Driver "sentenced" after Costa Crash Kills Woman

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
There was a poster having a right bitch about new threads quoting news stories and speculating over the content, hope he doesn't open this thread!
 
As people age their mobility also takes a dive and often a car can be lifeline to get to the supermarket or medical appointments for example, particularly in areas not adequately served by public transport. Taking away older drivers ability to drive a car with some form of blanket ban may be taking away their independence placing an increasing burden on the state/social services . So a proportionate response is what is required. Banging up the odd miscreant after they inadevertently kill someone isn't really going to address the problem???

Lifeline maybe, but the lying ******* just stole someone else's lifeline.

20 year anniversary retests for everyone, roads safer, government coffers full - what's not to like?
 
The trouble is that accidents are caused by carelessness, arrogance, inappropriate speed etc, so I doubt a retest would make much difference to these reasons. How many accidents are caused by lack of driving knowledge? I suspect very few.
 
geraldrobins said:
The trouble is that accidents are caused by carelessness, arrogance, inappropriate speed etc, so I doubt a retest would make much difference to these reasons. How many accidents are caused by lack of driving knowledge? I suspect very few.
They are also caused by silly, stupid old people who are too arrogant to admit that they are a danger on the road.
 
They are also caused by silly, stupid old people who are too arrogant to admit that they are a danger on the road.

Do you have any statistics to back that up. Some accidents are caused by older drivers of course but not the majority. There are also silly drivers in this category particularly with eyesight issues I suggest. Being silly stupid and arrogant and dangerous isn't reserved for a particular age range.
 
They are also caused by silly, stupid old/young/male/female/experienced/inexperienced people who are too arrogant to admit that they are a danger on the road.

Essentially, anybody who drives selfishly.

Bruce - I understand your view, but I really cannot think what the court could have sentenced him to. Imprisonment is meant for rehabilitation, not for revenge.

I can also see that the less he understood exactly what happened, then the more likely various 'explanations' would come to mind.
 
Westerham: Sentencing of elderly driver David Lord for killing grandmother in Costa Coffee crash

I post this here as I struggle with the "Sentence" given out.

Had the accused stood up day 1 and pleaded guilty, having said, It was me, I got confused! Then I could maybe understand the thinking behind this sentence.

But he dd not. He repeatedly lied about what had happened, blaming the car, a medical episode, another distraction etc.

I cannot help but think what if this were a younger man in the dock? It changes nothing, I know but?

Reminds me of this similar case which took place in my area .

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/17305...s-free-from-court-despite-mums-furious-blast/
 
Who is honest in court?

No-one in court is telling a perfectly pitched "honest" story.

The English legal system Prosecution and Defence "game" exaggerates both sides and the Judge (and sometimes jury) comes to a conclusion.

We all want revenge for a loss. Can we forgive an "honest" mistake in the elderly, or should we just stop people from driving before they "might" make a mistake? (65/75/85 *)


* delete as appropriate.
 
No-one in court is telling a perfectly pitched "honest" story.

The English legal system Prosecution and Defence "game" exaggerates both sides and the Judge (and sometimes jury) comes to a conclusion.

We all want revenge for a loss. Can we forgive an "honest" mistake in the elderly, or should we just stop people from driving before they "might" make a mistake? (65/75/85 *)


* delete as appropriate.

An honest mistake should be treated depending on the circumstances irrespective of age surely.
 
In this case (from I can read and have been told) honesty went out the window the second the driver was removed from his car, still inside Costa and surrounded by carnage.

He immediately at that point set out to lie and did lie. This is now being presented as 'confusion' but whatever we call it? It was untruthful and not a correct version of events as they happened.

What I see here is that he changed his story based on what 'evidence' was presented to him by the Police. As each story was debunked by the Police, he changed it again.

Rather than accept what was put to him on day 1(that he, and he alone was at fault. He set out blame the car. Other road users. Medical episode(s). Each one of these had to be investigated, disproved and brought back to court.

The Police (off record) new he was lying as did the family of the deceased. That is what is causing the angst here. Not the actual crash. That happened and cannot be changed.

But, if this were a 20 year old in a hot hatch who set to blame his car, other people, medical episodes etc, I suspect we would see a very different sentencing regime being applied.

These incidents are either becoming more common or better reported? I see several mentioned here and am aware of another in Kent where another elderly gent drove his car into a lady in a supermarket car park after colliding with several other cars. In that instance the lady was also killed. Then another outside a Kent bowling club. Almost identical. But in both of these the accused admitted their guilt and the cases were dealt with swiftly and without the need for prolonged agony for the families.

I have no solution here and no suggestions. I just feel uncomfortable about what (to me) feels like a huge abuse of the law (perjury) going unpunished and being called "confusion" I can see a massive precedent looming.
 
This old chestnut, confusing the accelerator for the brake is wearing a bit thin, not only have they mistook one for the other, they then fail to put right the wrong, by becoming more "confused", and pressing harder on the wrong pedal.What nonsense is this? If you make a mistake of such potential disastrous consequence, and then compound it by being unable to take the correct action to put it right you should not be driving. Problem is, by the time this is realised its too late.
 
This old chestnut, confusing the accelerator for the brake is wearing a bit thin, not only have they mistook one for the other, they then fail to put right the wrong, by becoming more "confused", and pressing harder on the wrong pedal.What nonsense is this? If you make a mistake of such potential disastrous consequence, and then compound it by being unable to take the correct action to put it right you should not be driving. Problem is, by the time this is realised its too late.



...and if you then continue to claim that the car was at fault, or a passer by distracted you, you wee having a medical episode.

No. I get the initial confusion and panic. I understand how and why that happens (and it does) but I am struggling with the subsequent denials and invention.

FYI: What we do not see in this video clip is that he had driven for some distance and hit several other cars before he comes into shot in this clip. AT the point he comes into shot, in this clip. The lady is dead. He is never going to stop and his momentum is going to take him into Costa. The guy on the pavement should buy a lottery ticket - No humour intended.
 
Society is full of different characters. Some are honest and some are deceitful.

It is true to say that if someone spends their life lying and cheating to get what they want in life, then this trait will follow them in to old age. If someone is a thug or bully, then it is also fair to say that they will carry those traits in to old age in some measure of their former self.

What I am saying here is that any one of us could have an accident as a pensioner, but it would take a devious sort of person, someone who probably spent their entire life lying and cheating to get on in life, to lie about what caused an accident that had claimed the life of another.

Most of us would say sorry, but some will blame everyone and everything but themselves. I actually work with a few people who see no fault in themselves, but with everyone else around them. After all, it's never their fault.

Just because someone is old and frail does not mean that they cannot still be devious and conniving.
 
Society is full of different characters. Some are honest and some are deceitful.

It is true to say that if someone spends their life lying and cheating to get what they want in life, then this trait will follow them in to old age. If someone is a thug or bully, then it is also fair to say that they will carry those traits in to old age in some measure of their former self.

What I am saying here is that any one of us could have an accident as a pensioner, but it would take a devious sort of person, someone who probably spent their entire life lying and cheating to get on in life, to lie about what caused an accident that had claimed the life of another.



Most of us would say sorry, but some will blame everyone and everything but themselves. I actually work with a few people who see no fault in themselves, but with everyone else around them. After all, it's never their fault.

Just because someone is old and frail does not mean that they cannot still be devious and conniving.
Your fault then ;^)
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom