Is there a case for doing away with juires ....

Commuting, Day rides, Audax, Incidents, etc.
Post Reply
sirmy
Posts: 608
Joined: 11 Mar 2009, 10:53am

Is there a case for doing away with juires ....

Post by sirmy »

... as they don't appear to want to convict

http://www.sunderlandecho.com/news/crime/sun-blinded-drivers-who-hit-cyclist-in-sunderland-cleared-of-causing-death-1-6913938. No matter how incompetent or negligent you get to walk free!
User avatar
gaz
Posts: 14649
Joined: 9 Mar 2007, 12:09pm
Location: Kent

Re: Is there a case for ding away with juires ....

Post by gaz »

:shock: :evil:
My thoughts are with the victims family and friends. We've seen outcomes like this too many times before.

The problem lies with driving standards. If driving standards improve then such tragedies should not occur.
High on a cocktail of flossy teacakes and marmalade
Bicycler
Posts: 3400
Joined: 4 Dec 2013, 3:33pm

Re: Is there a case for ding away with juires ....

Post by Bicycler »

It would be nice to think that the rest of society felt the same way as you or I about inadequate driving when incidents do happen though :(
BigFoz
Posts: 491
Joined: 2 Jun 2011, 12:33pm

Re: Is there a case for ding away with juires ....

Post by BigFoz »

Even if you got rid of the jury on the grounds of conflict of interest (they're likely to all be drivers, less likely to be cyclists), you would have magistrates / judges who drove to work that morning... Judge / magistrate could issue some kind of instruction etc to the jury to say that driving over someone on the side of the road most definitely fell within the careless / dangerous domain, and the jury should decide which... They issue advice on everything else.
User avatar
Neilo
Posts: 421
Joined: 11 Dec 2013, 4:15pm
Location: Swansea Valley

Re: Is there a case for ding away with juires ....

Post by Neilo »

Don't like the verdict, so abolish juries.
A very slippery slope, that we are too far down already.

Neil
If it aint broke, fix it til it is.
Bicycler
Posts: 3400
Joined: 4 Dec 2013, 3:33pm

Re: Is there a case for ding away with juires ....

Post by Bicycler »

It's the legislation that is the problem. Asking juries to decide upon whether something falls below or well below average standards of driving is full of problems. Chief amongst which is the fact that many or most drivers regularly do things which they shouldn't do. The law effectively legitimises types of dangerous driving if they become commonplace. I'd happily have hitting stationary individuals or objects as a strict liability offence. If you hit somebody who is stationary in the road then your driving is self-evidently dangerous unless you can come up with proof of a truly exceptional reason (immediate and total brake failure is the only one which springs to mind) why it happened despite competent driving.
reohn2
Posts: 45158
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: Is there a case for ding away with juires ....

Post by reohn2 »

Bicycler wrote:It's the legislation that is the problem. Asking juries to decide upon whether something falls below or well below average standards of driving is full of problems. Chief amongst which is the fact that many or most drivers regularly do things which they shouldn't do. The law effectively legitimises types of dangerous driving if they become commonplace. I'd happily have hitting stationary individuals or objects as a strict liability offence. If you hit somebody who is stationary in the road then your driving is self-evidently dangerous unless you can come up with proof of a truly exceptional reason (immediate and total brake failure is the only one which springs to mind) why it happened despite competent driving.

+1
Who's in charge of the vehicle?
The driver
So the driver is liable,it is his/her responsibility to drive safely is it not?
In the case in question the cyclist was absolved of all blame,so the drivers were driving dangerously.
It's that simple.It's that simple as they crashed into him because they couldn't see where they were going.
If you're driving in the UK apparently are able to drive whilst blinded by the sun in the hope there'll be nothing in their way to crash into because that's what you do isn't it?.
In a sane and right thinking society it'd be obvious who were a danger to society.
Unfortunately this isn't a sane and right thinking society.
So a driver can kill someone with a motor vehicle,have a well prepared sob story ready for the trial and get off with either a slap on the wrist or a not guilty verdict.

Is the UK a backward nation?
-----------------------------------------------------------
"All we are not stares back at what we are"
W H Auden
User avatar
jezer
Posts: 1581
Joined: 29 Sep 2007, 5:16pm
Location: North Wiltshire

Re: Is there a case for ding away with juires ....

Post by jezer »

I've never been called for jury service, and as I'm not far off 70 (which I believe is the cut off point), it is unlikely to happen now. I would certainly like to be involved with a case involving dangerouse driving, at least to argue the point about motorists at fault in causing death or serious injury to vulnerable road users.
Power to the pedals
Bonefishblues
Posts: 11009
Joined: 7 Jul 2014, 9:45pm
Location: Near Bicester Oxon

Re: Is there a case for ding away with juires ....

Post by Bonefishblues »

jezer wrote:I've never been called for jury service, and as I'm not far off 70 (which I believe is the cut off point), it is unlikely to happen now. I would certainly like to be involved with a case involving dangerouse driving, at least to argue the point about motorists at fault in causing death or serious injury to vulnerable road users.

What exactly do you mean?
User avatar
jezer
Posts: 1581
Joined: 29 Sep 2007, 5:16pm
Location: North Wiltshire

Re: Is there a case for ding away with juires ....

Post by jezer »

I mean I'd like to challenge a jury made up of mainly motorists, passing a decision on others like them indicating that vunarable road users have no signifience.
Power to the pedals
Bonefishblues
Posts: 11009
Joined: 7 Jul 2014, 9:45pm
Location: Near Bicester Oxon

Re: Is there a case for ding away with juires ....

Post by Bonefishblues »

jezer wrote:I mean I'd like to challenge a jury made up of mainly motorists, passing a decision on others like them indicating that vunarable road users have no signifience.

I'm sure you'd try the Defendant strictly on the evidence like the other 11 Jurors, as directed by the Judge :) . Whatever the verdict "said" would be of no importance in its determination, of course.
Last edited by Bonefishblues on 25 Oct 2014, 8:22pm, edited 1 time in total.
thirdcrank
Posts: 36776
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: Is there a case for ding away with juires ....

Post by thirdcrank »

jezer wrote:I've never been called for jury service, and as I'm not far off 70 (which I believe is the cut off point), ...


They've recently raised the age limit to 75. I have sat on a jury and as I'm also not far off 70, I thought it wouldn't happen again, but it's a bit like raising the age for old age pension and bus passes.
Post Reply