Speaking after the court hearing, the family of the boy, who did not want to be identified, said: "We are deeply saddened at the very poor choices of the driver of the car which hit our son, the consequences of which have had an indescribable impact on our family and will do so for years ahead as our son bravely continues with his recover (sic).”Clearly, State pensions are too high if a 74 year old can afford cocaine!
But why was he only charged with drug-driving?
The Crown Prosecution Service said there was "no evidence" that the defendant's driving was at fault and added two witnesses had seen the boy ride his bike into the path of Pennick's car, despite nearby traffic lights showing a green light to road users.Ah.
5 comments:
I doubt if anyone can afford a car on the State Pension, so he presumably had other pension income, or indeed, was still working. I wonder what the drug state of someone who was returning from the dentist might be.
Sometimes the mere fact that one is driving at a reasonable speed (within the speed limit or slower) encourages little and not so little fuckwits to walk or ride in front of a driver in the way they wouldn't if the driver was a boy racer screaming down the road at twice the speed limit and basting out noise from a modified exhaust and thunmping 'music'. The stopping distance is such that if someone does a last minute jump off the kerb there's nothing that can be done. I imagine that matters will get worse with electric cars.
I can be sorry for the boy, and sympathetic to his parents, but my feelings would normally go to the driver if it wasn't for his drug taking, for which he should be whipped. The boy ditto.
Pedal scum acts like a twat, gets splatted, use of coke or whatever of no relevance since Stirling Moss couldn't have stopped in time. The mention of drugs is so the cycle-moron can escape blame, 'cos they're Spayshul y'know.
Can someone clarify who is going to pay up the sums of money required to fund the child's "rehabilitation package" - will it be Mr Pennick's car insurance?
Of course, adult cyclists have their own insurance policies that cover this (sarcasm!)
Cyclists normaly ride on the pavement here where they often endanger and or verbally abuse pedestrians. Then they swerve into the road without a care while smoking and or chatting on the phone. It's well known that everything is somebody else's fault and the motorist is always to blame anyway. I never drive without a dash cam now in the vain hope video evidence might just save me from the wrath of the law when a cyclist rides into my car. The other day I saw a cyclist texting while riding on the pavement and he rode straight into a cable TV box. What chance do elderly pedestrians have?
"I wonder what the drug state of someone who was returning from the dentist might be."
I'm pretty sure that would have been offered as a defence if it had been viable!
"Sometimes the mere fact that one is driving at a reasonable speed (within the speed limit or slower) encourages little and not so little fuckwits to walk or ride in front of a driver in the way they wouldn't if the driver was a boy racer screaming down the road at twice the speed limit..."
Oh, I'm not so sure. Given how many cycle with earphones in!
"Can someone clarify who is going to pay up the sums of money required to fund the child's "rehabilitation package" - will it be Mr Pennick's car insurance?"
Good point!
"The other day I saw a cyclist texting while riding on the pavement and he rode straight into a cable TV box. "
Lucky you didn't have an accident from laughing! :D
Post a Comment