Thanks Thanks:  0
Needs Pictures Needs Pictures:  0
Picture(s) thanks Picture(s) thanks:  0
Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 66
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Mornington Peninsula
    Age
    45
    Posts
    2,825

    Default The courts are failing us

    Today in Australia a NSW man was sentenced to at least 3 years jail for sexting while a Tasmanian man who has four prior convictions for drink driving and was driving a car unlicensed when he hit and killed a cyclist was given a suspended sentence of 4 months prison, 150 hours community service and lost his license for 18 months.


    It's ok to kill someone but don't send a picture of your junk... how the hell does that even make sense?
    It's only a mistake if you don't learn from it.

  2. # ADS
    Google Adsense Advertisement
    Join Date
    Always
    Location
    Advertising world
    Age
    2010
    Posts
    Many





     
  3. #2
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    999

    Default

    Because in my opinion the laws are neither Fair or Just.

  4. #3
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    ACT
    Age
    82
    Posts
    2,526

    Default

    As has been said the "law is an ass" and I think all donkeys should take out a class action for the implied insult.
    Hugh

    Enough is enough, more than enough is too much.

  5. #4
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Pambula
    Age
    55
    Posts
    12,784

    Default

    I've heard people say that these cases go the way they do because judges and everyone else involved drives cars themselves and can easily see themselves in a situation like this where they might knock a cyclist down and end up in gaol. I don't know about that but I think it does have a fair bit to do with the attitude of the whole system in the country towards cyclists.

    Typically in a case like this the guy will have relied on the defence of SMIDSY (sorry mate I didn't see you). Easy to say that you were driving along minding your own business and you didn't even see the cyclist. Very sorry about that but nothing I could have done. I didn't mean it your honour. In some countries, the driver of the car is automatically at fault due to them being in charge of the 2 tonne lump of steel. Not seeing something you subsequently hit is not considered a defence.

    Basically the defence comes down to admitting you were in charge of a motor vehicle but not taking due care over where you pointed it. How that gets anybody off anything I will never know, but there you have it.

    But check this quote from the sexting article: "Just imagine the outrage of the victims if he wasn't jailed."

    Evidently sexting is more outrageous than killing someone.



    "I don't practice what I preach because I'm not the kind of person I'm preaching to."

  6. #5
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Dandenong, Vic
    Posts
    2,029

    Default

    its because the sexting was premeditated, planed and executed. The drink driver did it by accident.

  7. #6
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Armidale NSW
    Age
    50
    Posts
    1,938

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by silentC View Post
    In some countries, the driver of the car is automatically at fault due to them being in charge of the 2 tonne lump of steel.
    Even if the cyclist did something wrong (i.e. caused the accident)? Seems equally ridiculous.
    Cheers.

    Vernon.
    __________________________________________________
    Bite off more than you can chew and then chew like crazy.

  8. #7
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Pambula
    Age
    55
    Posts
    12,784

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Vernonv View Post
    Even if the cyclist did something wrong (i.e. caused the accident)? Seems equally ridiculous.
    Sorry I didn't express it very well. It is called strict liability. By 'at fault' I mean that the driver of the car is held responsible for the damage that occurs in a collision unless it can be proven that the cyclist was at fault, in which case they are held responsible for at least 50% of it.
    "I don't practice what I preach because I'm not the kind of person I'm preaching to."

  9. #8
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Pambula
    Age
    55
    Posts
    12,784

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by _fly_ View Post
    its because the sexting was premeditated, planed and executed. The drink driver did it by accident.
    Ah, like Oscar Pistorius?
    "I don't practice what I preach because I'm not the kind of person I'm preaching to."

  10. #9
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    25,623

    Default

    I notice you chose to reveal the drivers previous record but not the pervert's?
    Was this deliberate or accidental ?

  11. #10
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Pambula
    Age
    55
    Posts
    12,784

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BobL View Post
    I notice you chose to reveal the drivers previous record but not the pervert's?
    Was this deliberate or accidental ?
    I think the point being made is that the sentence given does not appear to reflect the severity of the situation and the pain and suffering that has been caused to the family of the person who was killed.

    The other case is mentioned just to provide an example of situation where a much more severe sentence was given for what, in the scale of things, is an event of far less gravity. Not to detract from the suffering caused by that kind of thing, but I hope we can agree that causing the death of a person is a more serious matter than texting them rude pictures.

    So for outside observers, which is what all of us here are, it may appear a bit strange to some of us that someone would go to gaol for three years for that when another person who has killed someone is basically let off.

    Now if you want to argue that for this reason or that reason both sentences are appropriate, you'll need to drill down into nitty gritty that you may not have access to, unless you can find a copy of the judgements. Just remember that you are talking about a person's life and the person who killed them has not exactly an unblemished record. What the pervert may or may not have done has no bearing on that.
    "I don't practice what I preach because I'm not the kind of person I'm preaching to."

  12. #11
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    25,623

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by silentC View Post
    I . . . What the pervert may or may not have done has no bearing on that.
    I agree. I'm not saying either of the sentences are necessarily correct but it looks to me to add emphasis to a point of view, the OP chose to (accidentally or otherwise) reveal the record of one and not the other. If you look up the record of the pervert, the sentence is much closer to the ball park than the OP makes out. I'm not saying the sentence in the other case is right. SO the law to me may in these two cases be just half an ass.

  13. #12
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Pambula
    Age
    55
    Posts
    12,784

    Default

    OK. I can't speak for corbs. I've seen similar comparisons made before, and I just take it as juxtaposition. There's always more to any story than you get in the media. It just seems to me that a person who can repeatedly put others at risk by driving drunk and then winds up killing someone has forfeit their right to be a free member of society. As far as I am concerned he can join the pervert and let them rot.
    "I don't practice what I preach because I'm not the kind of person I'm preaching to."

  14. #13
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Mornington Peninsula
    Age
    45
    Posts
    2,825

    Default

    I think the two sentences were right but applied to the wrong cases.

    I'm a big fan of the concept of strict liability too and that's to apply to all vehicles. The heaviest vehicle in the accident is to be assumed at fault until proven otherwise. Truck V Car, Car V Bike, Bike V Pedestrian. We also need minimum passing distances for cyclists nation wide too. Qld are trialling it now and Tas look like they're getting pretty close as well. I don't think ACT will be far behind and there has been some debate on strict liability here too.

    I ride everywhere now with a rear mounted camera and just picked up another which I will either put on my helmet or handlebars. There are too many a$$holes out there to not protect myself.

    kill_with_gun_vs_car_col_fade.jpg
    It's only a mistake if you don't learn from it.

  15. #14
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    25,623

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by corbs View Post
    I think the two sentences were right but applied to the wrong cases.
    You obviously don't know the pervs record then? BTW I'm still not saying the drivers sentence is right either.

  16. #15
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Mornington Peninsula
    Age
    45
    Posts
    2,825

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BobL View Post
    You obviously don't know the pervs record then? BTW I'm still not saying the drivers sentence is right either.
    Do you know the pervs record? How about we look at the two cases without the history then...

    Case 1: Perv uses carrier service for sexting (assuming without permission) - At least 3 years jail

    Case 2: Unlicensed driver not operating his vehicle safely for the conditions hits and kills a cyclist - 150 hours community service and loses his license 18 months.

    The history is irrelevant, the sentences are terrible.
    It's only a mistake if you don't learn from it.

Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Failing Vision
    By beer4all in forum WELDING
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 15th Oct 2013, 01:26 AM
  2. A question regarding failing vision
    By Grandad-5 in forum WELDING
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: 29th Jul 2011, 12:57 AM
  3. Failing CA
    By brendan stemp in forum WOODTURNING - GENERAL
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 6th Jul 2011, 01:56 PM
  4. Delta saw failing
    By Treecycle in forum TABLE SAWS & COMBINATIONS
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 29th Oct 2009, 10:01 PM
  5. Eye Sight Failing...Getting Old
    By stevew in forum METALWORK FORUM
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 10th Dec 2006, 09:32 PM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •