Your comments am speechless

[Scuba_Steve]

Just crush the car, it was the homicide weapon so dispose of it

[Jeeper]

Just crush the car, it was the homicide weapon so dispose of it

What if it was a company car? Which would be someone else's property.

[pritch]

What if it was a company car? Which would be someone else's property.

They'd probably have to prove he was a boy racer 'cause that's the only cars that get crushed to my (limited) knowledge.

[pete376403]

They'd probably have to prove he was a boy racer 'cause that's the only cars that get crushed to my (limited) knowledge.

AFAIK, only three boy racer cars were crushed, and even though collins takes the moniker "crusher", it was Anne Tolley who oversaw the events.
The first crushing was delayed so long that by the time the car got to the crusher it was a bare shell, everything of value had been removed
(and no doubt transplanted to another 'racer')

[pritch]

AFAIK, only three boy racer cars were crushed, and even though collins takes the moniker "crusher", it was Anne Tolley who oversaw the events.
The first crushing was delayed so long that by the time the car got to the crusher it was a bare shell, everything of value had been removed
(and no doubt transplanted to another 'racer')

I remember the first one well. Trying to pass off total humiliation as some sort of victory, Tolley tottering in the flattened shell in heels. Farcical.

[baffa]

My thoughts?

Ideally our first priority must be the focus on preventing losses like this, including more driver training.

However, since when were livelihoods and future employment considered more valuable than human life?
The low level carelessness argument absolutely sh!ts me.
If it was a situation that could result in severe injury or death, that was not low level.
The gas fitter in Christchurch who forgot to disconnect a gas pipe and blew up a house was fined almost $100,000 and had his name over the press, and rightly so. By the same logic that could be argued low level.
Realistically if you are merging on to a 80-100 Kph road, and by your 50s you do not know how to gauge speed, I don't see that as low level.

I don't really care that his future employment prospects may be harmed. Set an example, and make it fair.
A 25 year old maori kid who made the exact same accident would also have his future prospects hampered, but what is the chance the court would give him the same grace? To be honest the the verdict is disgusting.

If the Judge had simply removed his license, forcing him to start again, and fined him heavily to cover emotional harm and lost earnings to the victim (not a paltry $25,000) then maybe i could stomach it.

[Scuba_Steve]

Meanwhile on the other end of the pay scale
Former NZTA employee sentenced for careless driving causing death
Brown was sentenced to 200 hours’ community work, disqualified from driving for nine months and ordered to pay $9000 reparation.

Similar situation yet she was named, had some sort of penalty, and lost her job apparently (tho given her job was NZTA that should be a given).

[rastuscat]

Interesting similarities.




https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/300...eding--coroner

[Racing Dave]

Interesting similarities.

It's not clear to me if the van was turning into or out of the driveway. Either way, it intersected the rider's path.

The speed limit on that stretch of road is arbitrary; not too many years ago it was 100km/h, then down to 80km/h and now to 60km/h. In the 'olden days', the unfortunate rider would have been below the speed limit, but just as fatally injured.

When I ride up from Governor's Bay, if there's no oncoming traffic I choose to cross to the wrong side of the road, at each driveway, to give me and anyone emerging the greatest chance of seeing/being seen. If there's oncoming, then slow down...

[rastuscat]

It's not clear to me if the van was turning into or out of the driveway. Either way, it intersected the rider's path.

The speed limit on that stretch of road is arbitrary; not too many years ago it was 100km/h, then down to 80km/h and now to 60km/h. In the 'olden days', the unfortunate rider would have been below the speed limit, but just as fatally injured.

When I ride up from Governor's Bay, if there's no oncoming traffic I choose to cross to the wrong side of the road, at each driveway, to give me and anyone emerging the greatest chance of seeing/being seen. If there's oncoming, then slow down...

Van coming downhill, turning right into driveway.

As the law is interpreted, a driver is able to assume that oncoming raffic is doing the speed limit. The van driver lived there, so knew it was 60.

Clearly he misjudged the bike speed, but that happens at all speeds, in lots of places, every day.

This was a combination of things that all coincided to lead to that outcome. Heard of the Swiss Cheese model? This was it.

[Berries]

As the law is interpreted, a driver is able to assume that oncoming raffic is doing the speed limit. The van driver lived there, so knew it was 60.

Clearly he misjudged the bike speed, but that happens at all speeds, in lots of places, every day.

And will only get much worse as NZTA start forcing lower speed limits on rural roads that look like 100km/h roads but could be 60 or 80 depending how much they want to push it. The speed variance is just going to go up and I know you know the result of that.

[rastuscat]

And will only get much worse as NZTA start forcing lower speed limits on rural roads that look like 100km/h roads but could be 60 or 80 depending how much they want to push it. The speed variance is just going to go up and I know you know the result of that.

Indeed. Those who don't understand the need for the speed reductions, or do understand but disagree, will continue to conflict with those who do.

I'm on the fence. Some are justified, some appear to be unjustified. Mainly due to me not knowing the justification.

An example is the high street of Rangiora, the town I live in. The speed limit is 50 kmh, but only a nutter would drive through at that speed. It surely must become 30, as that's what most sane people do anyway. Then there's the ones that I don't see the justification for.

But at least I have an open mind on it.

[FROSTY:Me]

And yet a guy on a totally different motorcycle gets done for manslaughter. https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/124...rns-to-tragedy

[FJRider]

Indeed. Those who don't understand the need for the speed reductions, or do understand but disagree, will continue to conflict with those who do.

I'm on the fence. Some are justified, some appear to be unjustified. Mainly due to me not knowing the justification.

An example is the high street of Rangiora, the town I live in. The speed limit is 50 kmh, but only a nutter would drive through at that speed. It surely must become 30, as that's what most sane people do anyway. Then there's the ones that I don't see the justification for.

But at least I have an open mind on it.

There is a corner on the Cadrona valley road ... a few km's on the Queenstown side of the Cadrona Pub. Not a particularly dangerous corner ... but too fast (or cut the corner) and you can get into bother. A few did. The speed limit was reduced for that part of the road. And some time later ... another motorist died at that same corner.

Justifications are all well and good ... just as good intentions are.

[R650R]

And yet a guy on a totally different motorcycle gets done for manslaughter. https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/124...rns-to-tragedy

He needs a better lawyer.
Although a similar result was gained on teenage passengers in boyracer car that were actually having a proper race side by side in cars on road.
Several bikes going to cafe travelling in close proximity even if at speed is not a race.

So what happens if two people are running across road to get last taxi and one falls and cracks their head, is that manslaughter too?

All he needed to do was table evidence of fleeing driver fatal crashes cause that’s prob the formula one of all illegal street races ( I don’t blame cops just using for the illustration of hypocracy of justice system)