"I can't help it if a cyclist falls over"

[snorri]

It rather looks to me as if the guy saw the car coming towards him and braked, his friend failed to brake sufficiently hard, collided with him, lost her balance and fell into the road. It may well have been that if balance had not been lost the car would have got through without a contact. Although there would have been no collision without the overbalancing, it appears to have been ignored that it was driver action that caused the cyclists to brake and one to overbalance.

 

[lukesdad]

It rather looks to me as if the guy saw the car coming towards him and braked, his friend failed to brake sufficiently hard, collided with him, lost her balance and fell into the road. It may well have been that if balance had not been lost the car would have got through without a contact. Although there would have been no collision without the overbalancing, it appears to have been ignored that it was driver action that caused the cyclists to brake and one to overbalance.

From the report in the local paper, it would seem there is some doubt if there was any contact between the car and the cyclist ?

 

[Pale Rider]

"Flung 15 yards"

That quote seems to be from the boyfriend, most of the action happened behind him and it looks like he was unable to say if the MINI struck the killed cyclist or not.

The car would have been examined very closely, maybe some evidence there has not been reported, but the jury will have heard it.

 

[theclaud]

There is a point to be made, but not in that place and not at that time.

No there isn't. Except that, as long as we focus on the behaviour of the victim and not that of the perpetrator, the breathtaking arrogance of dangerous drivers will continue to intimidate novices off the road, or kill them.

 

[Origamist]

Two cyclists get left a gap of circa 2ft by a car coming in the opposite direction, wholly in their lane, on a right hand bend, travelling at up to 50mph.

It sounds like the jury did hear more detail, but if anything, it makes Dr Measures sound more culpable, not less.

 

[Lincov]

There are two contributing factors here, one is that a reckless overtaking, over the centre of the road, without clear visibility, and the second the inexperience of the cyclist who panicked in the face of the oncoming car. However, from any objective standpoint it seems completely clear that without the drivers reckless manoeuvre the inexperience of the cyclist would have been irrelevant.

We need a very clear message that dangerous, intimidating, or otherwise careless driving around cyclists is illegal, regardless of the consequences of the manoeuvre. It is up to the person driving the large metal box weighing several tons to take extra care around the person with no exterior protection, who may (let's be honest) be more likely to wobble or be unpredictable if they haven't yet clocked up hundreds of miles of experience. Not up to the vulnerable cyclist to be capable of dealing with all the vagaries of the car driver. Seems obvious enough to me...

 

[deptfordmarmoset]

The law courts have just said about that 'predatory' 13 year old something to the effect that ''under-age victims need more protection, not less.''
Similarly, inexperienced riders need more protection not less.

 

[Ron-da-Valli]

I'm absolutely fuming at this verdict. A doctor, pharmaceutical consultant, cancer specialist, ex parish bell ringer, keen cyclist and mother, drives on the wrong side of the road, killing an " immigrant" waitress on a 2nd hand bike. That's what it boils down to. I'd like to know who the judge was in this case and if he had any previous similar cases. He ultimately " instructs" the jury. I consider myself to be an experienced cyclist but even I would have panicked at the sight on an oncoming car at speed. The inconsistencies of the drivers statement should have been enough for any jury.First she didn't see the cyclists, then when she did she decided to carry on, at speed, and it was the cyclists fault for "falling over". An absolutely disgusting travesty of justice.

 

[Ron-da-Valli]

Oh and apparently Miss Perinova was wearing an old helmet of her boyfriends that had been adjusted to fit her. So the head injuries were her own fault were they? And aren't all helmets " adjusted" to fit the wearer?

 

[glenn forger]

Verdict can't be appealed, can complaints be made officially about Janick Fielding's filthy little outburst?

 

[Origamist]

Verdict can't be appealed, can complaints be made officially about Janick Fielding's filthy little outburst?

The defence might have been distasteful, but from Janick's LinkedIn page (my bolds) this is a run of the mill case for him:

Janick is an heavyweight criminal defence practitioner, with a well established practice in London and the South East. Well known for his fearless cross- examination and excellent closing speeches, Janick is often instructed by those solicitors that have attracted difficult clients who adamantly refuse to plead in the face of overwhelming evidence. Many of his finest results have come from those cases where the client has already sacked previous counsel after unwanted pressure to crack the case has been applied. No matter how narrow the defence, regardless of how implausible it may seem on the facts, if the client insists on running it then Janick will be only too pleased to fight it.

http://www.linkedin.com/pub/janick-fielding/34/281/407

 

[glenn forger]

Measures was going to a garden centre so maybe her work insurance didn't cover her? Maybe she just paid a load of money to get off killing a young woman by employing a Mr Loophole sleazebag.

 

[Boris Bajic]

None of us knows the exact circumstances of this tragedy, nor what presented fact, facts or evidence caused the jury to return a verdict of NG.

They did return that verdict and it seems an unusual one. The initial charge also seems unusual, as one might expect an unbroken centre line where passing was dangerous and yet there is no charge related to that. But that was the outcome of the case. The judge will have made it clear to the jury what they had to consider and where they had to weigh up one testimony against another. I haven't seen a transcript of the case. Has any of us?

If there is an appeal or a complaint to be made about the case, the defence counsel or the handling of the case, this forum is not the place to make it.

There is a lot of invective being poured on the defence barrister. Without wanting to defend a summing-up I have not read, we can imagine for a moment that we are being hauled in front of the Crown Court ourselves on a matter where the punishment would be severe and where we consider ourselves (rightly or wrongly) to be innocent. Our solicitor offers us two barristers to represent us in court: "Ms Able will make a good case, present the facts as they are and the jury will find you guilty. But Mr Baker will use every trick in the book, play on the insecurities of the jury, try to read and to play to their prejudices and tear every prosecution witness apart with absolutely no punches pulled".

Which counsel would you choose, Ms Able or Mr Baker? I would choose Mr Baker every time. I believe most of us would. Our issue with him is when he wins for the client we don't approve of.

He was doing his job. He won. Far from sullying his reputation, he has enhanced it.

 

[Spinney]

Then that is a damming statement about the justice system, where the facts are less important than how they can be twisted.

 

[mcshroom]

Then that is a damming statement about the justice system, where the facts are less important than how they can be twisted.

"The Best Justice Money Can Buy"