Safe Speed Forums

The campaign for genuine road safety
It is currently Tue Nov 18, 2025 23:59

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 14 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Oct 31, 2005 12:28 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2004 19:19
Posts: 1050
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/somerset/4392092.stm

A motorist was fined £150 and given three penalty points - for driving through a puddle and soaking a workman.

Jason Evans, 34, from Yeovil, splashed the man's jeans as he drove through 2ins-deep flood water near Charlton Mackrell in Somerset.

A policeman driving behind Mr Evans snapped a photo of the incident before pulling him over.

Mr Evans pleaded guilty to driving without due consideration for road users at Yeovil Magistrates' Court.

He told The Sun: "I wanted to apologise, but I did not want to stop the traffic."


In this case he had slowed down and was only doing 15mph... it was unintentional
Edmund King, RAC

Mr Evans was offered the chance to go on a two-day drivers' course, but declined.

He said it was an accident and he had not intentionally splashed the workman.

Workers were clearing drainage ditches after the road had partly flooded.

A spokeswoman for Avon and Somerset Police said the force was looking into the case, but that the offence was considered serious enough by the court and the Crown Prosecution Service to impose a fine.

"This was clearly an act which was inconsiderate to other road users and if the driver had shown a little more care or a little less speed he would not have found himself in court," she added.

Edmund King, executive director of the RAC Foundation, said: "I think we've all seen and we all know motorists who do this kind of thing on purpose and I think if someone does do it on purpose they should be prosecuted.

"But in this case he had slowed down and was only doing 15mph. He hadn't realised how deep the puddle was. It was unintentional."


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Oct 31, 2005 12:54 
Offline
User

Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2004 15:05
Posts: 1225
Location: Glasgow
Errrr, what evert happened to Mens rea aka criminal intent.

Since when was driving without due consideration a strict liability offence??

Does this mean we can expect an absolute and exclusive list of activities that consitiute this crime to be published in the near future??

This is madness - I assume that this was some 'fixed penalty' arrangement that the parties came to and wasn't pursued in court, because if it had been, the presiding judge should and almost certainly would have thrown it out!!

Proof that even if you didn't actually commit a crime they will happily extort your cash....


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Oct 31, 2005 13:56 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2005 18:38
Posts: 396
Location: Glasgow
r11co wrote:
Since when was driving without due consideration a strict liability offence??


Yes it is an offence, but little used.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Oct 31, 2005 14:01 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 23:09
Posts: 6737
Location: Stockport, Cheshire
r11co wrote:
Errrr, what ever happened to Mens rea aka criminal intent.

Since when was driving without due consideration a strict liability offence??

It is not a strict liability offence, but offences of careless, inconsiderate and dangerous driving are assessed by an objective test of the standard of driving relative to that of a competent and responsible driver. The court has to make a subjective assessment of the standard of driving, but there is no requirement to prove intent.

Indeed, by definition people do not intend to be unobservant or incompetent.

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed


Last edited by PeterE on Mon Oct 31, 2005 14:40, edited 2 times in total.

Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Oct 31, 2005 14:02 
Offline
Life Member
Life Member
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 30, 2005 22:02
Posts: 3266
Quote :CPS code
Quote:
6. The Public Interest Test
6.1 In 1951, Lord Shawcross, who was Attorney General, made the classic statement on public interest, which has been supported by Attorneys General ever since: “It has never been the rule in this country - I hope it never will be - that suspected criminal offences must automatically be the subject of prosecution”. (House of Commons Debates, volume 483, column 681, 29 January 1951.)

_________________
Speed limit sign radio interview. TV Snap Unhappy
“It has never been the rule in this country – I hope it never will be - that suspected criminal offences must automatically be the subject of prosecution” He added that there should be a prosecution: “wherever it appears that the offence or the circumstances of its commission is or are of such a character that a prosecution in respect thereof is required in the public interest”
This approach has been endorsed by Attorney General ever since 1951. CPS Code


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Oct 31, 2005 14:29 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member
User avatar

Joined: Wed Dec 08, 2004 14:26
Posts: 4364
Location: Hampshire/Wiltshire Border
The guy pleaded guilty.

What would have been wrong with the police giving him a good talking to and letting him proceed - sheepishly - on his way?

Just more alienation of the motorist from the police.

_________________
Malcolm W.
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not represent the views of Safespeed.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Oct 31, 2005 15:27 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 19:50
Posts: 3369
Location: Lost in the Wilderness
I wonder if there was more to this than what you read. How would the policeman have had any inclination what was going to happen?…. and just happend to have had a camera ready to use at the time. :scratchchin:

_________________
Useless laws weaken necessary laws.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Oct 31, 2005 15:48 
Offline
Life Member
Life Member
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2005 14:00
Posts: 1271
Location: Near Telford, UK / Barcelona, Spain
Dixie wrote:
I wonder if there was more to this than what you read. How would the policeman have had any inclination what was going to happen?…. and just happend to have had a camera ready to use at the time. :scratchchin:

More to the point, if the policeman was alone in the car and was moving while using a camera - isn't he guilty of "driving without due care and attention"?

_________________
"Politicians are the same the world over... We build bridges where there aren't any rivers." - Nikita Kruschev


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Oct 31, 2005 16:11 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2004 19:19
Posts: 1050
perhaps the snap was from an in-car video?

perhaps the chap did it deliberately?

however, personally either way said copper should have made him compensate the soaked worker rather than take it further.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Oct 31, 2005 22:32 
Offline
User

Joined: Mon Mar 08, 2004 00:08
Posts: 748
Location: Grimsby
I've only read a small amount of this debacle today, but whatever happened to preventative maintenance.
Does this driver not now have a strong case against the council for allowing the drainage ditch to cause the road to flood.

_________________
Semper in excreta, nur quantitat variat.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Oct 31, 2005 22:55 
Offline
Camera Partnership Staff
Camera Partnership Staff
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2005 19:48
Posts: 1995
going off tangent slightly has anyone else noticed the standard of drain cleaning.

over the weekend out and about with the family, i must have come across a dozen blocked drains with resulting puddles unto the carriageway, one a dual covering both lanes

ok youcould argue that being Autumn the drains get blocked with leaves washed down the heavy rain we have had, but i cannot recall the last time i saw one of them 'drain sucker machines' out and about[/quote]


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 01, 2005 10:50 
Offline
User

Joined: Mon Mar 08, 2004 00:08
Posts: 748
Location: Grimsby
CO, there was one like this in Corby last thursday, both lanes of the carriageway were flooded, even the cop car had to stay in L2 to get through it.
Less than an hour later the road was dry.
Preventative maintenence seems to be a lost art these days.

_________________
Semper in excreta, nur quantitat variat.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 01, 2005 11:33 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2004 19:19
Posts: 1050
CO - I don't know about your area, but in Surrey. The council have diverted road maintenance budget to road safety budget, due to their ability to get better grants.

this unfortunately contributes to bad drainage - not to mention the odd accident. I nearly came off my bike the other day on a roundabout when I encountered a ditch right in the middle of the avoidoil line. It was about 4inches deep and a foot wide. Reported it only to be told they already new about it :x


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Nov 02, 2005 01:48 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 01:42
Posts: 686
diy wrote:
CO - I don't know about your area, but in Surrey. The council have diverted road maintenance budget to road safety budget


In other words, buying speed cameras. Yes?

_________________
“For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong.” - H. L. Mencken


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 14 posts ] 

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You can post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
[ Time : 0.023s | 12 Queries | GZIP : Off ]