URI:
   DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
  HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       *****************************************************
   DIR Return to: The Flame Pit
       *****************************************************
       #Post#: 22173--------------------------------------------------
       Grey conviction quashed
   DIR By: Southpaw82
       Date: May 12, 2024, 6:55 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Court of Appeal judgment
  HTML https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Crim/2024/487.html
       I said it was wrong then and it’s wrong now. She should never
       have been convicted, let alone imprisoned.
       #Post#: 22197--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Grey conviction quashed
   DIR By: tonys
       Date: May 12, 2024, 3:04 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       I've never liked shared cycle paths and much prefer to ride on
       the road. But it has to be said that cycling on the road instead
       of an off road cycle path results in a lot of abuse from
       motorists.
       #Post#: 22200--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Grey conviction quashed
   DIR By: Southpaw82
       Date: May 12, 2024, 3:10 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: tonys link ---
       >
       > I've never liked shared cycle paths and much prefer to ride on
       the road. But it has to be said that cycling on the road instead
       of an off road cycle path results in a lot of abuse from
       motorists.
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       I understand that the council have said that it was not a shared
       use path.
       #Post#: 22204--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Grey conviction quashed
   DIR By: sparx
       Date: May 12, 2024, 4:06 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       I completely disagree with cyclists (adults... maybe older
       teenagers) using non-shared paths. Even shared paths are fraught
       with danger when the pedestrians have to cross the cycle bit (to
       both peds, and cyclists, as neither sometimes look correctly).
       This becomes even more dangerous when you bring e-bikes into the
       equation, plus the illegal use of e-scooters. I also believe the
       conditioning caused by cyclists continuing to use footpaths,
       instead of the roads, makes the average driver even more annoyed
       when cyclists are properly using the road, although don't get me
       started on the cyclists that refuse to use a perfectly good
       cycle path on a straight road with no junctions...
       I also agree with SP and the appeal outcome. Someone who has a
       vision problem, and possibly some LD / cognitive impairment too
       from the cerebral palsy, even if undiagnosed, who is then
       surprised by a fast moving cyclist in their path is likely to
       react with a surprise, gross reaction. Just like if I came up
       behind you and shouted in your ear, I would expect to be clocked
       by your body or arms.
       #Post#: 22206--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Grey conviction quashed
   DIR By: ivanleo
       Date: May 12, 2024, 4:23 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       "The judge's legal directions contained fundamental and material
       misdirections of law", ouch.
       #Post#: 22208--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Grey conviction quashed
   DIR By: Southpaw82
       Date: May 12, 2024, 4:39 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: cp8759 link ---
       >
       > "The judge's legal directions contained fundamental and
       material misdirections of law", ouch.
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       Failing to talk about the underlying offence in a case of
       unlawful act manslaughter seems pretty fundamental. But then,
       the prosecution didn’t address it either.
       #Post#: 22214--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Grey conviction quashed
   DIR By: ivanleo
       Date: May 12, 2024, 5:02 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: Southpaw82 link ---
       >
       > [quote author=cp8759 link=topic=1868.msg22206#msg22206
       date=1715548992]
       > "The judge's legal directions contained fundamental and
       material misdirections of law", ouch.
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       Failing to talk about the underlying offence in a case of
       unlawful act manslaughter seems pretty fundamental. But then,
       the prosecution didn’t address it either.
       [/quote]
       Isn't this the sort of thing you'd expect an experienced Crown
       Court judge to raise himself with the prosecution?
       #Post#: 22230--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Grey conviction quashed
   DIR By: Southpaw82
       Date: May 12, 2024, 6:35 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: cp8759 link ---
       >
       > [quote author=Southpaw82 link=topic=1868.msg22208#msg22208
       date=1715549988]
       > [quote author=cp8759 link=topic=1868.msg22206#msg22206
       date=1715548992]
       > "The judge's legal directions contained fundamental and
       material misdirections of law", ouch.
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       Failing to talk about the underlying offence in a case of
       unlawful act manslaughter seems pretty fundamental. But then,
       the prosecution didn’t address it either.
       [/quote]
       Isn't this the sort of thing you'd expect an experienced Crown
       Court judge to raise himself with the prosecution?
       [/quote]
       I would.
       #Post#: 22241--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Grey conviction quashed
   DIR By: The Rookie
       Date: May 13, 2024, 2:50 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: Southpaw82 link ---
       >
       > [quote author=tonys link=topic=1868.msg22197#msg22197
       date=1715544264]
       > I've never liked shared cycle paths and much prefer to ride on
       the road. But it has to be said that cycling on the road instead
       of an off road cycle path results in a lot of abuse from
       motorists.
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       I understand that the council have said that it was not a shared
       use path.
       [/quote]
       The evidence at trial is that while it was not a shared use
       path, the signage was such from a shared use path further along
       the street that it caused confusion whether or not were the
       incident happened it was shared use or not.
       I have this issue locally where there is no 'end of shared use'
       signage at the end of a number of shared use paths, you only
       know shared use has ended by the absence of repeaters.
       That said I rarely use shared use paths as they are only safe to
       use at much lower speeds than I typically cycle at and the one
       that should be safer at higher speeds (fully segregated pavement
       markings and a circa 4m wide pavement) the peds ignore the
       segregation and walk in the dedicated cycle path.
       *****************************************************
       Page 1 of 1