Fatal motorcyclist vs vehicle hit-and-run driver charged

**EJK** · 25th September 2014, 12:35

Originally Posted by Paul in NZ

Yeah thats fair.... At 17 he probably freaked out but 5 months???

I can hear lawyers whinging "he's only a teenager, too young to go to jail yada yada punishment will be too sever and will ruin his life in the future."

**Paul in NZ** · 25th September 2014, 15:51

Originally Posted by EJK

I can hear lawyers whinging "he's only a teenager, too young to go to jail yada yada punishment will be too sever and will ruin his life in the future."

I'd try that if I was his lawyer... bloody terrible situation...

**HenryDorsetCase** · 25th September 2014, 17:11

You all read the story didn't you? Before getting the pitchforks and flaming torches out?

my reading of the story is that a car pulled out in front of the motorcycle rider, he decked the bike and ended up in the oncoming lane, where he was struck and ultimately that was fatal.

I can easily see how a young, inexperienced (on the road) rider could do that and end up in the other lane.

The worst aspect of this is the hit and run, and not stopping (which is a crime itself) but it is very easy to see why this has been charged at the lower end of the spectrum. If ute-boy gets a half decent lawyer he might walk entirely on the careless causing (but definitely not on the failing to stop)

**Mo NZ** · 25th September 2014, 17:23

Nah. He avoided for 5 months.

Earlier I said
"If it was a genuine unavoidable thing with the bloke being knocked off and suddenly was on the road in front of him and unable to stop, well that would have to be looked at."

It speaks volumes that he took off and avoided detection.

**scumdog** · 25th September 2014, 17:50

Originally Posted by EJK

Lousy $4,500 for taking a man's life? That's pretty messed up if you ask me.

A wise man once said to me "If you ever want to kill somebody in NZ do it on the road - the penalty is not so harsh"

**Katman** · 26th September 2014, 08:11

Originally Posted by Mo NZ

Nah. He avoided for 5 months.

Earlier I said
"If it was a genuine unavoidable thing with the bloke being knocked off and suddenly was on the road in front of him and unable to stop, well that would have to be looked at."

It speaks volumes that he took off and avoided detection.

So who was it that tried to avoid detection?

The ute driver that hit and killed the motorcyclist or the driver that pulled out in front of him?

**Ender EnZed** · 26th September 2014, 11:33

Originally Posted by Katman

So who was it that tried to avoid detection?

The ute driver that hit and killed the motorcyclist or the driver that pulled out in front of him?

Only article I can find is the one linked here, which doesn't say.

Originally Posted by Maha

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/ar...ectid=11330750

Originally Posted by HenryDorsetCase

If ute-boy gets a half decent lawyer he might walk entirely on the careless causing (but definitely not on the failing to stop)

Do you have some other information or is that just a guess that he was driving the ute?

It seems a bit dumb to do a runner from a fatal accident that you didn't cause. Maybe he was pissed/speeding/had an ounce in the glove box.

If Samuel James Young was driving the ute, do we know if the car that pulled out is in the picture?

**Akzle** · 26th September 2014, 14:27

Originally Posted by Ender EnZed

If Samuel James Young was driving the ute, do we know if the car that pulled out is in the picture?

no we don't know shit. but since when has that ever slowed down th KB lynch mob...?

**SVboy** · 26th September 2014, 14:44

Originally Posted by Akzle

no we don't know shit. but since when has that ever stopped me from spouting drivel at every opportunity...?

Corrected for accuracy.

**Mo NZ** · 26th September 2014, 16:50

Originally Posted by Katman

So who was it that tried to avoid detection?

The ute driver that hit and killed the motorcyclist or the driver that pulled out in front of him?

He slid off the bike and, before he could get up, he was struck by a ute coming in the opposite direction.

It actually says it here. http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/ar...ectid=11330750

**Ender EnZed** · 26th September 2014, 17:22

Originally Posted by Mo NZ

He slid off the bike and, before he could get up, he was struck by a ute coming in the opposite direction.

It actually says it here. http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/ar...ectid=11330750

Yeah, we know that. Was Samuel James Young (the 17 year old who left the scene, avoided detection for 5 months and is now being charged with careless causing death) driving the ute that hit him or the car that pulled out in front of him? The article doesn't say.

**cynna** · 26th September 2014, 17:25

Originally Posted by Mo NZ

Its a long stretch to claim how sorry he is now.
He wasn't sorry enough to stop at the time, but left.. and did not come forward willingly.
If it was a genuine unavoidable thing with the bloke being knocked off and suddenly was on the road in front of him and unable to stop, well that would have to be looked at.
It speaks volumes that he took off and avoided detection.
He also had an opportunity to enter a plea.

He is sorry he has been identified.

yep like most criminals - they are only sorry that they got caught

**Mo NZ** · 26th September 2014, 17:32

Originally Posted by Ender EnZed

Yeah, we know that. Was Samuel James Young (the 17 year old who left the scene, avoided detection for 5 months and is now being charged with careless causing death) driving the ute that hit him or the car that pulled out in front of him? The article doesn't say.

See post #25.

**Mo NZ** · 26th September 2014, 17:34

Originally Posted by Ender EnZed

Yeah, we know that. Was Samuel James Young (the 17 year old who left the scene, avoided detection for 5 months and is now being charged with careless causing death) driving the ute that hit him or the car that pulled out in front of him? The article doesn't say.

Read all of it before you post.