st4
Banned
Yes, and this is why I am glad to have read 10p's "version" of events.
You often see emotive language in such articles like "he ploughed into" the "high performance high powered" to make people feel against the accused.
Thought provoking Driving Thread
- Thread starter davidjpowell
- Start date
Yes, and this is why I am glad to have read 10p's "version" of events.
You often see emotive language in such articles like "he ploughed into" the "high performance high powered" to make people feel against the accused.
davidjpowell
MB Enthusiast
If we go back to the original post on PH, I do think that 10 cents is to be praised, albeit his inappropriate speed has had a devastating impact on both him and the biker.
He clearly feels remorse, and has learnt from the experience. Looking forward (because we cannot change anything looking backwards) hopefuly some drivers will read his posts and examine their driving afterwards. It certainly brings the consequences home.
As for driving no faster than you can visibly stop, it should be the case, but how many of us expect to come around a corner to find such an obstruction in the road. Had it been a car the other driver may well have been relatively ok, but ten cents much more damaged.
I still stick to my view that it is an educational post and should be read as such.
David
He clearly feels remorse, and has learnt from the experience. Looking forward (because we cannot change anything looking backwards) hopefuly some drivers will read his posts and examine their driving afterwards. It certainly brings the consequences home.
As for driving no faster than you can visibly stop, it should be the case, but how many of us expect to come around a corner to find such an obstruction in the road. Had it been a car the other driver may well have been relatively ok, but ten cents much more damaged.
I still stick to my view that it is an educational post and should be read as such.
David
st4
Banned
I think everyone can agree on that. Its made me re-appraise some of my more spirited driving "jollies".
I take your point entirely and agree with all you say apart from the bit I put in bold. The final part, not the conviction, but the sentance itself I feel is a matter of debate. Lets say there was no injury to a 3rd party and this skid was a "cought on camera " conviction, would they go prison - probably not. They'd get a fine (another bone of contention of mine but we've been over this before), points on the licence and maybe a small ban.
The crime itself (of 10p) is dangerous driving, morally anyway. The consequence of that crime is the tragic consequence, but there is no malcicous intent, hence the reasoning behing my post. Some will agree, some will agree. These are my opinions, not hard facts
But where do you take this? The consequence has to have some bearing. Take theft for example - do you say that stealing 10p or £10 million should covered by the same sentence?
There is a deterrent factor involved - the more serious the consequences, the harder the sentence should be to drive home to both the offender and the general public that we have to accept the consequences of our actions, premeditated or note.
However, hats off the the guy who has accepted the consequences of his actions and hopes that we can all learn from his mistake.
st4
Banned
That example you've given slightly misses the point I make. I'll give an example of what I am getting it. Mr A decides he hates mr B and wishes to kill him, he goes out and shoots at him, he misses. Mr C decides he hates Mr D, he shoots at him and gets him, Mr D dies. Mr A and Mr C have both tried to kill and premediate, both deserve the same punishment. Mr E shoots a gun in the air, and Mr F dies, its an accident, Mr E expresses regret and genuine sorrow, why should Mr E receive any further punishment, its an accident that tragically went wrong. The regret and sorrow are the punishment, not the 3 yrs in prison and the electronic tag.
In the case of 10p and his wreckless driving, the real deterent for driving like this isn't the stretch in prison, its the injuring and killing of innocent people through selfish wreckless behaviour. For most people this is the case I would hope.
I stand by my point is that I didn't think the prison punishment was appropriate for an offence of this nature. It didn't drive the point home for the fella I know who actually killed someone through drink drive, as he was caught over the legal limit again several years later and habitually drove whilst being completely legless after serving a 3 year sentance.
Last edited:
I think I agree with *** here - if nothing had been coming the other way, but the event had been witnessed by the police, I doubt 10 pence would have received a custodial sentance (when by rights he probably should have been treated the same in both cases).
Changing Mr E's point slightly, by leveling out the intent, the question would be - if two theives set out to steel £10m, one gets the £10m, the other 10p. Should they receive the same sentance - yes they should.
Changing Mr E's point slightly, by leveling out the intent, the question would be - if two theives set out to steel £10m, one gets the £10m, the other 10p. Should they receive the same sentance - yes they should.
The way the post is written and the fact 10 pence short takes full responsibility makes for gripping reading.
There for the grace of god go us. How many of us have had that little blast or gone a longer way home to drive a 'good' road.
If one person reading this slows down next time they are having a go it could save two more familys going through hell.
It also shows the power of the forums though in both ways, the police able to use his comments as evidance but also the ability to reach hundred if not thousands with his message after the accident.
Slow down everyone. I do think this is where track days are great. If you want to see what you and your car can really do. Choose a mid week session and they are fairly cheap. Anyway thats moving off topic.
Good post and should be read by ALL car nuts, in fact anyone that drives as it could have been any one of us.
There for the grace of god go us. How many of us have had that little blast or gone a longer way home to drive a 'good' road.
If one person reading this slows down next time they are having a go it could save two more familys going through hell.
It also shows the power of the forums though in both ways, the police able to use his comments as evidance but also the ability to reach hundred if not thousands with his message after the accident.
Slow down everyone. I do think this is where track days are great. If you want to see what you and your car can really do. Choose a mid week session and they are fairly cheap. Anyway thats moving off topic.
Good post and should be read by ALL car nuts, in fact anyone that drives as it could have been any one of us.
bluevenetian
Active Member
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2008
- Messages
- 195
- Location
- Badlands of sarf east London
- Car
- Midnight blue W124 estate
hmmm... its not just intent which is taken into account when someone is sentenced -- it is also the outcome.
Hence the difference in law between (a) attempted murder
(b) murder
(c) manslaughter
With regard to the driver who hit the biker -- he did not lose control of his car through no fault of his own -- say a tyre blowing. He lost control because he was driving too fast.
Hence the difference in law between (a) attempted murder
(b) murder
(c) manslaughter
With regard to the driver who hit the biker -- he did not lose control of his car through no fault of his own -- say a tyre blowing. He lost control because he was driving too fast.
Agreed, but exactly the same logic can be used by the bike rider, stop in the distance you can see.
This is why getting a fitting punishment for so many cases is incredibly hard.
Dave!
Dieselman
Banned
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2003
- Messages
- 34,199
- Car
- Peugeot 403 Convertible
Maybe he did. The impact energy came from the car so even if the bike did stop he would still have been hit.
Remember the heavy bike was flung 14 metres back down the road, so that car was travelling a lot faster than 5mph on impact.
If the bike was still moving it means the car must have been going even faster at impact to overcome the kinetic energy stored in the bike. The bike travelling at 0 is the best case scenario for reverse travel.
Even if the car was stopped, by the account of Ollie it seems the biker would never have stopped still.
It doesn't change what happened and the biker doesn't deserve what happened to him in any way shape or form. I know exactly how hard it is to bring a bike to a stop round a tight bend and he was onto a loser before he even saw the car.
Dave!
It doesn't change what happened and the biker doesn't deserve what happened to him in any way shape or form. I know exactly how hard it is to bring a bike to a stop round a tight bend and he was onto a loser before he even saw the car.
Dave!
Dave Lewis
Active Member
I think it's a very good thing that this is being aired across the driving forums. It's a reality check: real life is not a computer game, and the consequences of using public roads as a playground are often instantaneous, grisly beyond your worst nightmare, and totally life-changing for all involved and their loved ones.
Game over
Game over
Sp!ke
Administrator
I don't think ten pence short is being entirely honest.
I've seen plenty of bike/car accidents and looking at the damage I'd put that one at around a combined speed of 60-70mph.
If the bike was catapulted 60 ft backwards after impact then the car would have been the vehicle carrying the most speed despite what ten pence alleges in his posts. It is not impossible for the bike to have been stationary on impact but it is impossible for the car to be so disposed. As an armchair critic I'd say 50mph v 20mph... I'm sure this can be accurately worked out without too much difficulty and this was probably was presented to the courts by the accident investigators. Ten pence short failed to mention what the police said his speed was on impact as far as I have read (correct me if I'm wrong please)
You can also see from the angle of impact how much the angle of drift must have been as well. Its pretty impossible to get that far adrift unless you were really giving it some.
Sure, he's showing remorse but he is also claiming he was hardly moving on impact. This is physically impossible.
Whether he just cant face the truth or he is still trying to play down his part I'm not sure. Either way, he doesnt deserve sympathy - save that for the injured parties.
I've seen plenty of bike/car accidents and looking at the damage I'd put that one at around a combined speed of 60-70mph.
If the bike was catapulted 60 ft backwards after impact then the car would have been the vehicle carrying the most speed despite what ten pence alleges in his posts. It is not impossible for the bike to have been stationary on impact but it is impossible for the car to be so disposed. As an armchair critic I'd say 50mph v 20mph... I'm sure this can be accurately worked out without too much difficulty and this was probably was presented to the courts by the accident investigators. Ten pence short failed to mention what the police said his speed was on impact as far as I have read (correct me if I'm wrong please)
You can also see from the angle of impact how much the angle of drift must have been as well. Its pretty impossible to get that far adrift unless you were really giving it some.
Sure, he's showing remorse but he is also claiming he was hardly moving on impact. This is physically impossible.
Whether he just cant face the truth or he is still trying to play down his part I'm not sure. Either way, he doesnt deserve sympathy - save that for the injured parties.
Last edited:
st4
Banned
No he doesn't deserve sympathy as such, but I have a certain level of respect for him for putting his head above the parapit, explaining the error of his ways to try and get others to learn from his mistake.
Dieselman
Banned
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2003
- Messages
- 34,199
- Car
- Peugeot 403 Convertible
He mentioned a speed of between 30 and 60 mph but an accurate collision speed couldn't be calculated due to lack of skid marks. Not sure about that.!
He also said that his car was stationary or thereabouts but he then traveled some distance further forwards (
) due to his wheels gripping the tarmac and driving him forwards as he had his foot planted attempting to regain control.(Columbo speak).
If he was stationary or thereabouts and was attempting to recover a high speed drift which gear would he be in...4th.?
If the wheels then bit from spinning the engine would stall instantly in any other gear than 1st.
He had to be traveling forwards at some rate for the events to happen as they did.
As many people do he is underestimating his impact speed and possibly finding it difficult to come to terms with his actions.
The police report said that the bike was doing anywhere between 30 and 60 - impossible to ascertain probably due to lack of skid marks, etc.
The driver says that there were skids marks of at least 50m from his vehicle. According to this site (http://www.harristechnical.com/skid33.htm) this would give a speed of just over 60.
WRT the bike "bouncing" back - that can happen without the car moving. Once the deformation of the bike and car has completed the remaining forces will cause the vehicles to move. The bike would have less inertia and would "bounce" more - the car also move subsequent to the impact. Unfortunately we had a similar result to an accident a couple of years ago when a bike hit a horse trailer - the bike was found 20m behind the impact. The trailer had no motion toward the bike as it was crossing the road.
Either way, the driver of the car has put his hands up to ruining someone else's life. That's the lesson I've taken from this - and I'm thinking more soberly about some of the bends round here that I "know" can be taken at the posted limit...
I watched my bike slide for absolutely ages at a relatively slow speed crash, once it's on its side a 200 kilo bike sliding on plastic and metal takes a bloody long time to stop.
A good ex bike riding friend of mine ended up having a 50mph head on, no doubt around a 80/90mph closing speed with a Honda Civic. He wrote off a year old car mainly with his body and 5 months later was dancing at a wedding with a limp, but mainly ok.
The injuries and damage to the bike are not a good indication of speed, it's where the energy gets dispensed which counts.
Dave!
A good ex bike riding friend of mine ended up having a 50mph head on, no doubt around a 80/90mph closing speed with a Honda Civic. He wrote off a year old car mainly with his body and 5 months later was dancing at a wedding with a limp, but mainly ok.
The injuries and damage to the bike are not a good indication of speed, it's where the energy gets dispensed which counts.
Dave!
Dieselman
Banned
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2003
- Messages
- 34,199
- Car
- Peugeot 403 Convertible
For that to happen the deformation of the car and bike would have to be elastic, which they are not.
If the car was stationary and the bike ran into it, the bike could only continue forwards or stop at the crash point. It may make the car move away due to kinetic energy as whichever object has the greater kinetic energy will control the movement of the other object.
Video example, note how the bike front wheel locks on impact and the car moves away.
This gives the impression of the bike moving backwards.
another example.
Last edited:
Ade B
MB Enthusiast
Certainly is thought provoking, if you watch the video link of the VFR taking the same route, VFR pilot manages to brake to avoid stationary sheep one bend before the accident.. If I am reading the situation correctly, I suspect both vehicles were moving a bit faster than has been stated..
An all too clear example of the benefits of making sure you can stop in the distance you can see... especially on a bike which won't stop easily once tipped over in a bend..
Ade
I've both ridden and driven that road 'enthusiastically' and seen a few cars upside down in fields.. it would take monumental will power not to turn up the wick as its such a great road.. Whilst I think that the poster has shown genuine remorse for his actions, I can't help feeling the biker involved could have been better placed to mitigate the unfortunate outcome..
An all too clear example of the benefits of making sure you can stop in the distance you can see... especially on a bike which won't stop easily once tipped over in a bend..
Ade
Last edited:
oldcro
MB Enthusiast
So it makes more sense if the bike was going very slow or was stopped and the car drifting at speed towards it.
Unless anyone knows more, there is not enough information given for a fair assesment to be given. A one sided story and some newspaper quotes is hardly enough evidence to form a constructive picture of the actual events prior to and during the accident. Not that such omissions restrict comment for or against the punishment levied.
Lots of pats on the back for someone who has ruined a man and his families lives because he wrote a blog on the internet, says something about todays society.
