Well the guy who caused my motorcycle accident at the end of April has finally been to court. Soon I'll be able to post pictures of the crash scene and just what my bike looked liked after a 100km/h run in with a trailer.
Would anyone like to guess what the verdict was?
I won't keep you all in suspense too long. Needless to say it seems that the law no longer seems to holds up in court. It seems that the police are mistrusted and second-guessed by the judge in court. It seems that the statement that is taken from the defendant 2 days after the crash can be dismissed in court. It seems that the truth can take a back seat. It seems that the person who can invent the best story in court wins!
The guy who almost killed me, put me in a wheel chair for 6 weeks, made me use crutches for 2 months, prevent me from doing many things that I love to do and still can't do many things that I used to do, gets off free of charge.
That's right he received a verdict of NOT GUILTY!!!
He had 3 reasons why he wasn't at fault. The first was an obstruction on the road in the direction I was travelling from. It wasn't on the road but it was surrounded by cones and could easily distract a driver and prevent him from noticing a small car or a motorcycle.
The second reason was a dip in the road. Apparently the dip is so severe that it prevents a driver at the top of the dip from seeing a low slung car or small motorcycle from being seen.
The third reason is that a road worker walked in front of him as he made his turn and he had to stop or he would hit the road worker.
The third reason was the killer. Made up of lies on top of lies. The defendant stated that he slowed down too less than walking speed to avoid hitting this road worker. Then saw a look of shock on the road workers face as the worker looked past his vehicle. The defendant turned and saw me ride straight into the draw bar of his trailer.
The policeman stated when he was up on the stand that after I had impacted with his trailer my bike had been dragged 3 - 4 meters down the road in the direction the defendant was travelling in. There were scrap marks and debris on the road to indicate this. This statement by the officer makes a mockery of the defendants "walking speed" pace unless he continued on for another 3 seconds after I hit him, which is very improbable. The judge ignored this piece of information from the police officer.
Likewise it was stated that there were no skid marks on the road from my motorcycle. This indicates to me that I was either really inattentive for at least 150m to not see a 4wd and trailer in my way (Sometimes I ride with my eyes shut:slapor that the defendant didn't see me and turned in front of me giving me no time at all to even apply the brakes. I may have had time to pray, I'm not sure. The judge ignored this information as well.
In the judge's summary he said that "this was just an unfortunate accident. The defendant had to stop to avoid hurting a road worker and in doing so left his trailer in the path of traffic, which unfortunately I rode into. I feel that the police have not adequately proved beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant was careless while operating a motor vehicle. Therefore the defendant is not guilty."
How can he just ignore these blatantly obvious lies/stories and find the truth? Perhaps he doesn't like motorcyclists?
Now of course I'm biased. I was the victim. I would like to know what the legal beagles think of this and if anyone else has an opinion of the judge I would like to hear it. I know I have my own opinions about the matter!
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by John Banks
You poor bastard! The really sad part is that I am in no way surprised by this verdict.
Bookmarks