Zak Carr- writ issued.

[spindrift]

http://www.eveningnews24.co.uk/cont...gory=News&itemid=NOED08 Aug 2008 08:09:27:230

The widow of a champion cyclist has launched a £300,000 claim against the Norwich publican who killed him when he fell asleep at the wheel of his car.

Zak Carr, 30, was cycling along the northbound carriageway of the A11 in October 2005 when he was knocked off his bike by a Rover 220i driven by Donald Pearce.

In January 2007 Mr Pearce, then landlord of the Farmhouse pub in Colman Road, was jailed for five years after being found guilty of death by dangerous driving.

Zak Carr

 

[hackbike 6]

FFS this is so sad.

 

[PBancroft]

FFS this is so sad.

Sad that he was killed, or sad that the writ has been issued?

 

[spindrift]

I recall the witness evidece was that the driver didn't stop, was flagged down by another driver, did not go back to check on Zak and instead got his phone out and called his lawyer.

 

[yenrod]

I recall the witness evidece was that the driver didn't stop, was flagged down by another driver, did not go back to check on Zak and instead got his phone out and called his lawyer.

Yet another class ****ing twat !!!

 

[spindrift]

Pearce's counsel, Laurence Bruce, asked if he felt tired before setting off from the airport, to which he replied: "I wouldn't get into a car if I didn't feel safe to drive." He added that he did not feel tired during the journey.

He became emotional when asked about the effect the accident had had on him, saying he was devastated and his life had not been the same since.

Mr Farmer asked: "If you are a person who can drive along in a motor car which, after all, is a lethal weapon, and kill someone and just not know how it happened, that in itself is pretty dangerous, isn't it?" Pearce agreed.

He said he did not think he had drifted into a layby but agreed that evidence from the scene revealed he had done.

"Can you offer any justification for a normal and competent driver to drive into a layby like that?" asked Mr Farmer.

"No," said Pearce, agreeing it fell far below what he would expect of a driver.

"And that's how you drove?" said Mr Farmer.

"Must have been," replied Pearce, who also agreed it fell below normal standards for a driver not to notice what was ahead of him and not to stop immediately after hitting someone, as he had done.

Mr Farmer suggested to Pearce that

it looked as if the most viable explanation was he had fallen asleep behind the wheel.

"It does," said Pearce.

"You have admitted the statutory elements of this offence. What is your defence?" asked Mr Farmer.

"I don't know," said Pearce.

"Are you hoping for a perverse verdict - a sympathy vote?" Mr Farmer continued. "This is pretty serious. Are you in fact admitting no defence to this charge against you?"

"No," said Pearce, who confirmed he was not admitting the charged when asked by Mr Bruce.

http://new.edp24.co.uk/content/news...gory=News&itemid=NOED04 Jan 2007 21:10:56:550

 

[hackbike 6]

Sad that he was killed, or sad that the writ has been issued?

If you cant use your common sense I wont bother answering this.

 

[spindrift]

£300,000 seems awfully low, is it just for the horrible emotional turmoil or loss of earnings?

 

[PBancroft]

If you cant use your common sense I wont bother answering this.

It's a genuine question, with no attempt to be facetious or moral upmanship. Both could be valid viewpoints, and I just wondered if you would be able to clarify - I could make an educated guess, but then I've been wrong on such matters of late.

 

[hackbike 6]

The cyclist of course.

 

[spen666]

The cyclist of course.

Doesn't answer the perfectly reasonable question asked

what is so sad?

The accident happening?

The fact that a writ has had to be issued *

Both events




* I'm interested to learn more about this ( Patrick Can you help me?) as my understanding is that WRITS had been abolished some years ago in England & Wales. Could it be lazy journalism not bothering to get facts?

 

[hackbike 6]

I meant it's so sad what happened to the cyclist.Being killed by this incident I mean.

 

[LLB]

£300,000 seems awfully low, is it just for the horrible emotional turmoil or loss of earnings?

Loss of earnings @£25k for 10 year is the standard IIRC in cases like this, loss of life would probably not amount to more than about £50k.

An old neighbour of mine was knocked off his m/cycle by a drunk driver and left a widow and his 6 month old baby son fatherless. This was approx what his widow got 20 years ago, but adjusted then for earnings and inflation.

Should be fairly cut and dried after the verdict for Zak Carr, byt usually takes a couple of years for the insurance companies and lawyers to reach a settlement and hand over the cheque.

The driver got 5 years, and no amount of money will bring Mr Carr back. You can't put a sum on someones life which can be reconciled to the loss of their nearest and dearest. Life can be really unfair at times!

 

[spindrift]

Doesn't answer the perfectly reasonable question asked

what is so sad?

The accident happening?

The fact that a writ has had to be issued *

Both events




* I'm interested to learn more about this ( Patrick Can you help me?) as my understanding is that WRITS had been abolished some years ago in England & Wales. Could it be lazy journalism not bothering to get facts?[/quote]

Probably.


The EDP excelled themselves when originally reporting the death, noting sensitively that it caused "traffic chaos".