I got a call from a local paper wanting cctv footage and they must have passed it to BBC and in the evening Sky news wanted the footage.
I hope they paid you for it.
I got a call from a local paper wanting cctv footage and they must have passed it to BBC and in the evening Sky news wanted the footage.
I hope they paid you for it.
That road comes across as very much needing traffic calming measures ASAP.Just a ps on mad driving. A car has just gone through our 20mph limit at what I'd guess as 60+ it's one big laugh to them. I heard the noise as it came down the road.
That road comes across as very much needing traffic calming measures ASAP.
Only after reading your account of the incident did I know what really happened and only today did I hear on an LBC Radio news bulletin describe it as such . My original misunderstanding was down to the first report on TV that I watched and the reporter near the scene said this." .Police were pursuing a VW Passat through town when it went onto the A66 and hit the police car". I'm thinking 'how could that happen ? " My wife agreed that it was poor reporting and lacked clarity.. This is a case of him knowing what he meant but failing to ensure those watching his report understood what happened. There was no mentioin of the collision being head-on,either.In the case discussed the criminals IIRC (could have the opposite way round?) were travelling south on the north bound carriageway....the police car was properly on the northbound carriageway. They were not both travelling in the same direction, hence the reported head-on collision![]()
The offence of causing death by reckless driving was changed to....'causing death 'by dangerous driving' to make it easier to get a successful conviction. All about a state of mind and awareness. Drivers were being found 'not guilty'. I should have remembered that.If there was a meaningful punishment for causing death by reckless driving it would deter these morons and others who do similar
We don’t need new laws just deter them using the ones we already have
I've pointed out to Cambsno, who couldn't even defend his position on this to me in my post above, ..because he can't.. why a driver whose manner of driving is such that it can be classed as 'dangerous driving' and results in the death of someone, cannot be charged with murder yet, he persists in his belief that it should be charged as murder by giving your post a 'like' because you believe the same to be the case.I think it should be murder as you will definitely kill someone, you just don’t know who. A bit like firing a gun indiscriminately into a crowd. You aren’t choosing a particular person but you’ll kill someone.
Quite often when young people are killed in car accidents, not even involving another vehicle, it turns out that none of them were wearing a seat belt and if one was, that one often survived. When you're young you think you're invincible or think what could happen wouldn't.It doesn’t take away from what these heinous actions achieve, but I doubt there were any seatbelts used by the criminals.
That's correct. Murder requires an intent to kill or to cause serious injury.I've pointed out to Cambsno, who couldn't even defend his position on this to me in my post above, ..because he can't.. why a driver whose manner of driving is such that it can be classed as 'dangerous driving' and results in the death of someone, cannot be charged with murder yet, he persists in his belief that it should be charged as murder by giving your post a 'like' because you believe the same to be the case.
I expect you read my post. Murder requires 'intent'. For the sake of this discussion let's say that the drivers had survived. Ask yourself this after I've described both the recent incidents. Was there or was there not an intent to kill ? In both scenarios, the M9 in Ireland and the A66 here, the young men were involved in criminality before the collisions. In Ireland they were aware that police were onto them because people had reported them for attempting to break into cars and homes. For whatever reason they went onto the wrong carriageway on the M9 motorway . Regarding the A66 incident, the young men were in a stolen VW Passat and being pursued by a police vehicle which stopped the pursuit as soon as they saw the Passat being driven onto the A66..the wrong way. Do you think that the drivers intended to ,in Ireland, crash into the car with the three sisters and the 7 year old in, intending to kill them and the driver on the A66 intended to kill the officers in the patrol car which they hit head-on ? You know the answer. It's 'no'.
You both persist in saying, had they survived and any driver in the same position should have been charged with murder. I don't know what more I can say to convince both of you that a charge of murder is not not the correct one. You'll sometimes read of the CPS prosecuting someone for manslaughter because they can't prove intent and would likely lose the case.
You give an example of someone firing a gun into a crowd. It's clear they are intending to kill someone because that's what guns/ bullets are designed to do. I've done my best to point out why a charge of murder would not be brought. If you and Cambsno still persist in your erroneous belief that it could then it's a case of.."you can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink. ".
A relative of one of the A66 victims in the Passat called LBC Radio earlier this evening, I'm sure it wasn't the mother..maybe an auntie..who said what a lovely lad he was, always smiling and making people laugh but the media are making them out to be really bad.
Later, someone else called in to ask why LBC were allowing that kind of call.
I accept the law doesn’t quite see it as murder but laws change and I’m just expressing that I do see it as murder. Such an act will inevitably result in death and it’s foreseeable that someone will get killed so just the mere act of driving the wrong way down a motorway or busy road on purpose will likely result in the death of someone, conversely shooting into a crowd may not if you don’t hit an organ. Guns and cars are used by humans to kill people. Let’s not give these waste of oxygen’s any quarter.I've pointed out to Cambsno, who couldn't even defend his position on this to me in my post above, ..because he can't.. why a driver whose manner of driving is such that it can be classed as 'dangerous driving' and results in the death of someone, cannot be charged with murder yet, he persists in his belief that it should be charged as murder by giving your post a 'like' because you believe the same to be the case.
I expect you read my post. Murder requires 'intent'. For the sake of this discussion let's say that the drivers had survived. Ask yourself this after I've described both the recent incidents. Was there or was there not an intent to kill ? In both scenarios, the M9 in Ireland and the A66 here, the young men were involved in criminality before the collisions. In Ireland they were aware that police were onto them because people had reported them for attempting to break into cars and homes. For whatever reason they went onto the wrong carriageway on the M9 motorway . Regarding the A66 incident, the young men were in a stolen VW Passat and being pursued by a police vehicle which stopped the pursuit as soon as they saw the Passat being driven onto the A66..the wrong way. Do you think that the drivers intended to ,in Ireland, crash into the car with the three sisters and the 7 year old in, intending to kill them and the driver on the A66 intended to kill the officers in the patrol car which they hit head-on ? You know the answer. It's 'no'.
You both persist in saying, had they survived and any driver in the same position should have been charged with murder. I don't know what more I can say to convince both of you that a charge of murder is not not the correct one. You'll sometimes read of the CPS prosecuting someone for manslaughter because they can't prove intent and would likely lose the case.
You give an example of someone firing a gun into a crowd. It's clear they are intending to kill someone because that's what guns/ bullets are designed to do. I've done my best to point out why a charge of murder would not be brought. If you and Cambsno still persist in your erroneous belief that it could then it's a case of.."you can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink. ".
This is the issue I have. As you say, post a few hurts words and you get nicked. Normally law abiding people who make a mistake for one reason and another get nicked. Yet these balaclava wearing idiots who are known to police just seem to get away with it time and time again! This is why I feel our justice system is not working.Apparently they're organising or may have had a "baloon", yes that's how they spelt it, release eulogy for the them also there's a meme thingy depicting one as an angel. I still haven't spoken to anyone who has an ounce of sympathy but sadly there's an army of people and families like those 5 here. Meanwhile I think over £400k has been pledged so far for the policemen's family.
I did see one comment which resonated with me as getting the local police to respond to anything is a task. Someone pointed out that if you post hurty words on social media the cops turn up at your home mob handed yet some of the 5 were known to the police and one had a habit of bating the police into car chases which he filmed on his phone and posted on social media. Yet they remained at large. I think that's a valid point.
PS.
We live just a few hundred meters form a cemetery. A while back the police cordoned it off for the grand parade and funeral of a local crime boss. It was quite an event. I don't know where the 5 are from but I hope to gosh their funerals and burials aren't at my church or local cemetery. Holding either and they will be big events attended by the local scum a mile from the crash site would IMO be nothing short of obscene.
Do agree that murder isn’t the right term but behaviour like this, driving recklessly like that does deserve severe punishment and jail time in my opinion even just to take them off the roads to protect society
Now, this IS due to legislation. For some reason, hurty words have to be taken seriously by the police, and they have to prioritise them over some quite serious crimes, this isn't their fault.This is the issue I have. As you say, post a few hurts words and you get nicked. Normally law abiding people who make a mistake for one reason and another get nicked. Yet these balaclava wearing idiots who are known to police just seem to get away with it time and time again! This is why I feel our justice system is not working.
This is the issue I have. As you say, post a few hurts words and you get nicked. Normally law abiding people who make a mistake for one reason and another get nicked. Yet these balaclava wearing idiots who are known to police just seem to get away with it time and time again! This is why I feel our justice system is not working.