iwannasupra Posted July 9, 2005 Share Posted July 9, 2005 http://www.gtr.co.uk/forum/upload/showthread.php?t=39390 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted July 9, 2005 Share Posted July 9, 2005 Well that's one side of the story... We'll never know "the truth". Obviously 'racing' regardless of the different car types, stupid in wet roads Yes very harsh sentance, but obviously to set an example. I'm sure an appeal will be done and things will all be better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted July 9, 2005 Share Posted July 9, 2005 Thought about it a while...Entirely the Fiesta drivers fault. You take responsibility for your own actions. They didn't have to drive fast in a car unsuitable. I do wonder what the charge was.."Death by dangerous driving"? There's a lot of cruising cars around stafford/stoke at the moment and I reckon the courts are sending a message. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnA Posted July 9, 2005 Share Posted July 9, 2005 There is no mention on how the 'racing' theory came about, and was taken so seriously by the court. Surely there is missing information from that original post. Was it CCTV, bystanders, other motorists who shopped them? etc... And do we really want any more morons with RWD cars racing in the wet? what if one of these 'enthusiasts' were next to you, hit you and sent you to a life of wheelchair? Would that be different? Without access to all the data I wouldn't sign petitions or badmouth a judge who could well be right in his/her judgement... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clarkey Posted July 9, 2005 Share Posted July 9, 2005 Thought about it a while...Entirely the Fiesta drivers fault. You take responsibility for your own actions. They didn't have to drive fast in a car unsuitable. I don't think it's that black & white. Perhaps the sentance is harsh - but I'm great believer that you've got to take responsibility of your actions. Reading the thead - it's clear they were racing in hazardous conditions. One car crashed - the other didn't. The race instigated the crash. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scoboblio Posted July 9, 2005 Share Posted July 9, 2005 I agree with Rogue entirely. You take responsibility for your own actions. I've heard of this sort of sentencing before, but left me run a quick scenario past you guys; You're on a motorway and move out to overtake a slower car... halfway through overtaking the other car it speeds up so you're evenly matched. Do you A: Lift off and pull in behind him. B: Plant the throttle and overtake him. I know that myself and most other people on here would chose B - does that mean we're "racing" and face a 5 year prison sentence if the OTHER car loses control? A load of c**p as far as I'm concerned. And seriously, 5 years in jail because the fiesta had an underinflated tyre? Is that their idea of justice? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clarkey Posted July 9, 2005 Share Posted July 9, 2005 You're on a motorway and move out to overtake a slower car... halfway through overtaking the other car it speeds up so you're evenly matched. Do you A: Lift off and pull in behind him. B: Plant the throttle and overtake him. I know that myself and most other people on here would chose B - does that mean we're "racing" and face a 5 year prison sentence if the OTHER car loses control? An interesting & a very valid point. Chances are I'd probably choose option B. But then thats now road-racing. If the other car looses control and hits another car killing someone - then imo the cause of the crash is 50% my fault. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJI Posted July 9, 2005 Share Posted July 9, 2005 Having read the text I still don't know how the 200SX driver can be the cause of the death of the people in the Fiesta. Racing or no racing the Fiesta driver is in control of his/her destiny. Unless the 200SX driver made contact with the Fiesta and this was the result of the car loosing control then the reason for the sentance is bollox. The 200SX should have been charged with breaking the speed limit. At most a charge of 'careless driving' on the part that he was travelling at 90mph in very wet conditions.... with the view that knowing that there was a good chance of aquaplaning and loss of control. But to be charged with the reason the other car crashed .... I just can't see the link. It was ultimately the Fiesta driver who took the decision to send his car upto that speed and it was the Fiesta driver who didn't check his tyres were in road worthy condition. To take the courts presumed argument to a new level.... if there was a Police car on a high speed persuit which overtook this Fiesta... and for some reason the driver wanted to see if he could keep up with the police car.... would the policaman be charged with the deaths if the Fiesta crashed? The courts are basically saying that if you overtake another car you are racing. Now what the text doesn't say is that what was on the video evidence. I'm assuming the video evidence was that somebody in either the 200SX or the Fiesta had a camcorder. And maybe.... there was video of somebody initiating a race? Either by three horn sounds or hand signals with which both parties acknowledge. If there was such evidence then this would be a good argument to say that they were racing. BUT it still doesn't mean that the 200SX driver should be the CAUSE of the crash. The Fiesta was under control of the driver and he had the final 'say' on what the car was doing at any moment in time. That just my own take on the situation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carl0s Posted July 9, 2005 Share Posted July 9, 2005 if the driver of the Fiesta had survived, then presumably he would be getting the same 5yr sentence.. or would it be 10? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dangerous brain Posted July 9, 2005 Share Posted July 9, 2005 OK so what if you took option B and then you crashed and died because knob head inside you sped up then what do you think? Its all subjective really. If the stated facts are true and 200 man and fiesta man were ragging it. Then fiesta man left 200 man behind then it does stand to reason that 200 man actually quit the race. Its a touch unreasonable to slam the 200 man up for 5 years apportioning complete blame for fiesta mans inability to make his own decisions. I will hold my hands up and say I have made very questionable decisions on the road in the past. But I wouldn't at any point apportion blame for my decision on anyone else even if the reason for making that decision is someone else acting the dick. It is my responsibility and mine alone for any action I decide to take and any repurcusions are mine to bear. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jake Posted July 9, 2005 Share Posted July 9, 2005 Some more details here You can kinda see the judge's point of view : Judge Paul Glenn told him: "It was wet at the time and you knew the danger of this stretch of road, but despite this you raced against a smaller, less powerful car, encouraging Mr Hughes to drive faster when he had an under-inflated tyre. "The plain and simple fact is that, had you not chosen to race him, he would not have driven as he did. I'm afraid that racing is a feature of high culpability in this case. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kopite Posted July 9, 2005 Share Posted July 9, 2005 i still don't understand how they were deemed to be racing. i think him changing his plea to guilty is what's done him. i totally disagree with what the judge said though - "The plain and simple fact is that, had you not chosen to race him, he would not have driven as he did. I'm afraid that racing is a feature of high culpability in this case." how many times have you had a chav in a nova or cavalier next to you put his foot down against a supra, i get it loads! i had a punto do a burnout in front of me at the lights a couple of weeks ago. if the fiesta was in front then surely they weren't racing. As Scobolio said, if you overtake a car are you then hinting at them that you want a race? the charge of causing death by dangerous drivin is bollox, even if Mr 200sx wanted a race, the driver of the fiesta was a big enough boy to decline. he made a decision to speed and the worst happened. If Kimi Raikonnen spins off in front of Schumacher, is it Shumacher's fault for pressuring Raikonnen to actually do some racing in F1 ( )? i hardly race anyone in my supra, but unless the other person seriously cuts me up or t-bones me or something, if i crash it's my fault! something similar happened to my mate. he had never been in trouble with the law before and had a clean license. he met up with another of my mates at asda (he worked there) and they were headin off somewhere. my mate lost the back end of his RWD Rover in the pissin rain on a roundabout and hit a lamp post, the post fell towards a bus stop. some one at the bus stop dived out the way (even though the post landed about 15 feet away from him), and he broke his leg. my mate got 1 year for dangerous driving and a 1 year ban!! WTF! he was guilty of bein inexperienced with RWD, he wasn't speedin (roundabout was only 100 yards from the exit of asda and the Rover was shit slow anyway), all he did was have an accident! yeah the bloke broke his leg but to be honest, the post was nowhere near him. if i drive past an old lady with my chav BOV, it goes off and she shits herself, do i need to buy her a new pair of pants?! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnA Posted July 9, 2005 Share Posted July 9, 2005 Some more details .... You can kinda see the judge's point of view : Bit more info there. So there was CCTV footage and the testimony of a cab driver as evidence that they were racing. Looks like the fact that he stopped and tried to help (or whatever) didn't end him up incriminated, since they would have tracked him down anyway. As for racing in the rain, against a crammed, unmaintained 75bhp car, in front of CCTV cameras, what can I say... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jake Posted July 9, 2005 Share Posted July 9, 2005 We all know you're not supposed to race on public roads and if something goes seriously wrong there will be a harsh penalty. It sounds like the 200SX driver was pushing the teenager in the Fiesta to drive far beyond his and the car's capabilities. Add to that the fact the Fiesta had a seriously under inflated tyre and the bad weather conditions - both of which the 200SX guy would/should have noticed and made allowances for. On the balance of things, I'd say the 200sx guy was partially responsible for the accident and subsequent deaths. Not as much to blame as the Fiesta idiot but to blame nonetheless. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shovels Posted July 9, 2005 Share Posted July 9, 2005 Some more details here You can kinda see the judge's point of view : Did the 200SX guy have any previous convictions? five years seems a bit harsh. Not quite sure that I agree with the judges comments about "If 200 man didn't decide to race it wouldn't have happened". But I guess Fiesta man can't take any of the blame, so it all goes to 200sx man. Judge was probably having bad day. I had a judge as a college lecturer and he admitted that if he was having a bad day that the sentence would be harsher! Like Kopite I had a guy in a Golf VR6 that 'decided' we were racing, he was driving like a right tosser. I could image that if he had crashed, which was close at times, witnesses would have said we were racing as he kept waiting for me to catch up and then would wheelspin off. You shouldn't be blamed for other idiots actions, but i'm sure there's underlying reasons for all this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kopite Posted July 9, 2005 Share Posted July 9, 2005 think it said the 200SX guy got done for speeding a few days before! wouldn't help his case either! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jake Posted July 9, 2005 Share Posted July 9, 2005 Did the 200SX guy have any previous convictions? Like it says in the Sentinel article I linked to above, the guy had been convicted for speeding 2 days before the crash. I bet the court didn't like that. Doesn't make him look good, does it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobbeh Posted July 9, 2005 Share Posted July 9, 2005 Just because the guy in the Nissan was going quick doesnt mean that the guy in the Fiesta had to follow suit, hes blaming the guy in the Nissan for the actions that the person in the Fiesta took.. so does Mr Nissan driver have some sort of brain control device that he used?! If you had a Ferrari you and someone decided they wanted to race you I assume you'd get blamed for owning a car that encouraged someone to race! I believe they're setting an example with this case, or at least trying too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jake Posted July 9, 2005 Share Posted July 9, 2005 I presume that because the Nissan was following the Fiesta, at high speed, in poor conditions, the judge took the view that if he hadn't been chasing the Fiesta it probably wouldn't have been driving so fast. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobbeh Posted July 9, 2005 Share Posted July 9, 2005 Hmm maybe that can apply to when cops are chasing you too Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CardiffSupra Posted July 9, 2005 Share Posted July 9, 2005 How the hell was the fiesta in front i want to know? they were both breaking the law but jacko can not be blamed for this. british justice system is a discrace! people get less for rape and murders thats what pisses me off! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jake Posted July 9, 2005 Share Posted July 9, 2005 jacko can not be blamed for this. Why not? Do you think those two people would be dead now if he hadn't been chasing after them? british justice system is a discrace! people get less for rape and murders Don't talk bollocks mate. Show me one case where a person convicted of murder got less than a 5 year sentence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colsoop Posted July 9, 2005 Share Posted July 9, 2005 I think he is partially to blame for the accident but the sentence he received is extreme,i think the legal advice given to him was poor. I was reading the daily mail today and this article was printed: "A sri lankan refugee who fled the uk after causing the death of a pregnant teacher and her unborn baby was jailed yesterday for less than 3 years. 2 years 3 months for the accident and 6 months for perverting the course of justice. That is why i think his sentence was OTT i am sure if he appeals his sentence will be reduced, the judge was trying to make an example out of him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dangerous brain Posted July 9, 2005 Share Posted July 9, 2005 Why not? Do you think those two people would be dead now if he hadn't been chasing after them? In this instance could you not also say then that the managing director of general ordnance should be jailed for manufacturing explosives and ammunition that kill people after all if his company didn't make it a significant amount of people would still be alive. Yes I agree sometimes knobbers do incite acts of disgracefull driving, but blaming the knobber for the disgraceful act of driving isn't 100% fair. Incarceration for 5 years in this instance is way OTT. The guy should in this instance have had the book thrown at him for his actual crime to the fullest extent ie the dangerous driving likely to cause death or whatever it is called, as he himself could quite easily have actually mowed someone down or lost his car etc driving at the speed he did in the conditions. He didn't kill the other driver and his passenger the other driver did that himself. I don't want to be unfair but some drivers are accidents waiting to happen. Likewise I don't want to disrespect the dead but the kind of person that is willing to drive a car with passengers in, that isn't capable of handling poor road conditions, and or high speeds with a lacsadaisical attitude towards vehicle maintainance is someone thats looking for "the flowers on the lampost award" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian R Posted July 10, 2005 Share Posted July 10, 2005 5 years does seem harsh on the face of it. How many times have I been baited in the past and taken it ? Quite a few and normally im thinking it teach them a lesson. However there have been times when I have been involved in a race with another car and they start to drive like complete nob heads. Its doesn't take a rocket scientist to realise when they are pushing the car to the limit or there driver ability when this has happened in the past I have backed of because I see myslef as a responsible driver and wouldn't want to be contributing factor to someone dying on the road. The guy in the sx was 21 FFS surely he had more maturity to rise above it IMO he was more concerned what his mates might say if he "lost" to a Fiesta Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.