>> www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/midlands-news/supercar-driver-who-killed-noreen-7776595
"Joanne Barker, prosecuting, said: “Mary Ryan was not at fault in any way for what happened that night."
Err in any way? Ok so he was driving criminally quickly in the wrong place and the primary cause of the accident, but her mincing around half over and half not over the give way lines (it was not her right of way) and then stopping in the middle of the carriageway?
She was a contributing factor.
|
>> She was a contributing factor.
>>
I 'm sorry but that's bowlux on stilts.
She edges out of a junction where sightlines may not be that good. Halfway or more across she realises the perps car is travelling far, far faster than limit and freezes fractionally ahead of the impact. The way her car is thrown illustrates just how fast the Audi is going.
Possible a driver with above average skills/observation/awareness might have accelerated a suitably rapid car out of way. An average driver? No Way.
|
>> >> She was a contributing factor.
>> >>
>>
>> I 'm sorry but that's bowlux on stilts.
Had she not stopped, had she driven smartly across the junction, she would still be alive. Those stilts are mightily short
|
>> Had she not stopped, had she driven smartly across the junction, she would still be
>> alive. Those stilts are mightily short
Driven smartly my well have taken into into unseen hazards of the type she might expect on such a road. She may well have crept forward out of the junction because of limited sightlines.
Probably not enough to hide a bus but certainly a car or 2 wheeler.
The freeze, realising impact is inevitable, is standard human reaction stuff.
|
|
No-one could be expected to react in time to a vehicle travelling at least 76mph in an urban area. Totally his fault. When racing there are marshals. This geezer was racing without any restrictions or precautions. Z expects perfection from the driver of the Fiesta, who was unaware the road had become a racetrack.
|
Zero is right.
You create your own luck in life.
For someone to say the victim had no part to play in this accident is ridiculous. At a time she was put in mortal danger by the criminal, moronic driver in the Audi, she faffed and stopped.
Partial, or in particular, full throttle instead of stopping... gave her a very real chance of getting away with it, but she froze and panicked.
Now you can say it's understandable for a driver to panic, because of the typical low quality of driving, but nevertheless, at that split second in time she had her own fate in her hands in a similar principle to someone crossing a railway line when a train's coming.
That might sound harsh, but it's reality.
|
>> Partial, or in particular, full throttle instead of stopping... gave her a very real chance
>> of getting away with it, but she froze and panicked.
I disagree with the assertion that her driving was 'low quality'. Freeze/panic is pretty much instinctive. Saw it regularly in London when pedestrians stepped out in front of the bike. Training can overcome it and given the situations you might have got into in your role as a police driver it probably got practised.
It's unfair to expect the average Josephine, who meets this once in a lifetime, to muster that level of thinking.
It would be interesting to know, should there be a claim against driver/MIB (he was uninsured) iro the deceased's dependants, they try and assert contributory negligence.
|
>> It would be interesting to know, should there be a claim against driver/MIB (he was
>> uninsured) iro the deceased's dependants, they try and assert contributory negligence.
>>
I sincerely hope not..and would be surprised
|
The point here is that there are lots of imperfect drivers on the roads, that is one reason why the speed limits are set as they are (although many on here think they are too low).
If he had been traveling within the speed limit he would have had plenty of room to stop, she would not have panicked etc.
Ever wondered why there are no crossing points on motorways and why they are disapearing fast from dual carriageways . . . . .
|
>> Ever wondered why there are no crossing points on motorways and why they are disapearing
>> fast from dual carriageways . . . . .
>>
All the roundabouts got binned off on the A1 in Notts, an area I've covered alot. Far better now there are M'way type slip rounds, helped cut down the accident rate I believe. Helped decrease the time travelling as well!
|
>> The point here is that there are lots of imperfect drivers on the roads, that
>> is one reason why the speed limits are set as they are (although many on
>> here think they are too low).
>>
>> If he had been traveling within the speed limit he would have had plenty of
>> room to stop, she would not have panicked etc.
Yes, but trouble is the more you dumb things down, the more dumb people become.
(This statement is a generality, because in reality, in this case the guilty party was so hopelessly wrong, there's no real argument to back his side of things up).
|
Seeing the road on Google street view makes the speed of the Audi all the more ridiculous.
tinyurl.com/oj93xap
|
>> Seeing the road on Google street view makes the speed of the Audi all the
>> more ridiculous.
>>
>> tinyurl.com/oj93xap
Thanks for posting that. It shows in a way the CCTV could not:
(a) the limited sightlines from Reddings Lane onto B4217 in both directions - more so with, as likley at night, more cars parked. Deceased correctly emerged using 'creep/peep.
(b) A bend in B4217 further limits view to left and that deceased would have very little advance warning of Audi's approach.
|
'creep/peep - Is that really the way to drive in the 21st century? Sounds more like a kerb crawling term from a 19th Century novel.
If the driver could not see why didn't she: Turn down the radio, ask her passenger to be quiet for a moment and open the window ? Part of the crawling out of a junction (which is missing from all the explanations on here) is the use of hearing as well as vision.
Not condoning speeding here but there are parts of the basic training which are evidently missing where a refresher or a speed awareness course (but called something else as this lady had possibly never had a speeding ticket in her life) may just have saved a life.
What also strikes me is why there was a CCTV camera there ? If it has been installed because there have been numerous near misses then it strikes me as a bit ghoulish to install a camera without altering the road layout to avoid the near misses or in this case fatal accident.
Last edited by: gmac on Wed 17 Sep 14 at 12:33
|
>> 'creep/peep - Is that really the way to drive in the 21st century? Sounds more
>> like a kerb crawling term from a 19th Century novel.
Call it what you will but yes, it's still a valid technique in C21' Particularly so on urban roads that pre-date the motor car (so lots of on road parking) and where vegetation and street furniture further limit views.
>> If the driver could not see why didn't she: Turn down the radio, ask her
>> passenger to be quiet for a moment and open the window ? Part of the
>> crawling out of a junction (which is missing from all the explanations on here) is
>> the use of hearing as well as vision.
How do we know radio was on or passenger chattering? Hearing can be valuable though more in rural settings than urban where background noise is constant. No amount of hearing will detect a kerb hugging pedal cyclist. Even an off throttle moped makes little noise.
>> Not condoning speeding here but there are parts of the basic training which are evidently
>> missing where a refresher or a speed awareness course (but called something else as this
>> lady had possibly never had a speeding ticket in her life) may just have saved
>> a life.
Trouble is this is a motoring forum and many of us will have, or at least followed the principles of IAM training. Two or three of us, including WP, are/were trianed to drive to Police pursuit standards.
The law's basis is the averagely competent motorist. Such a person will 'creep/peep', those falling below standard launch and prey.
>> What also strikes me is why there was a CCTV camera there ? If it
>> has been installed because there have been numerous near misses then it strikes me as
>> a bit ghoulish to install a camera without altering the road layout to avoid the
>> near misses or in this case fatal accident.
More likely there for 'security and public safety' or to monitor rush hour traffic. The UK has more CCTV per square mile than almost anywhere in world. Without any real debate or Parliamentary authority we have 1984 style oversight of our every move.
|
>> How do we know radio was on or passenger chattering? Hearing can be valuable though
>> more in rural settings than urban where background noise is constant. No amount of hearing
>> will detect a kerb hugging pedal cyclist. Even an off throttle moped makes little noise.
>>
In fairness he does make a reasonable point. You would more likely hear a supercar doing 70+ by opening a window and far more than bike or moped. I don't think there would be so much background noise to blank out the noise of an R8.
Whether it's reasonable at every 'tight' junction in an urban area to drop the window, is another matter.
|
>> How do we know radio was on or passenger chattering?
We don't. The point I was making is we would not try to cross a junction blindfolded why not use all the senses available to us?
>>Hearing can be valuable though more in rural settings than urban where background noise
>> is constant. No amount of hearing will detect a kerb hugging pedal cyclist. Even an off
>> throttle moped makes little noise.
An EV example would have been more appropriate. A kerb hugging cyclist is not going to punt a Fiesta across the junction killing one of the occupants. As for background noise? An R8 is going to make a fair old wail bouncing around an urban environment.
>> Trouble is this is a motoring forum and many of us will have, or at
>> least followed the principles of IAM training. Two or three of us, including WP, are/were
>> trianed to drive to Police pursuit standards.
>>
That means you're closed to learning? No one can teach you anything? True, there's nothing new under the sun but sometimes we forget and a reminder can sometimes be a good thing.
|
>> An EV example would have been more appropriate. A kerb hugging cyclist is not going
>> to punt a Fiesta across the junction killing one of the occupants. As for background
>> noise? An R8 is going to make a fair old wail bouncing around an urban
>> environment.
There are any number of examples. Collision with a cyclist will have serious consequences for him personally (injury or death) and motorist (criminal action, licence at risk etc. EV or cyclist are commonplace a TWOC'd supercar doing wrap 6 is not.
>> That means you're closed to learning? No one can teach you anything? True, there's nothing
>> new under the sun but sometimes we forget and a reminder can sometimes be a
>> good thing.
Where did I say I was closed to learning? My point is about the actions skills expected of an 'average' driver. A forum of car enthusiasts acting with hindsight seem to me to have an unrealistic view of what comprises average.
|
Genuinely staggered to see comments on here almost mitigating the A8 guy's reckless excess speed by saying "if only she'd done...."
Firstly the CCTV is available as there's a commercial camera just below the gutter of an alarm company premises right on the corner.
Looking at the site carefully it seems likely there would have been cars half parked on the pavement to her left (as on streetview) so her cautious semi-halt and slow creep out was appropriate. At the point she crossed the white lines out of her side road the A8 would have been around 350ft away crossing the previous junction and masked by it's bright lights she could never have judged its speed to be so excessive so would have reasonably expected it would cover only a third of the distance between her initial awareness and the time she would have cleared the junction. Even if the approaching vehicle was 50% over the speed limit she would still have cleared the junction with a safely margin of over 100ft.
As she reached the middle of the road it obviously became apparent the A8 was in fact travelling at enormous speed so entirely reasonably she halted so she left his lane 100% clear.
The fault is totally with the A8 guy due to his speed and also taking evasive action which went against the most likely action of the crossing car.
So (like the 97mph biker) we have another situation where the use of the road as a private racetrack puts a normal member of the public in an impossible situation.
|
Thanks... and another point....
To those that would say if the lady had carried on then it would all have been fine.
For those two cars to be certain of missing each other with the speed involved it would have taken the precise & careful pre-planning of a stunt team where everyone was in radio contact and speeds/positioning were known to both drivers... and with a contingency plan for change of speed/position if either car deviated from the planned sequence.
|
>> Thanks... and another point....
>>
>> To those that would say if the lady had carried on then it would all
>> have been fine.
>>
>> For those two cars to be certain of missing each other with the speed involved
>> it would have taken the precise & careful pre-planning of a stunt team where everyone
>> was in radio contact and speeds/positioning were known to both drivers... and with a contingency
>> plan for change of speed/position if either car deviated from the planned sequence.
For the avoidance of doubt I did not mean to impute any blame at all to the lady driving in my post at 11.39.
Her action when she became aware of the other car can only have been a reflex. The collision was not only a consequence of the Audi driver's action but a reasonably foreseeable one, at that speed.
|
>> Genuinely staggered to see comments on here almost mitigating the A8 guy's reckless excess speed
>> by saying "if only she'd done...."
You are reading stuff into comments that have not been made. Nobody is mitigating or absolving the Audi driver of primary blame.
I bet that had she been alive, the old bill would seriously have considered persecuting her, as they did with the biker incident which is almost 100% the same type of accident. Based on that for the prosecution to say "she was not in anyway to blame" had a touch of hypocrisy about it.
|
Driver of the Fiesta survived, passenger was killed.
|
>> >> Genuinely staggered to see comments on here almost mitigating the A8 guy's reckless excess
>> speed
>> >> by saying "if only she'd done...."
>>
>> You are reading stuff into comments that have not been made. Nobody is mitigating or
>> absolving the Audi driver of primary blame.
>>
>> I bet that had she been alive, the old bill would seriously have considered persecuting
>> her, as they did with the biker incident which is almost 100% the same type
>> of accident. Based on that for the prosecution to say "she was not in anyway
>> to blame" had a touch of hypocrisy about it.
>>
The only "if only she'd done..." here was Fenlander. I don't read anywhere, anyone saying the R8 driver was done wrong.
My own post was a but for the grace of god if there's something we can take from this...wish I hadn't bothered now. Apparently I am privileged to walk among IAM deity in here who can learn nothing about anything with tyres.
|
>>>You are reading stuff into comments that have not been made.
>>>The only "if only she'd done..." here was Fenlander
You know what I was getting at because previously in the thread I'd read these multiple comments that all read as I read them... a whole load of "what she might/should have done"...
>>>her mincing around half over and half not over the give way lines (it was not her right of way) and then stopping in the middle of the carriageway? She was a contributing factor.
>>>Had she not stopped, had she driven smartly across the junction, she would still be alive.
>>> At a time she was put in mortal danger by the criminal, moronic driver in the Audi, she faffed and stopped. Partial, or in particular, full throttle instead of stopping... gave her a very real chance of getting away with it, but she froze and panicked.
>>>If the driver could not see why didn't she: Turn down the radio, ask her passenger to be quiet for a moment and open the window ?
>>>If she'd not frozen and braked (or lifted off) although the speeding car would still have hit her, it would have been further towards the rear of the car - and just perhaps, she might still be here.
>>>but she STOPPED. An action by her, a deliberate action by her, freezing - i.e. a failure in risk perception, put her into the collision zone.
Oh and on that last point... she didn't put herself in the collision zone... the other driver did that when he veered out of his lane.
Last edited by: Fenlander on Wed 17 Sep 14 at 17:06
|
>> I bet that had she been alive, the old bill would seriously have considered persecuting
>> her, as they did with the biker incident which is almost 100% the same type
>> of accident. Based on that for the prosecution to say "she was not in anyway
>> to blame" had a touch of hypocrisy about it.
The OB/CPS would of course have had to consider prosecution ( I assume your use of persecution is Freudian slip or auto-correct). I believe however they would not have done so on basis of law re dangerous/careless and limited chances of success.
A loon on a motorbike on a rural A road, square in your field of view albeit well over limit is commonplace and something the competent driver should be aware of. Another loon in a 'supercar' on an urban b road with limited sight lines and a 30 limit is a different kettle of fish. I also think the CCTV showing her stopping almost clear of Audi's lane would play against even carelessness. I only spotted that after reviewing vid this morning after other comments. In light of that I put leee weight on panic than I did earlier.
|
>> The OB/CPS would of course have had to consider prosecution ( I assume your use
>> of persecution is Freudian slip or auto-correct). I believe however they would not have done
>> so on basis of law re dangerous/careless and limited chances of success.
And presumably did consider it, as the driver is still alive - it was the passenger, her sister, who was killed.
|
>> Genuinely staggered to see comments on here almost mitigating the A8 guy's reckless excess speed
>> by saying "if only she'd done...."
Is that an 'almost mitigating' or a 'mitigating'.
For the record, none of my posts have the intent or suggestion of mitigation for the A8 driver, none whatsoever. His criminal reckless driving killed someone.
My point is, the victim here, when she found herself in mortal danger was unable to help herself and save her life .. when she probably could have done...how sad.
|
>> was unable to help herself and save her life .. when she probably could have done...how sad.
Dazzled by the Audi's main beams, she failed to register that it was going very fast and stopped thinking perhaps that it would be able to steer round her. She didn't see the extreme urgency of getting out of harm's way, because she didn't anticipate harm.
On the whole I do anticipate harm, an attitude that has served me well. I think I would have spotted that the Audi was really belting and skedaddled out of its way. But not having been there I can't be sure.
|
>> As she reached the middle of the road it obviously became apparent the A8 was
>> in fact travelling at enormous speed so entirely reasonably she halted so she left his
>> lane 100% clear.
That is not necessarily correct.
The loon in the A8 would be expecting her to keep going, so he aimed to his right, the rear of her car...unfortunately for her she stopped right in the middle of his trajectory.
|
>>That might sound harsh, but it's reality.
Once in the situation where she was halfway, and realised that something was coming at her very fast, any timely reaction in those circumstances could only be based on instinct, or learned behaviour.
Her learned behaviour was probably based on having to give way, so the first reaction was to stop.
I agree that being a "sharper" driver by habit might have helped - she might have been quicker off the mark, or seen the Audi earlier, or reacted differently - but the die was cast and once she had set off, when it came the response was reflex.
Her style and response may have been a contributory factor, but not to me in any way contributory negligence.
It's something I've thought about before, that driving compliantly,and avoiding collisions are different things. Most of us have probably had at least a minor prang that was absolutely not our fault, but could have been avoided. Sadly this was much more devastating.
Last edited by: Manatee on Wed 17 Sep 14 at 11:39
|
>> Most of us have probably had at least a minor prang that was absolutely not our
>> fault, but could have been avoided. Sadly this was much more devastating.
>>
Perhaps I am one of the exceptions:-(
I have had just three minor prangs. None were my fault, all could have been avoided by the other driver (not by me). In two I was stationary and the third at 15 mph.
I have had one write off that could have been easily avoided. ( I was stationary in a queue).
By coincidence all were "local", all in 30 limits, all in good day light and all by women drivers.
Many times, every day I hear on a nearby dual carriageway, mainly bikes, exceeding the 40 limit by a vast amount. I suspect they are way way over the NSL.
As there are no accidents I suppose all is OK :-(
|
>> Her style and response may have been a contributory factor, but not to me in
>> any way contributory negligence.
Quite agree and exactly the point I've been trying to make.
|
Only thing I can think of is that there were some parked cars, she was edge round possibly badly parked?
I saw her stop as well, I think it's a reaction to seeing the car at the last minute. A panic reaction.
Possibly in some very small way, but never going to get anything more than 0% of the blame. She could have gunned it, but not unreasonable driving.
Last edited by: sooty123 on Tue 16 Sep 14 at 19:52
|
If she'd not frozen and braked (or lifted off) although the speeding car would still have hit her, it would have been further towards the rear of the car - and just perhaps, she might still be here.
Doesn't form a defence for anyone though.
|
>> If she'd not frozen and braked (or lifted off) although the speeding car would still
>> have hit her, it would have been further towards the rear of the car -
>> and just perhaps, she might still be here.
>>
>> Doesn't form a defence for anyone though.
Qualified by final sentence I agree. The fact that lightening reactions or superior driving skill MIGHT have mitigated does not make for contributory as Z suggests.
|
SQ
>> Qualified by final sentence I agree. The fact that lightening reactions or superior driving skill
>> MIGHT have mitigated does not make for contributory as Z suggests.
but she STOPPED. An action by her, a deliberate action by her, freezing - i.e. a failure in risk perception, put her into the collision zone.
Last edited by: VxFan on Wed 17 Sep 14 at 01:31
|
|
She froze in fear, realising just how much ground the Audi covered in a second or so and how stupidly fast it was travelling. That's a normal human reaction, not something deliberate or indicative of driving on her part falling below the 'average' the law and common sense expects.
|
>She froze in fear,
I think she saw the Audi and stopped half way across in the chicken lane expecting it to stay in lane and pass in front of her. He expected her to continue and tried to pass behind her.
Last edited by: Kevin on Tue 16 Sep 14 at 20:33
|
>> but she STOPPED. An action by her, a deliberate action by her, freezing - i.e.
>> a failure in risk perception, put her into the collision zone.
>>
Looking at the video, stopping only made a difference to where the R8 hit, not if it hit it or not.
|
The right car in the right gear can sometimes accelerate out of harm's way, if the driver does the right thing. Very few do as the default instinct in a developing accident is to slow down. You have to be a proper driver to even attempt the right thing, and the chances are the car won't be up to it.
Happened to me once in a hired car and I did the right thing, but a Triumph Herald 1200 doesn't have much muscle and we were hit on the rear quarter, causing a 180 degree rotation in the outside lane of the Marylebone Road. The culprit was a Triumph 2000 driver who admitted he'd 'just come in off the M1', his excuse for running a red light five or more seconds late... My fault was being very prompt when the light changed, since I was already rolling up to the front in an empty outside lane, geddit?
No one was hurt or even badly upset. The hire company just shrugged and didn't charge extra. Win-win-win actually, just as well because I was poor in those days and a bit frazzled.
|
How does this compare with the poor schmut that pulled across in front of the motorcycle that was doing close on a ton?
ISTR they were penalised (though not as much as the motorcyclist)?
|
>> How does this compare with the poor schmut that pulled across in front of the
>> motorcycle that was doing close on a ton?
Similar but different I guess. Rural A road v urban street. Failure to see at all and failure to recognise speed of a car exceeding limit by a greater multiple than biker.
Question of what's expected of an averagely competent driver.
|
>> >> How does this compare with the poor schmut that pulled across in front of
>> the
>> >> motorcycle that was doing close on a ton?
>>
>> Similar but different I guess.
Like the car was doing 30mph less and was bigger so easier to see?
|
>> How does this compare with the poor schmut that pulled across in front of the
>> motorcycle that was doing close on a ton?
>>
>> ISTR they were penalised (though not as much as the motorcyclist)?
>>
The Clio driver in the biker video got a 12 month 'community sentence', made do 130 hours unpaid work, 18 month driving ban and paid £260 costs.
|
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-tayside-central-29226666
Old chap and his wife travelling at 40-45mph on the M'way hit by another car travelling at a more reasonable lick leading to the old man's death.
Community payback order.
|
There are two levels to this, official and moral.
The official level just descends, there's nothing you can do about it give or take a bit of squirming and arguing. Doesn't make any difference how innocent you are.
The moral level is another thing. You wouldn't want to have anyone's death or serious injury on your conscience. I don't mean just being involved. I mean knowing your own error or character defect had caused it.
|
Harder to tell from the BBC report what actually happened in the M9 accident and how the elderly driver's low speed contributed to it, given that he was hit from the side and not from behind.
The Birmingham case, for me, is entirely on the Audi driver. Yes, the Fiesta driver might have escaped if she'd shot straight across, but if she was inching out of the side road with a poor view, ready to stop and give way to anything she saw - as we're all taught to do - then what she did was both reasonable and predictable. Calling it 'panic' is unfair. The Audi driver's speed meant he only had time to guess what to do when this predictable situation arose. He guessed wrong - the lane he was speeding in remained clear, as the Fiesta driver intended - and we know the rest.
|
Of course it wasn't the Fiesta driver's fault. The average driver's response to a developing accident situation is to slow or stop. An 'average' driver won't usually be able to think quickly enough to try to accelerate out of danger. The Audi driver was going much too fast and chose the wrong lane. It seems the Mercedes in which the Audi driver and his friend 'escaped' would have been going too fast too. The Audi driver, perhaps in shock, apologised and admitted being at fault before legging it.
How can a very potent machine like that Audi be hired to an incompetent reckless twit who has 600 quid to waste? Seems absurd to me, but hard to imagine how it can be avoided.
Last edited by: Armel Coussine on Wed 17 Sep 14 at 14:46
|
|
As I understood report the Audi was TWOCd. The hirer had left keys on a table and the accident driver had 'borrowed' them.
|
Just on a side note; in my experience, it is dangerous being a motorist in and around another city; Bradford.
Not at all unusual to see curiously young drivers in curiously expensive powerful machinery performing outrageous antics.
Can pretty-much guarantee it on any drive through. In fact my family have turned it into a kind of I-Spy game; counting how many we will observe (but pray we don’t get caught-up in).
But really really frustratingly, there’s never a police car there to see it and cop ‘em.
|
>> Just on a side note; in my experience, it is dangerous being a motorist in
>> and around another city; Bradford.
Do the accident statistics back that up?
|
I don't have those figures. Perhaps someone else here knows them. I am speaking purely from my own experiences driving in various parts of the country and various cities.
In any case, fortunately, I have not yet witnessed one of these episodes result in an accident - just a lot of near-misses resulting from blatantly illegal manoeuvres and speeds.
Perhaps the city just happens also to be blessed with unusually-good luck.
|
>> Perhaps the city just happens also to be blessed with unusually-good luck.
Maybe, its not blessed with anything else.
|
>>Maybe, its not blessed with anything else.<<
Yes, it is.
It's truly multi-cultural with a rich plethora of accents.
Wonderful aroma's of many countries traditional cuisine.
Every one I have ever met in Bradford has a wonderful, witty, sense of humour and can laugh at themselves.
I have, and always will have a soft spot for Bradford!
Pat
|
>> a soft spot for Bradford!
Well said Pat, I've got one too. When I worked in the City in the sixties I had an assistant who came from Bradford: Bradford Grammar School and Magdalen College Oxford. He was a charming fellow who had retained his accent.
We drove up there together in a company car to test some tobacco advertising on the right sort of age/class/etc respondent groups. Seemed like a great place to me, and my young colleague's mother was charming too.
Obviously must have changed since then, but there's nothing to make one think it's got worse.
Last edited by: Armel Coussine on Wed 17 Sep 14 at 17:15
|
|
I dont know about the accident stats but it is one of the worst areas for uninsured drivers and these things tend to go hand in hand.
|
I was born in Manningham, Bradford, and spent the first fifteen years of my life in Manningham. Then the second fifteen years of my life working in the centre of Bradford near the bottom of Sunbridge Rd. The heart of the city was pulled down & destroyed by the planners, only a few lovely old buildings remain. Not a single contemporary of mine lives, to the best of my knowledge, in Bradford. It is a hole of the biggest magnitude with very few redeeming features.
Bradford, and Keighley, where I worked up until six years ago, are the only two places anywhere in the UK where I have been involved with hit n run drivers. Stay away.
|
>> The heart of the city was pulled down & destroyed by the planners, only a few lovely old buildings remain.
Alas, that happened all over the country. But I think I must have made Bradford before much of that had happened, because I remember very fine old wool mills with a lot of water around them.
I like industrial history - who doesn't - and really enjoyed the northern cities when I was younger and had reasons to visit them. Did the cotton side too, saw mechanical looms in action. Loved it all.
|
>> As I understood report the Audi was TWOCd.
Ah, that would explain it, hired to someone mature with a clean record and some serious existing insurance.
Younger brother or cousin or someone nicking the keys for a joyride. Damn little monkey, deserves his porridge but it'll only make him worse.
|
If you watch the first vehicle that passes, they pass pretty much on the middle lane of the road thereby indicating to me there were parked cars on inside.
Fiesta car has came out , edged forward to see that all is clear, it probably was at that point, kept going, looked again and by this time car was bearing down on them. Braked int he hope the car would keep on the lane it should have been in and passed her by.
I really do not see anything wrong with that, in fact I could argue that she had possible been more observant than most. Many would have checked either way was clear and continued on their way oblivious to anything subsequent happened.
Maybe her passenger shouted "Watch" in which case my reflex reaction would be to slam on the brakes, not to keep going?
100% to blame Audi driver in my book.
As a contrast, many years ago a colleague of mine killed an old couple in a car crash. He was going along a dual carriageway and they pulled out in front of him directly into his path from a side road. In that scenario, no charges were levied against my colleague, there was nothing illegal or wrong with what he was doing.
|
|
100% Audi drivers fault. Was is a black example? :-)
|
Of course it was MD. Even though I have a powerful car and would have been in first gear, and even if I knew the toad layout, I cannot say hand on heart how I would have reacted to a nutter speeding down the road. Maybe I too would have frozen. Or maybe I had the presence of mind to boot it and get across. I am very aware of motorbikes & cyclists and look several times each way, especially at night for idiots on unlit push bikes who are intent on improving the gene pool.
So sad for the innocent driver
|
>>
>> So sad for the innocent driver
>>
Much worse for the innocent passenger.
|
|
Sorry Duncani did not read the details. I only knew there had been a fatality and wrongly assumed there was only one person in the vehicle.
|
>> Sorry Duncani did not read the details. I only knew there had been a fatality
>> and wrongly assumed there was only one person in the vehicle.
>>
Same here to start with, couldn't read the original link
|
Audi R8 - fatal crash driver gets 6 years - Zero
