Police arrest driver after Buckinghamshire hit-and-run

To those saying "accident/deliberate" there is actually a third alternative that is neither. Negligent incompetence.

This means someone knowingly does something illegal and hasnt the skills or the social conscience to do the right thing should something go horribly wrong.

For that alone is just as bad as "deliberate" actions as it shows a level of premeditation in contributary actions. This too should mean a long spell in jail, but will the CPS and courts back up Plod and the public interest? Thats the real question.

Personally, given the well documented success in killing and maiming the motor vehicle is tainted with that is likely unprecedented even by the firearm I don't think it's too far a leap to label such conduct as attempted murder.

The driver was banned - irrespective of any secondary reasoning a court of law had decided the driver had no place on the road (albeit far too briefly as is always the case) but the driver chose to adopt the selfish and reckless path by getting back into a car, with the knowledge that he would have no insurance. Compounding this big #uck you to the entire world he then sought to evade further problems by leaving his victim thinking yet again of himself.

Ok, there may be no prior plan to set out and hurt or kill anyone but does that same reasoning wash if I go into the high street 364 days in a row and randomly point and fire a rifle?

Luckily no-one gets hurt but on the 365th day my bullet hits and kills someone. I didn't set out that morning to kill anyone and statistically I can argue it was an anomoly but does that mean I am excused of my actions? The common sense argument would surely prevail as such an act is both dangerous and I know it is wrong.

The problem comes when the same is applied to a motoring scenario such as this. 364 days a year I drive like a complete twonk and just wind everyone up and scare a few innocents but on the 365th day I kill someone. With the gun I can't claim 'Whoops', with the car I can.

Far as I'm concerned doing something plainly dangerous resulting in death is a form of prior planning when the reasonable person knows what they are doing is obviously reckless.

Driving off is yet more evidence that they know what they did was wrong. Attempted murder for drivers such as this latest idiot given the state of our roads is to my mind quite a reasonable charge.

I'm not 100% certain but when you watch the slow motion replay it looks as if the driver has changed direction slightly towards the cyclist ie he has turned right to go into Kwik Fit then turns left directly at the cyclist.

Holy crap that helmet cam reached some height...

Quote:

The opposite of accident implies he did it deliberately - is that what you genuinely think

I don't think that because it's over simplifying. If the driver was distracted because they were:
Texting
Talking on a mobile
Driving too fast with the sun in their eyes
Looking at somebody on the pavement
Not paying attention to the road
Putting on makeup
Having a crafty sherman
Or whatever.
Then they made a decision to stop concentrating on the road and had this collision, I agree with the police for using collision instead of accident, and yes it implies it was deliberate. Accident implies unforseen/unpredictable event. This was neither. It's not a huge leap of faith to expect an "accident" if you take your concentration away from the task in hand.
The driver either was driving without due care or attention or dangerously. Which is it?
Fin.

It's not 'attempted murder'. Ridiculous statement to make.

He will plead guilty and get £75 fine and a community order and £5 victim costs.

CPS - Crown Prosecution Service or as it's also known the Criminal Protection Scheme!

@AyBee, it wasn't an accident.

Nice to see some action taken.

It may be the vid but anyone else notice how hard it is to see the indicator flashing. I could only tell during the slow motion bit and when the camera was very close?

Why wasn't he remanded if he has committed other offences? Surely he is a danger to the public driving like that, there is a high risk of him reoffending or absconding. Madness to give him bail.

And if he ever does get to appear in court and is actually convicted he might get 150 hours community service or an £80 fine, 3 penalty points and have to pay a £20 victim surcharge. However he may well have a good defence such as he thought he had hit a (just select the correct body) 1) dog, 2) deer, 3) horse or swerved across the road to avoid the same, meaning he gets off, or he may simply claim SMIDSY which is a driver's trump all card, "the sun was in my eyes m'Lud" and he walks free …………. to drive home.

There is a high probability that the CPS given their form will fuck the case up and he gets off or is convicted of a much lesser offence.

This time it's on video, its shocking, the cyclist can in no way be claimed to be at any fault.

If the court mess this one up, it will be the case that demands sentencing laws get changed.

They found the fucker.

Watch the CPS #uck it all up. Driver will get small fine, perhaps another ban for a few months that he'll ignore and some kind of community service where he'll learn nothing and do very little as no-one bothers to check they're actually doing anything.

The little cherub will claim he isn't responsible for any of it as he thought he was insured, didn't realise he'd hit anyone, thought his current driving ban had expired, didn't know he had to report the collision (not that he knew about it) and besides the cyclist doesn't pay to use the roads so he shouldn't have been there anyway.

Disinterested fart in the magistrates court will lap it up in between dealing with two credit card cases brought by a dodgy debt collection company and accepts the pathetic excuse that the poor motorist didn't set out to hurt anyone so must have been 'a temporary lapse in concentration'...ergo the driver escapes all responsibility.

Police charge victim with wasting police time, driver successfully sues victim for damage to vehicle he doesn't even own, court awards adverse costs against victim for having the audacity to complain about being hit.

All proof of the government's commitment to getting people on bikes of course. I think the time has come for government simply to be honest and just admit they don't give a $hit about anyone not in a car.That I could deal with, this continued failure to protect whilst insisting they care is getting extremely dull.

I'm gkad the cops got stuck in and caught this dangerous driver. But I wonder if the courts will keep up the goid work! Life time driving ban would be a good start.

I hope that Patrick will fully recover soon and that the driver gets what he deserves. If I'm right, Patrick Knetemann's lineage is top level, assuming that is his real surname. Gerrie Knetemann was my absolute idol back when......he and Jan Raas just gobbled up the opposition in all the major classics. Can Patrick be the son and heir of Gerrie?

Here's hoping for a result that'll send a big loud message out to those who drive cars, and drive them dangerously.
This wasn't an accident.
The driver didn't see the cyclist and was therefore driving without due care and attention, or the driver did see the cyclist and continued diving dangerously.
Which one was it?

This is great news but I have a horrible feeling that unless the prosecuting legal team can enhance the video well enough to show the accused clearly then I suspect they have a very simple defense which would make guilty verdict unlikely.

this is where we need to copy the americans by changing the law to make a motor vehicle admissible as a weapon,so you can charge idiots like this with assault with a deadly weapon,and other appropriate charges and impound their vehicles as evidence.

The law stinks, should have been charged with attempted murder or GBH, or anything far more serious. This wasn't an accident, and the moron behind the wheel deserves a lot more than he will get!

"The offences the arrest relates to are suspicion of causing serious injury by dangerous driving, driving while disqualified, being the driver of a vehicle which failed to stop after a road accident, being the driver of a vehicle involved in a road accident who failed to report that accident, using a motor vehicle on a road/public place without third party insurance and fraud by false representation."

So the obvious thing to do is to bail him until November and just cross fingers he doesn't drive in the mean time?