Safe Speed Forums

The campaign for genuine road safety
It is currently Fri Nov 14, 2025 10:19

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 17 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu May 01, 2008 13:40 
Offline
Life Member
Life Member
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 30, 2005 22:02
Posts: 3266
http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/news/Son39s ... 4041137.jp

Quote:
Son's plea to mum before she died on city danger road


Jose Joseph with daughter Jiya and son Joel at home after the inquest

« Previous « PreviousNext » Next »View GalleryADVERTISEMENTPublished Date:
01 May 2008
By Victoria Taylor
A little boy told his mother not to cross the road as it was too dangerous just moments before she was killed, an inquest has been told.
Shinimol Jose, known as Shini, died instantly under the wheels of a 17-ton lorry in an accident which shocked Portsmouth last year.

As she went under the vehicle the mum-of-two – who is also pictured on the front page – managed to push away the pushchair she was holding – saving her daughter's life.

Now, almost a year on, an inquest into her death has revealed how her son, Joel, had stepped back on to the pavement shortly before the accident, telling his mum not to cross the busy London Road in Portsmouth.

The inquest heard how after the accident nine-year-old Joel said: 'I told her not to go because it's too dangerous.

'But she went. She went.'

Neighbour Shifa Shahriyer said: 'He kept repeating it.

'He said when his mother was going to cross he felt there was something dangerous.

'He said "don't cross the road now". And his mother said "let's run". He said "no, mum."

'He went with her and he turned away.

'He said he turned away and came back on the pavement.'

Mrs Jose, 39, of Centaur Street, Buckland, died on June 1 last year while shopping for a birthday present in North End with her children.

The inquest heard how Mrs Jose walked alongside the lorry and crossed in front of it as the lights – opposite Somerfield – turned from amber to green.

CCTV showed Joel, then eight, begin to cross in front of the lorry with his mum but then turn back to the pavement.

Mrs Jose then went under the front of the lorry as it pulled away on a green light.

She was in driver David Suter's blind spot as he slowly pulled off, the inquest heard.

He told the inquest he had no idea she was there.

He said: 'I felt a bump and heard other people screaming.'

When asked if he saw anything, Mr Suter replied: 'No. I wish I had.'

He added: 'I got out of the cab. My brain was not in gear. I couldn't believe what had happened.'

In a statement, witness Rosemarie Gale said: 'I saw her go under the front of the lorry. I shouted to the driver.

'I called out "driver, driver, it wasn't your fault. You couldn't have missed her".

'In my opinion the lorry driver couldn't have done anything to avoid the collision.'

Motorist Stephen Parry said he saw Mrs Jose push her then four-year-old daughter Jiya out of the lorry's way and to safety.

He said: 'The lady managed to push the pushchair out of the side between the wheels and unfortunately that was probably the last event of her life.'

Coroner for Portsmouth and South-East Hampshire David Horsley said neither Mr Suter or Mrs Jose were to blame.

He said: 'I believe nothing could have been done in these circumstances to prevent the tragedy which happened.

'It was unforeseen by both the driver of the lorry and Mrs Jose herself.

'I'm satisfied her death, being an unforeseen and totally innocent act on her part, could be properly described as an accidental death.'

_________________
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


Last edited by anton on Mon May 05, 2008 09:44, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 01, 2008 13:51 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2005 08:22
Posts: 2618
Quote:
The inquest heard how Mrs Jose walked alongside the lorry and crossed in front of it as the lights – opposite Somerfield – turned from amber to green.


I'm sorry, but I fail to see how the inquest can say that it wasn't her fault...

That poor driver will have to live with that for the rest of his life, and its about time that the authorities had the gaul to lay the blame with the deceased.

_________________
Science won over religion when they started installing lightning rods on churches.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 01, 2008 14:39 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 13, 2005 23:28
Posts: 1940
Sixy_the_red wrote:
Quote:
The inquest heard how Mrs Jose walked alongside the lorry and crossed in front of it as the lights – opposite Somerfield – turned from amber to green.


I'm sorry, but I fail to see how the inquest can say that it wasn't her fault...

That poor driver will have to live with that for the rest of his life, and its about time that the authorities had the gaul to lay the blame with the deceased.



I agree with you. Her own little boy... He tried to stop her. I do feel for those children - especially her son. He will need a lot of help und reassurances that he not to blame here. :cry:

She must have seen the lights change. Her little boy did. It must have been very horrific for him und his four year old sister. I can only wish the very best for them, condolences to all parties und a hope that the lorry driver und the friend und the children go on to lead a life which keeps a loving memory of Mama ... but free of undue trauma.

_________________
Nicht ganz im Lot!
Ich setze mich immer wieder in die Nesseln! Der Mad Doc ist mein Mann! Und ich benutzte seinen PC!

UND OUR SMILEYS? Smile ... und the the world smiles with you.
Smiley guy seen when you read
Fine me for Safe Speed
(& other good causes..)

Greatest love & Greatest Achievements Require Greatest Risk
But if you lose the driving plan - don't lose the COAST lesson.
Me?
Je ne regrette rien
!


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 01, 2008 14:46 
Offline
Life Member
Life Member
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 22, 2006 13:54
Posts: 1711
Location: NW Kent
Sixy_the_red wrote:
Quote:
The inquest heard how Mrs Jose walked alongside the lorry and crossed in front of it as the lights – opposite Somerfield – turned from amber to green.


I'm sorry, but I fail to see how the inquest can say that it wasn't her fault...

That poor driver will have to live with that for the rest of his life, and its about time that the authorities had the gaul to lay the blame with the deceased.


I am tending towards your point of view on this Sixy.

Coroner wrote:
I'm satisfied her death, being an unforeseen and totally innocent act on her part, could be properly described as an accidental death.


With the caution that there may be a reporting error the above leaves me somewhat confused, the child foresaw the danger in crossing the road so at the least she was failing to exercise care. Would a driver get off with failing to foresee a fatal collision with a pedestrian?

_________________
Driving fast is for a particular time and place, I can do it I just only do it occasionally because I am a gentleman.
- James May


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 01, 2008 14:55 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2005 02:50
Posts: 2868
Location: Dorset
She crossed right in front of a lorry? :shock:

I wonder were there any pedestrian crossing facilities there? If so did it have nearside or farside red/green men?

_________________
Andrew.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 01, 2008 15:17 
Offline
Life Member
Life Member
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 22, 2006 13:54
Posts: 1711
Location: NW Kent
Ziltro wrote:
She crossed right in front of a lorry? :shock:

I wonder were there any pedestrian crossing facilities there? If so did it have nearside or farside red/green men?


This Junction is just south of Somerfields on London Road

There are crossings on two of the legs but not the one closest to Somerfields by the look of it.

_________________
Driving fast is for a particular time and place, I can do it I just only do it occasionally because I am a gentleman.
- James May


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 01, 2008 15:33 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2005 02:50
Posts: 2868
Location: Dorset
Actually, the article doesn't say it was a junction. It could have been the pedestrian crossing which looks like it's near Somerfield. I don't know which one the store is, but I'm guessing that it is the large store just north of the arrow, and the crossing on A2047, London Road, just south of Laburnum Grove.

The article described the green light as being "opposite Somerfield".

If it is there, question is it it a Pelican or is it a Puffin?

_________________
Andrew.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 01, 2008 16:00 
Offline
Life Member
Life Member
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 22, 2006 13:54
Posts: 1711
Location: NW Kent
Ziltro wrote:
Actually, the article doesn't say it was a junction. It could have been the pedestrian crossing which looks like it's near Somerfield. I don't know which one the store is, but I'm guessing that it is the large store just north of the arrow, and the crossing on A2047, London Road, just south of Laburnum Grove.

The article described the green light as being "opposite Somerfield".

If it is there, question is it it a Pelican or is it a Puffin?


Looks more likely, I was thinking traffic lights rather than pedestrian crossing, in which case she must have had a red 'do not cross' light which she ignored or did not check.

I feel for the lad, not only has he lost his mum but I suspect he will keep thinking he should have stopped her somehow.

_________________
Driving fast is for a particular time and place, I can do it I just only do it occasionally because I am a gentleman.
- James May


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 01, 2008 16:18 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2005 02:50
Posts: 2868
Location: Dorset
toltec wrote:
Looks more likely, I was thinking traffic lights rather than pedestrian crossing, in which case she must have had a red 'do not cross' light which she ignored or did not check.

That's what I'm wondering. If it was a pelican they would be across the road and you get the flashing green man. If it's a puffin it's likely she didn't even bother looking for the red/green man and just went on the vehicle signals.

_________________
Andrew.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sat May 03, 2008 21:21 
Offline
User

Joined: Mon Mar 08, 2004 00:08
Posts: 748
Location: Grimsby
I have the deepest sympathy for this little boy, and hope and pray that he will find some comfort in that he tried to prevent this incident happening.
However, as an artic driver, and a car driver, I am sick to death of pedestrians who take foolish and dangerous chances, that would have them screaming if it were a driver did a simila manouvre to save a second and put their lives at risk.
The number of times I have had to suddenly stop, just as I was moving off, just as a pedestrian steps out into the road in front of me.
The law should apply equally to pedestrians as to driivers.

_________________
Semper in excreta, nur quantitat variat.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 05, 2008 00:14 
Offline
User

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2007 19:58
Posts: 730
The coroner seems not to be up to the job.

Quote:
Coroner for Portsmouth and South-East Hampshire David Horsley said neither Mr Suter or Mrs Jose were to blame.
He said: 'I believe nothing could have been done in these circumstances to prevent the tragedy which happened.
'It was unforeseen by both the driver of the lorry and Mrs Jose herself.


If it was foreseen by a child of nine, how can Mr Horsley say it was unforeseen by Mrs Jose as her own son had warned her? :cry:

_________________
www.thatsnews.org.uk / www.thatsnews.blogspot.com / http://thatsmotoring.blogspot.com/


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 05, 2008 06:24 
Offline
User

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2007 17:12
Posts: 618
Location: Borough of Queens, NYC, NY USA
Dratsabasti wrote:
I have the deepest sympathy for this little boy, and hope and pray that he will find some comfort in that he tried to prevent this incident happening.
However, as an artic driver, and a car driver, I am sick to death of pedestrians who take foolish and dangerous chances, that would have them screaming if it were a driver did a similar manouvre to save a second and put their lives at risk.
The number of times I have had to suddenly stop, just as I was moving off, just as a pedestrian steps out into the road in front of me.
The law should apply equally to pedestrians as to drivers.
It should, but economically speaking, one does not have to carry either a license, or insurance, to be a pedestrian, so what real legal recourse is there? I know this isn't permission to act as if invulnerable, so does her son; she did not - or worse, she knew, and acted inspite of this knowledge, in front of her own son.
He will find his comfort when he sees his children take primary responsibility for their own safety, and not just when they cross the street, either.
Thatsnews wrote:
If it was foreseen by a child of nine, how can Mr Horsley say it was unforeseen by Mrs Jose as her own son had warned her? :cry:
Would it have been taseless for him to say,

"The fact that the child, from his literal and metaphorical vantage point, could see what the truck driver couldn't, and that his mother quite probably ignored not only what should have been obvious -the traffic lights and the truck's presence with the absence of its driver's eyes - but also her son's warnings, points one toward the dreadful conclusion that she exercised a reckless indifference with her own life, as well as the lives of her children.
That said, let us not forget that, in her last moment, she obviously did realize her mistake, and in doing so, saved her daughter's life."

_________________
The Rules for ALL ROAD USERS:
1) No one gets hurt
2) Nothing gets hit, except to protect others; see Rule#1
3) The Laws of Physics are invincible and immutable - so-called 'laws' of men are not
4) You are always immediately and ultimately responsible for your safety first, then proximately responsible for everyone's
Do not let other road users' mistakes become yours, nor yours become others
5) The rest, including laws of the land, is thoughtful observation, prescience, etiquette, decorum, and cooperation


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 05, 2008 10:00 
Offline
Life Member
Life Member
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 30, 2005 22:02
Posts: 3266
thinking outside the box...
Road safety training for pedestrians is to say the least minimal in this country. I am not sure which country this lady came from or when, of if she was born in the UK speaks or reads in english.

It is highly possible that she never watches UK tv or has access to roadsafety material in a language she can read.

How can she be taught so that she can teach her children?

Are non-english speaking pedestrians having more accidents?

What disadvantage/added risk factor is there to those who do not speak or read english as a first language?

(PS. I do not realy buy the "she saved her daughter" story. There could just as easily have been a motor bike on the outside of the lorry, she failed to make eye contact with the driver before crossing, she failed to find a safe place to cross. Etc... etc.)

_________________
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  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 05, 2008 20:33 
Offline
User

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2007 17:12
Posts: 618
Location: Borough of Queens, NYC, NY USA
anton wrote:
Road safety training for pedestrians is to say the least minimal in this country.
Where, pray tell, is road safety training for pedestrians anything other than minimal, besides perhaps inside one's home? You had the "Green Cross Code", right? We had "Cross on the Green - not in between!" Note that i said HAD.
Quote:
I am not sure which country this lady came from or when, of if she was born in the UK, or speaks or reads in english.
It is highly possible that she never watches UK tv or has access to roadsafety material in a language she can read.
Take a look at this pic. I doubt she's a native Brit.
Quote:
How can she be taught so that she can teach her children?
Too late. Her son already knew, hopefully he will be allowed to pass on his wisdom. I will risk guessing that there is a socially constructed idea that allows the fallacy that manmade law is superior to natural law to take root. Thankfully, this child's mind has not yet been polluted by this dangerous solipsism.
Quote:
Are non-english speaking pedestrians having more accidents?
What disadvantage/added risk factor is there to those who do not speak or read english as a first language?
Both are damn good questions. I know others have the guts to ask this question. I hope at least one of these people are in the right place, at the right time, and in the right company, to answer honestly, and for that answer to have a meaningful and positive effect on road safety for all road users going forward.

Some of you may have heard me reference the "Boulevard of Death", aka Queens Boulevard. I can truthfully state that several years ago, the people who would 'dare me to strike them' appeared to originate, mostly, outside of the U.S.A., and that such acts of 'reckless defiance' typically took place in places like Queens Boulevard, especially around commercially active shopping districts.

What scares me, is that over the past few years, I would now have to say that the high schools in Queens and Long Island are now competing with shopping districts for the highest number of recklessly defiant jaywalking acts per given unit of time. I take this to mean that this 'mutation' has been passed to the next generation, and that the origin of Patient Zero is no longer a meaningful part of the solultion here in America.
Quote:
(P.S.: I do not really buy the "she saved her daughter" story. There could just as easily have been a motor bike on the outside of the lorry, she failed to make eye contact with the driver before crossing, she failed to find a safe place to cross. Etc... etc.)
OK, how about
"She chose to apply negative modifiers to her saving throw, which overrode the positive modifiers her son attempted to apply, thus failing where she could have easily succeded.
However, she also managed to re-roll again for her daughter, and despite the negative modifiers already in effect, her daughter survived."
No insult was intended by the use of roleplaying metaphors.

_________________
The Rules for ALL ROAD USERS:
1) No one gets hurt
2) Nothing gets hit, except to protect others; see Rule#1
3) The Laws of Physics are invincible and immutable - so-called 'laws' of men are not
4) You are always immediately and ultimately responsible for your safety first, then proximately responsible for everyone's
Do not let other road users' mistakes become yours, nor yours become others
5) The rest, including laws of the land, is thoughtful observation, prescience, etiquette, decorum, and cooperation


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 06, 2008 13:40 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2005 08:22
Posts: 2618
The scary thing is, if you read the posts on the condolences pages that The Rush has linked to, people are STILL blaming speed and volume of traffic.

For goodness sakes, it really is time pedestrians took responsibility for themselves!!! :x

_________________
Science won over religion when they started installing lightning rods on churches.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 06, 2008 13:52 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 16:34
Posts: 4923
Location: Somewhere between a rock and a hard place
Couldn't agree more Sixy and you hit on exactly what it is all about - BLAME.

It's all part of the blame culture we live in which, it has to be said, came from across the Atlantic, (sorry Rush)

Where there's blame there's a claim.

_________________
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not necessarily represent the views of Safe Speed.
You will be branded a threat to society by going over a speed limit where it is safe to do so, and suffer the consequences of your actions in a way criminals do not, more so than someone who is a real threat to our society.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 06, 2008 22:03 
Offline
User

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2007 17:12
Posts: 618
Location: Borough of Queens, NYC, NY USA
Big Tone wrote:
Couldn't agree more Sixy and you hit on exactly what it is all about - BLAME.

It's all part of the blame culture we live in which, it has to be said, came from across the Atlantic, (sorry Rush)

Where there's blame there's a claim.

Somehow, this topic seems related.
Start calling it the blame / claim culture.
Forgetting the 'claim' part makes it much easier to forget that we have used a collective solipsism to install a social mechanism to monetarily profit from tragedy (and money is another collective solipsism).

How do we install a social mechanism to learn not to repeat, and to avoid tragedies? Is the only thing in the way, the fact that it it's so hard to make money off the lessons themselves?

_________________
The Rules for ALL ROAD USERS:
1) No one gets hurt
2) Nothing gets hit, except to protect others; see Rule#1
3) The Laws of Physics are invincible and immutable - so-called 'laws' of men are not
4) You are always immediately and ultimately responsible for your safety first, then proximately responsible for everyone's
Do not let other road users' mistakes become yours, nor yours become others
5) The rest, including laws of the land, is thoughtful observation, prescience, etiquette, decorum, and cooperation


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 17 posts ] 

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 130 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 | 11 Queries | GZIP : Off ]