NSFW IF you were the judge in this case what would you have done?

Bobsyeruncle said:
Don't agree with that comment. The crash happened because the car driver turned across the junction. Sure, the riders speed may have made it more difficult for the car driver to see him, but that didn't cause the accident.
Click to expand...

Being a Motorbike rider myself, I would normally back up another fellow Motorcyclist. But in this instance it's a little difficult to defend the speeding biker, yes I know we were not there. But Police crash investigators were not there either, they have to go with what marks they find on the vehicles and road etc. Oh and the Video evidence, so strange why the car driver got done for turning into the path of a speeding bike!
 
mattyg said:
The driver pleaded guilty and admitted he didn't see the Biker nor the car the biker had overtaken.

The driver caused the collision the speed of the biker caused the fatality
Click to expand...

60mph is enough for a fatality. I lost a friend at less than 40mph in exactly the same circumstances. The closing speed was estimated at 60mph.
 
mattyg said:
The driver pleaded guilty and admitted he didn't see the Biker nor the car the biker had overtaken.

The driver caused the collision the speed of the biker caused the fatality
Click to expand...
The driver probably felt guilty and pleaded accordingly as someone died, doesn't really mean he was, he just made the outcome of the court appearance easy. If the accident hadn't resulted in a death, there is every likelihood he wouldn't have pleaded guilty.
On A roads where there are junctions the sensible thing to do is slow below the speed limit and prepare to take avoiding action due to the danger of slower moving traffic. We have no idea of the car drivers experience, it's hard to judge speed. I'm not surprised the driver never saw the car that was overtaken, it was quite a way from the junction when overtaken and I daresay still was when the accident happened.
 
What a terrible tragedy, really sad

I'm 67 years old and rode Bikes for some time, in fact I still have 4 which I do not want to part with…. hardly ride now but I still have one insured etc.,

I came off the odd time, but never at that speed but the thought was always there is my mind … some drivers just do not see bikes, especially when pulling out of a side roads…. I know that from my experience and I always looked, if possible, for eye contact ……. car drivers are all shapes and size, ages and experience ….. it can be difficult to "blame" them if a missile is travelling a high speed….. they just don't have the ability or concentration.

modern Bikes have really fantastic Brakes, but they are incredibly fast ….. and at high speeds it is more about the thinking and reaction time, plus when you approach a hazard on a Bike you always know what could happen and what you should do and should not do …. but it is easy to be wise after the event.

I was a keen motor cyclist, on and off road, but only for pleasure but I did help with Sunday morning Advanced riding courses some years ago and all I would say is that such courses do help even a very experienced rider to rethink their riding and maybe all riders, no matter what their skill levels should be encouraged to consider regular training as part of which for many is a "pastime" more that a necessity……. modern training is really about keeping safe.

My heart goes out to his mother, father and friends, there is really nothing that can be said or done apart from what his mother feels ….. it was a tragic accident and a risk that all road users take…. accidents like this will tragically always happen to Bikers.

I think that it is a good idea to (compulsory) train someone, at their expense - driver or motor cyclist, following an accident, rather than give then "community service" …… hopefully that will then help in the future.

Unfortunately the car driver will live with it for the rest of his life
 
Last edited:
Byker28i said:
60mph is enough for a fatality. I lost a friend at less than 40mph in exactly the same circumstances. The closing speed was estimated at 60mph.
Click to expand...

I lost my best mate at no more than 32 MPH. In reality as he was turning into his drive it would have been much lower. He clipped a kerb as he swung wide and went head first into a bus stop post.
 
Byker28i said:
Sorry there's a lot of difference between a pair of led strip daylight lights on cars to a full headlight(s) on motorbikes, both is size, height and brightness.
Click to expand...
The bike would only be allowed to have dipped beam on, my drl led's are in my bi xenon headlights and from outside the car the LED's show up a lot brighter than the dipped beam.
 
nilagin said:
The bike would only be allowed to have dipped beam on, my drl led's are in my bi xenon headlights and from outside the car the LED's show up a lot brighter than the dipped beam.
Click to expand...

Thats because they meant to be on during the day. Thats why they either dim or turn off when you turn your headlights on.
 
mattyg said:
Thats because they meant to be on during the day. Thats why they either dim or turn off when you turn your headlights on.
Click to expand...
But wasn't the comment about bikes running with their headlights on during daylight.
 
nilagin said:
If the accident hadn't resulted in a death, there is every likelihood he wouldn't have pleaded guilty.
Click to expand...

Good to see the old psychic abilities are alive and kicking :rolleyes:
 
Having lost my brother in similar circumstances last year, except that he was doing 53 in a 60 zone, I can sympathise with the family that have lost a loved one.

However, driving at that speed on that road is downright stupidity. The car driver should not have turned in front of him, but if he wasn`t riding like a clown,then it would not have happened.

A terrible thing for all concerned.
 
At 40mph you can try and throw yourself over the car, with good bike clothing you can try and roll, and hope no other vehicle hits you. You might get away with it at 40mph, but it does not bear thinking about at 100mph.

I know the faster I ride, the lesser my safety options become, I like to keep the safety get outs as much in my favour as possible.
 
Last edited:
nilagin said:
The bike would only be allowed to have dipped beam on, my drl led's are in my bi xenon headlights and from outside the car the LED's show up a lot brighter than the dipped beam.
Click to expand...
Sorry what's your car?

Most modern bikes have dipped beams on all the time and large single or dual headlights.
 
Last edited:
boyfalldown said:
I need no psychic ability to know that if the accident hadn't resulted in a fatality then the car driver would not have pleaded guilty to causing death by careless driving. :):)
Click to expand...

Yes, but the post wasn't specific to what charge. ..just a blanket not guilty (y)
 
viv1969 said:
Yes, but the post wasn't specific to what charge. ..just a blanket not guilty (y)
Click to expand...
No, if you re-read my post it refers to not pleading guilty instead of his guilty plea. If there was no death involved, he'd likely be charged with driving without due care and attention or similar to which he'd just as likely plead not guilty as he wouldn't be blaming himself for someone's death.
 
nilagin said:
Mk3 Focus
Click to expand...
Thought the official mk3 running lights were the led strips?
Either way, a bikes headlights are on, dipped, constantly and higher than a car. Despite this it's still amazing how many times a car driver won't see you, or at times makes an attempt to.
It seems today it's manoeuvre, if lucky indicate, then mirror to see who you've upset.

So it's defensive driving all the way, dont put yourself into harms way, think ahead etc
 
Byker28i said:
Thought the official mk3 running lights were the led strips?
Either way, a bikes headlights are on, dipped, constantly and higher than a car. Despite this it's still amazing how many times a car driver won't see you, or at times makes an attempt to.
It seems today it's manoeuvre, if lucky indicate, then mirror to see who you've upset.

So it's defensive driving all the way, dont put yourself into harms way, think ahead etc
Click to expand...
They are led strips but they are in the top of the headlights. I've had the car since the middle of May and even the car is bright red and with the DRL's, so it'd not as if it isn't easily noticed, I still get cars pulling out on me even driving straight at me. Some people will still pull out or drive at you regardless of how visible you are, for some unexplainable reason, it just seems to be in their nature.
 
6 of one, half a dozen of the other. To turn across could be argued as stupid, but 50% + over the speed limit as well... stupid.

I couldn't judge the exact speed of an oncoming vehicle, but I'd have a pretty good idea as to if nearer say 60 or nudging triple figures...
 
For an experienced motorcyclist to be touching 100mph at a junction where cars are about to turn is crazy

Yes the car shouldn't have turned but the speed plays a huge factor in this instance

I've had many bikes overtake me at high speed on A roads , the death and serious injury figures for bikers make frightening reading , the saddest part is a lot of them are fathers in their 40s and 50s with children

A parent can cope with the death of their child, heartbreaking as it is, spending the rest of your life without a dad from such a young age doesn't bear thinking about
 
Lynton said:
6 of one, half a dozen of the other. To turn across could be argued as stupid, but 50% + over the speed limit as well... stupid.

I couldn't judge the exact speed of an oncoming vehicle, but I'd have a pretty good idea as to if nearer say 60 or nudging triple figures...
Click to expand...
But how long does that thought process take. Bear in mind the driver won't only be looking at traffic approaching from in front, they will also be looking in their rear view mirror as well as checking nothing is trying to pull out of the turning into their path and also making sure the side road is also clear to turn into. Whilst all that is going on the car driver will be assuming anything coming towards him is travelling at 60mph or less. and will be using that info whilst processing all the other info.
 
Sorry chap, you're reading into the situation. The court found him guilty, he turned across the path of incoming traffic and admitting to not seeing vehicles.

Yes the biker compounded the issue and I'm fully of the opinion that the majority of the time if your involved in an incident, you're at least partially to blame, you've put yourself in that position. (I refuse to call them accidents, as they are usually someone being careless)
 
Byker28i said:
Sorry chap, you're reading into the situation. The court found him guilty, he turned across the path of incoming traffic and admitting to not seeing vehicles.

Yes the biker compounded the issue and I'm fully of the opinion that the majority of the time if your involved in an incident, you're at least partially to blame, you've put yourself in that position. (I refuse to call them accidents, as they are usually someone being careless)
Click to expand...
Okay let's change the scenario a little, a car although speeding approaches a junction, a motorbike turns across the approaching cars path, the bike gets hit and the rider dies. Who's going to get the blame.
I also disagree about both parties sharing some blame in the majority of accidents, for some they are unfortunately in the wrong place at the wrong time and completely innocent.
 
Just watched the video. That could easily have been me making that turn. No way could I have reacted quick enough.

Am on my iphone say maybe things would be different on a larger screen but there was less than three seconds between me spotting the car and the collision.

When I make a turn like that, I judge the oncoming traffic and assess whether I can safely make the turn. If the traffic is a distance away and the road looks like it's gonna remain clear whilst i turn, I go ahead and make the turn.

The driver was caught unawares and I would have been as well. There's a huge delay between the time you spot something out of the corner of your eye, your brain reacting and your body moving. The biker appeared when the driver wasn't expecting anything. Presumably they would have checked to make sure the path was clear and then made the manoeuvre.
 
It's a difficult call for courts and judges isn't it ?
Yesterday I heard about someone who is facing court soon regarding an accident that happened over a year ago and 2 young people
were killed when the driver lost control of the car and hit a tree, 2 other passengers in the back of the car suffered non some injuries.
The person facing court wasn't even in the car, was following them and has been accused of causing the accident in which his
friends.
Since then he hasn't driven a car, and has no wish to, and could be facing a custodial sentence, despite not crashing his car, quite
how he has come to be blamed I have no idea and will try and find out further details
 
nilagin said:
Okay let's change the scenario a little, a car although speeding approaches a junction, a motorbike turns across the approaching cars path, the bike gets hit and the rider dies. Who's going to get the blame.
I also disagree about both parties sharing some blame in the majority of accidents, for some they are unfortunately in the wrong place at the wrong time and completely innocent.
Click to expand...

Both, the same as in this case, it's no different.

There are very few blameless accidents, nearly all are caused by the actions of someone.
 
omens said:
Just watched the video. That could easily have been me making that turn. No way could I have reacted quick enough.

Am on my iphone say maybe things would be different on a larger screen but there was less than three seconds between me spotting the car and the collision.

When I make a turn like that, I judge the oncoming traffic and assess whether I can safely make the turn. If the traffic is a distance away and the road looks like it's gonna remain clear whilst i turn, I go ahead and make the turn.

The driver was caught unawares and I would have been as well. There's a huge delay between the time you spot something out of the corner of your eye, your brain reacting and your body moving. The biker appeared when the driver wasn't expecting anything. Presumably they would have checked to make sure the path was clear and then made the manoeuvre.
Click to expand...

7 seconds to spot the vehicles, one of which had their headlights on? Time to hand in your licence then, you're a danger on the road.

This was a case of the vehicle making the turn not wanting to wait and carried momentum through the turn. I could quite believe they thought they had time before the car and the bike overtook reducing that time causing the accident, but the driver stated he didn't see the car or bike. Even if he hadn't hit the bike, he would have caused the car approaching to significantly reduce speed.

But, none of us were there, we haven't heard the whole evidence but the court did and found the driver guilty. The biker and his family paid the ultimate penalty for his poor decision making. There's no way he should have been overtaking near a busy junction.
 
There's no way the car that was overtaken would have had to reduce speed. It was overtaken along way back. The other driver could have easily made the turn before the other car was even close.
 
Sorry chap, you're reading into the situation. The court found him guilty, he turned across the path of incoming traffic and admitting to not seeing vehicles.
Click to expand...

No the court didn't find him guilty, he pleaded guilty, its not the same thing. In a guilty plea the evidence isn't tested like it is in a NG plea.
It may have been that had he pleaded not, he would have been acquitted of causing death by careless. I accept it was careless, and possibly reckless, but I would have contended the speed of the rider was the direct cause of his death, and outside of the control of the car driver.
 
Bobsyeruncle said:
Don't agree with that comment. The crash happened because the car driver turned across the junction. Sure, the riders speed may have made it more difficult for the car driver to see him, but that didn't cause the accident.
Click to expand...
But, if the rider hadn't been doing approaching 100mph at the junction, the car driver would have been safely across and the bike wouldn't have been at that point. Nobody to blame but the idiot on the bike.
 
Byker28i said:
7 seconds to spot the vehicles, one of which had their headlights on? Time to hand in your licence then, you're a danger on the road.

This was a case of the vehicle making the turn not wanting to wait and carried momentum through the turn. I could quite believe they thought they had time before the car and the bike overtook reducing that time causing the accident, but the driver stated he didn't see the car or bike. Even if he hadn't hit the bike, he would have caused the car approaching to significantly reduce speed.

But, none of us were there, we haven't heard the whole evidence but the court did and found the driver guilty. The biker and his family paid the ultimate penalty for his poor decision making. There's no way he should have been overtaking near a busy junction.
Click to expand...
The court didn't find the driver guilty, he pleaded guilty. A whole world of difference.
 
Gremlin said:
It's a difficult call for courts and judges isn't it ?
Yesterday I heard about someone who is facing court soon regarding an accident that happened over a year ago and 2 young people
were killed when the driver lost control of the car and hit a tree, 2 other passengers in the back of the car suffered non some injuries.
The person facing court wasn't even in the car, was following them and has been accused of causing the accident in which his
friends.
Since then he hasn't driven a car, and has no wish to, and could be facing a custodial sentence, despite not crashing his car, quite
how he has come to be blamed I have no idea and will try and find out further details
Click to expand...

Obviously the CPS believe they were racing. In which case all parties are as guilty as each other
 
I watched the video and think this is a very sad accident, but the judgemental B/S I'm reading in this thread, from people arguing both ways, goes straight to the root of the problem for me.

I certainly wouldn't expect a vehicle to be approaching me on an A-road at 97 mph but I can imagine it and wouldn't exclude it. I've seen it before. It's possible. I have to calculate that it might be happening again this time!

But surely much of my point is that I've seen it before and have learnt from that experience. Most road users are closed minded and black-and-white judgemental about all other road users

As a relevant anecdote I remember from my teenaged years, the first time I spectated on the RAC Rally. Three of us who competed in club rallying were horrified at the lack of imagination of most spectators who stood just by the forest track as cars hurtled past at around 97mph. Didn't they realise that cars could crash? We spectated from the safety of six foot up the nearest tree.

But the fourth member of our group, Trevor, was competing and winning in International Rallycross at the time. He was used to driving rather faster than we other three. He was horrified at our lack of imagination and spectated from twelve foot up the tree!!
 
Most road users are closed minded, by conditioning and experience. We don't anticipate vehicles to be travelling at almost 100 mph, and because of that anticipation is based on a vehicle travelling at or around the speed limit. I am not sure that any of us could calculate the time a vehicle could cover a given distance between it and us with any accuracy given that in this case the speeds concerned were way above that normally encountered.
Even with a defensive driving mindset, if I am honest I doubt I would have held at that junction if I was driving that car. Obviously it's impossible to know for 100% certainty though.
 
Byker28i said:
7 seconds to spot the vehicles, one of which had their headlights on? Time to hand in your licence then, you're a danger on the road.
Click to expand...

The 7 seconds was the time from overtake to impact.

The driver had about 3 seconds to see the bike before he started his turn.

The car behind is of no consequence, not even sure why it is being brought up. It wasn't travelling quick enough to reach the junction before the car pulling across was clear of the carriageway.
 
IMHO, only if you have ridden a Bike can you fully begin to understand what happened ........ the guy seemed to be an experienced rider of mature age who liked to ride fast but just took one chance too many, I would have thought that normally he would have been very wary of the position of the car and what may happen, maybe he was not concentrating fully at the time, to be safe you have to be concentrating on riding 100% of the time ..... riding a Bike is not like driving a car.

I see very poor riding most weeks, we all see poor driving most days ...... that life, unfortunately ... Don't blame anyone, it's gone, done and was an accident, in this case it would seem that neither intended to cause what happened - just support better training and better road safety ..... a life of a normal guy has been tragically lost.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top