Cat bin woman fined

[vwkittie]

The judge said nothing of the kind, Eilidh did nothing wrong.

 

From comments:

 

It's a shame that any potential witnesses to this accident were turned away by the police, without anyone's details being taken - no wonder the family and prosecutor still don't know how the accident took place. My colleague and I work in a shop outside of which the accident took place, and although we didn't witness the accident, we did witness the police handling of the matter and the way all motorists behind the truck were told to u-turn immediately. The police didn't come back to look for witnesses until 2 weeks later, by which time - of course - there weren't any!

 

I'm a cyclist myself and it sickens me to think that a human life is worth so little to our justice system. You get a worse penalty for theft. Why does a diamond robber get 10 years in jail and on the same day a tuck driver who kills a cyclist gets only a £200 fine? What kind of a society values possessions/protects business over human life?

 

A diamond robbery is a premeditated, planned and deliberate act. Knocking down a cyclist in this case was a tragic accident. Hence the difference.

 

Anyway, the lorry driver in the case you mention only had his eyes checked months after the incident and was found to fail by only a short margin, and the mirror adjustment issue is referred to as 'claims' i.e. unsubstantiated. Sounds like the right outcome in the case to me.

 

The poisoning of the birds (90!) and the dog was a cruel, premeditated attack. It will also have had other implications, for example to the dog's owner, visitors to the park, the council having to clear it up etc. This is obviously completely different to an unfortunate accident.

[spindrift]

Knocking down a cyclist in this case was a tragic accident.

 

 

In broad daylight a cyclist is hit and killed from behind by a lorry with faulty mirrors being driven by a man with faulty eyesight. The police waved away potential witnesses and the driver didn't even lose his licence.

 

In another case, a lorry driver admitted checking his paperwork at the wheel when he ran down and killed a cyclist who was doing nothing wrong.

 

If you want an internet campaign and death threats stuff a cat in a bin on CCTV.

 

If you want to kill someone and get away scot free, use a vehicle.

[vwkittie]

In broad daylight a cyclist is hit and killed from behind by a lorry with faulty mirrors being driven by a man with faulty eyesight. The police waved away potential witnesses and the driver didn't even lose his licence.

 

In another case, a lorry driver admitted checking his paperwork at the wheel when he ran down and killed a cyclist who was doing nothing wrong.

 

If you want an internet campaign and death threats stuff a cat in a bin on CCTV.

 

If you want to kill someone and get away scot free, use a vehicle.

 

So, the cyclist was behind a reversing lorry why? The article mentions nothing about his reversing lights not working?

[spindrift]

So, the cyclist was behind a reversing lorry why? The article mentions nothing about his reversing lights not working?

 

The cyclist was ahead of the lorry, read the link.

 

 

 

HGVs account for 45 per cent of all London cyclists' deaths, and one in five of cyclists' deaths in the UK, yet represent only five per cent. of road traffic.

 

The driver couldn't speak English, had mirrors that weren't adjusted correctly, was in a vehicle wider than the lane, failed to notice a cyclist ahead of him in broad daylight, and killed her by smashing into her from behind.

 

Verdict "Accidental Death".

 

Punishment £200.

 

Sickening.

[Bulgarian]

If you want to kill someone and get away scot free, use a vehicle.

 

Thats been the case for years.

[spindrift]

Thats been the case for years.

 

 

Sure, and it's not just cyclists, it's pedestrians as well.

 

The weird thing is, if the lorry driver had killed someone on a building site the HSE would crawl all over the place.

 

On the roads they mop up the blood and shrug.

[Conrod]

Ok, so she put a cat in a bin. She didn't kill it, mutilate it or harm it. A few hours later the cat will have been treated to cream and tuna no doubt - it was still in one piece, just a bit hacked off for a few hours.

 

While she did deserve to be repremanded, the way people have over-reacted to this is utterly ridiculous. Parents who have abused their children will get off with a caution and the odd look-in from social services - do try to put that into perspective considering the hatred that has been targetted at this woman, the fine, the significant court costs and the effect it will have had on her life.

[Mr Prime]

Different thread, but yes there would. Pollution and hunger are very much products of our rational world view.

 

What statute makes being "weird" a crime?

 

I don't see anything logical in letting people starve or spewing chemicals into the sea but that's just me.

 

I have not stated being weird is a crime. However when you think about it criminals are people who refuse to follow the same rules as ordinary people. Either because they think they are special which they aren't or that they can get away with it, which they can't. That is pretty weird.

[spindrift]

Parents who have abused their children will get off with a caution

 

Which parents?

[Mr Prime]

Ok, so she put a cat in a bin. She didn't kill it, mutilate it or harm it. A few hours later the cat will have been treated to cream and tuna no doubt - it was still in one piece, just a bit hacked off for a few hours.

 

While she did deserve to be repremanded, the way people have over-reacted to this is utterly ridiculous. Parents who have abused their children will get off with a caution and the odd look-in from social services - do try to put that into perspective considering the hatred that has been targetted at this woman, the fine, the significant court costs and the effect it will have had on her life.

 

This is because her crime was so simple. It is often a hotly contested argument as to what constitutes child abuse so cautions are inevitable. Let's not have revisionism over this woman, she is a disgrace.