Traffic Cops working hard..

[StMarks]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-43716912" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Cavetroll87]

dam that was a hard read, good work by the coppers but gutting story

[Kwacky]

Hats off to the police for their work in that case.

Words fail me for the driver. I'll end up banning myself from this forum if I vent my true thoughts.

That poor biker and his family. They did nothing to deserve that. Those he leaves behind pay a life sentence for one man's actions.

[Cavetroll87]

as you say kwacky it is properly heart breaking for that blokes family, all because of 1 complete and utter helmet.

[Cav]

Bravo, Bob! Terrible circumstances and events but at least the family have closure on the events that happened

[C00kiemonster]

My god. People like that should never be allowed out.

I cant say publicly what he really deserves. RIP fellow biker.

[D41]

That's a long read. They can call that "death by dangerous driving" all day long....I read it as second-degree murder, plain & simple.
Key moment being when the driver sped up to follow the passing rider....total change of driver mindset at that point.

[StMarks]

"He had been tootling along at 55 -57mph, until the motorcycle passed him, then cameras showed him pursuing the bike at over 80 "
&
"Sweeting, of Bettws, Newport, who had had 21 convictions across 35 offences dating back to 1979, was given seven years in prison for death by dangerous driving, 12 months for attempting to pervert the course of justice, and was disqualified for driving for six years."

People like that ^ are at the root causes of much of Human Society's problems imho.

[D41]

Yep, and odds are he will NEVER change, because in his mind he did the 'right-thing-that-ended-badly', and that's all he did. He'll justify it to himself (and anyone daft enough to listen) all day long.....he's been doing it already for years/decades.

[Jack]

he's a cnut as is anyone who ignores medical advice regarding their driving particularly when it's eyesight related , it makes me wonder how many other people he has pulled out on or turned into because he couldn't see them and obviously couldn't care .

[StMarks]

he's a cnut as is anyone who ignores medical advice regarding their driving particularly when it's eyesight related , it makes me wonder how many other people he has pulled out on or turned into because he couldn't see them and obviously couldn't care .

Whilst his poor eyesight was a valid issue, I read it as yet him almost using it as another mitigation rather than being a cause.
Fwiw it seemed apparent to me that, based on the evidence retrieved, he almost certainly acted maliciously because he had been overtaken?

[Stonesie]

That's how I read it too, he saw the bike just fine and got himself into a rage because a bike doing 70 overtook him while he was doing less than 60.

I hope that his driving ban starts on the day of his release but with his history and actions in this case I would not put it past him to just pick up a cheap banger and drive while banned.

Cracking work by the traffic officer there though

[Jack]

The article doesn't make it clear which side entered his poor eyesight as evidence , he really is an idiot if he gave the information voluntarily as that alone would open him up to dangerous driving , I don't know if it was malicious I doubt he intended to run him off the road or to cause a collision I imagine he had had a drink or two and decided to get a bit racey when he got overtaken , the drink and his poor eyesight and judgement caused the tragedy and he did a runner because he had been drinking . I'm not condoning his behaviour in any way or trying to excuse it , he sounds like a horrible excuse of a man but I don't think we can attribute intent to cause harm to him in relation to the initial contact .

[nsr500]

Read that earlier too, no excuse to act that way, ex army or not, great read, cops in this country are slated a lot, but when someone takes the time to pin down what happened then all credit to them. Shocking way to behave, but i do think the penalty was light, it comes down to intent, if he meant it bang him up for life, end of.

[D41]

Intent to cause harm?? Maybe not consciously or with malice, but what else should the court do?
Any way you cut it a man is dead through the actions of another, who else is going to be held accountable?? It's not like this guy is a model citizen....he has a long history of fcuking up along similar lines.

[Jack]

As I stated I am not condoning what he did , I do think he was correctly charged and penalised but we are not in a position to say with any amount of certainty that he had the intent to do harm or that he acted maliciously only that his actions which were reckless and dangerous caused the death of an innocent man .

[D41]

Not with any amount of "certainty" per se, no....just beyond a reasonable doubt.

[Jack]

no not even that, we have no idea what he was thinking , if he was thinking at all which I have my doubts about , he has been convicted because of his actions not the intent behind those actions .

[Rossgo]

That was a very interesting article in respect of how the investigator went about finding evidence. A lot of respect to him and to others doing such difficult jobs

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk