while driving, I get it, but the reality is that most fatalities are just accidents, the driver wasn't drunk, they weren't being intentionally careless, they simply made a mistake, which we are human after all, and to be human is to error, no one is perfect. So to put a person in jail for life for an accident where a mistake was made is crazy to invoke a harsh penalty on someone for.

In the case of a drunk or drugged out person, that person should spend a long time in jail, like at least 20 years for killing someone, because they intentionally went out driving while intoxicated, thus whatever damage or killing they do they intentionally did it. Or 50 plus years for someone who intentionally hits cyclists even if sober.

Old people don't realize they're getting old, they think their fine, and some are, but some are not, those should have their license revoked forever, a problem with revoking a license is that they will just drive anyways, we see this every day with people who got their license suspended for drunk driving, and they'll drive anyway, they don't care. I think someone who causes two fatalities while drunk should be locked up forever, 20 years for the first offense, life for the second.

Besides, the person causing the fatality will have a huge lawsuit from the family to deal with, which could take everything they worked for all their life away from them.

By the way, stay out of Florida riding a bike, Florida has the highest bicycle fatality rate of any state in the nation due to all the old retired people down there.

But restricting licenses does not work the least bit, a person who intentionally causes an accident needs to be locked up for a long while, that will keep them off the road, and hopefully make them think twice before they drink and drive.

Sorry I don’t buy that ‘it was just a mistake’ line. Maybe the driver was always really careful and never did anything wrong and this was just one of the million to one scenarios when the driver made their first mistake of the year and it ended up killing someone. After many years of driving and cycling I think it’s more the case that drivers drive terribly and constantly are not paying attention or doing dangerous things. Every now again that results in a death. If people drove like there was a police officer in the car you see the number of KSIs drop to virtually zero and these ‘accidents’ would disappear.

 

[Slick]

What would you expect the copper to say? It wasn't the police phoning his parents to say he'd been killed, it was the parents phoning his mobile, which was picked up by a copper on the scene.

It isn't good, but when asked "is he OK?", I'm not sure he could have said much else really. Any other response would have been false, and unlike when the police initiate the notification, he didn't have time to prepare for an "easy" way to break it.

We are obviously a product of our own experiences, and as a really young boy, I was witness to one of my friends being run over and killed. I can't remember a whole lot of the aftermath of that, but the incident has lived with me since. A few months later, another even younger child was knocked down by a tipper truck, but unbelievably survived. What I do remember was some daft neighbour telling my mother that she thought it was me and she was 99% certain I was dead. Silly bloody woman got it wrong on all counts and sent my mum into panic mode. So maybe I'm thinking about that when I say, he could have just said three has been an accident and what hospital he was being taken to, all of which would have kept it factual. Anyway, its hardly the issue anyway.

That struck me too. What a thoughtlessly cruel thing to say. He could have said he didn’t know but would ascertain as soon as possible, or that medics were attending to him and he would find out. To blurt out what he did was very unprofessional.

Agreed, I'm not even sure he should have answered the guys phone if I'm honest, but no doubt that will be wrong as well.

I understand your point of view, but disagree.

I would be furious if I was given a misleading or inaccurate answer to such a serious question. Nothing less than honesty would be acceptable.

Maybe shows there is no 'right answer.

Nothing less than honesty would do for me either, but 99% would have sent me over the edge. I think your right though, no right answer for us all.

 

[HMS_Dave]

Yes, unbelievable leniency. Justice, denied....

I don't believe the driver set out to kill a person that day, but his neglectful actions did result in just that. Clearly, unaware of another road user, failed to take appropriate action and showed little remorse according to the victims family, the father knew the man... Driving a car is not god given right. The right is obtained through the correct demonstration of being able to handle and safely operate a motor vehicle, understanding of the laws of the road and the correct legalities obtained. He fell short of this. Just something else the victims family have to suffer with...

 

[Speicher]

I have temporarily locked this thread. Some recent posts have been argumentative, insulting and off-topic. The thread may be reopened later, after the Moderator Team have looked at it.

 

[Pat "5mph"]

Mod Note:
Some OT posts have been removed: please let's keep to the OP from here on, cheers.
Thread reopened.

 

[Big T]

I remember sorting out my dad’s car insurance. Once he got to 80, the premiums went up substantially, and the older he got the more they went up. He gave up driving at 84 and gave his car to me. It was only 2 years old but had scapes down the side where he had misjudged gaps when driving into his driveway. He should not really have been driving past 80, I think. He admitted that his eyesight had deteriorated.

 

[froze]

Sorry I don’t buy that ‘it was just a mistake’ line. Maybe the driver was always really careful and never did anything wrong and this was just one of the million to one scenarios when the driver made their first mistake of the year and it ended up killing someone. After many years of driving and cycling I think it’s more the case that drivers drive terribly and constantly are not paying attention or doing dangerous things. Every now again that results in a death. If people drove like there was a police officer in the car you see the number of KSIs drop to virtually zero and these ‘accidents’ would disappear.

Did you see the accident happen? Did you read the complete accident report? If you did not then you have no right to judge either for or against. We live in a factual world, you can't sentence someone to jail or death based on your emotions and not on any evidence, if we were able to do that a lot of people would be in jail that are innocent, maybe even you.

Police officers even have at-fault accidents, so your statement about KSI would drop to virtually zero because cops being around is not true, accidents happen, and they will continue to happen; heck accidents could actually increase as more people would be looking at their rearview mirrors trying to figure out why a cop is tailing them, and then fail to see something going on in front of them!

 

[HMS_Dave]

Did you see the accident happen? Did you read the complete accident report? If you did not then you have no right to judge either for or against. We live in a factual world, you can't sentence someone to jail or death based on your emotions and not on any evidence, if we were able to do that a lot of people would be in jail that are innocent, maybe even you.

Police officers even have at-fault accidents, so your statement about KSI would drop to virtually zero because cops being around is not true, accidents happen, and they will continue to happen; heck accidents could actually increase as more people would be looking at their rearview mirrors trying to figure out why a cop is tailing them, and then fail to see something going on in front of them!

Have you seen or read the complete accident report? What gives your opinion more weight than anybody else's if you're offering no facts or premise to your counter argument in this factual world?

Besides, one fact that is indisputable is that the driver was convicted for "causing death by dangerous driving". I will await your report on how this as you have mentioned is just a "mistake"....

the driver wasn't drunk, they weren't being intentionally careless, they simply made a mistake

Lets try to stick to the facts and evidence you demand and maybe you can quote where in the accident report you think the judge got it wrong with the judgement of "causing death by dangerous driving". Additionally, how do you know that the driver wasn't being intentionally careless?

 

[All uphill]

I think the problem with the idea of "just an accident" is the implication that they will always happen, and nothing could or should be done to stop them happening. In other words there is nothing that can be done, when the evidence of falling death and injury rates on UK roads shows that there is much that can be done.

I understand that some of the things that need to be done impinge on a few people's interpretation of personal freedom- speed limits, annual roadworthiness checks.

If you were going on a flight would you prefer the pilot was highly- trained, and following strict procedures, or relied on hope that they wouldn't have an unlucky accident?