Cat bin woman fined

[Bulgarian]

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.

 

The strange thing is if he had run over a cat he would be getting death threats now.

[Conrod]

Which parents?

I guess the answer would be bad ones. Ones with kids on 'at risk' registers. Ones who have taken kids to hospital too many times with bruises. Ones who go out and leave young kids unsupervised. Ones who don't feed their kids properly because they spend their money on drugs. Ones who give their babies drugs to keep them from crying.

 

What argument are you looking for this time?

[Mr Prime]

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.

 

I concur, I wish people would try thinking about all the factors judges have to take into account when sentencing. They also do so in an unemotional way as opposed to thinking "that poor cyclist did nothing wrong therefore the evil trucker must be jailed for years. The judge will have factored in the guilt he will feel for the rest of his life.

[Conrod]

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.

I don't dispute that she did wrong. but this is totally out of perspective.

[Mr Prime]

I don't dispute that she did wrong. but this is totally out of perspective.

 

Is it? It went to court and she paid a fine. She's not doing time or anything. An American judge I read about discovered a woman over there discarded a load of kittens in some woods in the middle of the night. That judge ruled that the woman had to spend a night in the woods by herself with no proper coat if I remember rightly. This was an elected equivalent of a magistrate. How do you think our nutter would have fared if left at the mercy of an elected community judge?

[fake]

I don't dispute that she did wrong. but this is totally out of perspective.

 

I agree, to much media hype.

 

She was stupid, if she had kept quiet and not admitted guilt she would not have been prosecuted despite the CCT footage.

[flamingjimmy]

The strange thing is if he had run over a cat he would be getting death threats now.

 

I think there's rather a big difference in intent. It would be very hard to argue in court that the woman accidentally put the cat in the wheely bin.

[spindrift]

What argument are you looking for this time?

 

I wondered if you had any actual examples of people who had abused children being dealt with by a caution. Otherwise your post is just silly.

[spindrift]

the mirror adjustment issue is referred to as 'claims' i.e. unsubstantiated. Sounds like the right outcome in the case to me.

.

 

 

Now you're just making stuff up:

 

The inquest also found that if the driver had adjusted his mirrors correctly, he would have been able to see Eilidh clearly.

 

The point in the road at which the accident happened was just 2 metres wide – the driver’s vehicle was 2.5 metres, raising the question of why he was on that particular road in the first place. A verdict of accidental death was delivered.

 

Ms Cairns's sister Kate said

 

“The one thing we didn't want was an accidental verdict. We agree it was not intentional but we believed it was avoidable. People in power act as though these accidents just unfortunately happen to female cyclists and people have to deal with it. There is a huge problem with female cyclists being on the streets of London with HGVs and politicians are not doing enough to address that.

 

“These cyclists are not soldiers going into battle. They are just women going to work and nobody is doing anything to stop this needless slaughter.”

 

 

http://ibikelondon.blogspot.com/2010/02/know-your-enemies-know-your-limits.html

[sccsux]

Is it? It went to court and she paid a fine. She's not doing time or anything.An American judge I read about discovered a woman over there discarded a load of kittens in some woods in the middle of the night. That judge ruled that the woman had to spend a night in the woods by herself with no proper coat if I remember rightly. This was an elected equivalent of a magistrate. How do you think our nutter would have fared if left at the mercy of an elected community judge?

 

Of course it's an over-reaction. No one died (nor was anyone likely to). The rest of your post is irrelevant as this is the UK justice system, not the insanity that is the US version.

 

I think there's rather a big difference in intent. It would be very hard to argue in court that the woman accidentally put the cat in the wheely bin.

 

It'd be even harder to prove that someone had driven over a cat deliberately.