Ah yes lets proscute the easy target !

gasbanni

gasbanni

Joined
7 Jan 2007
Messages
8,831
Reaction score
1,230
Country
United Kingdom
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-crash-cash-insurance-scam-busy-motorway.html

funny how the van drivers been blamed but the accident was caused by the scammers.............oh but i shouldn't refer to the fact that they appear to be east Europeans as I'm been bigoted.


So you're on a motorway doing 70mph, past experience how often do you have to carry out emergency braking to come to a dead stop hardly ever and how many meters would it take ?

55 meters I dont bl00dy think so !!!!! there's some right idiots in the legal profession.
 
Sponsored Links
"As a result the van, which had 312metres of clear visibility prior to the stationary vehicle, should have stopped within just over 55 metres from 69.6mph. "


He should be done for dangerous driving, but not sure about death by dangerous driving, as the incident was deliberately caused by (probably EU) immigrants.
 
AronSearle said:
"As a result the van, which had 312metres of clear visibility prior to the stationary vehicle, should have stopped within just over 55 metres from 69.6mph. "


He should be done for dangerous driving, but not sure about death by dangerous driving, as the incident was deliberately caused by (probably EU) immigrants.
Click to expand...

I don't know about you but when I'm on the motorway my eye's are constantly scanning rear view mirrors and lanes either side of my lane for vehicles moving in to my lane.

Have you ever come up to a stationary vehicle when you were doing 70 on the motorway I haven't, slowing down in the stream of traffic yes
and also vehicles slowing down who have put their hazards on to warn others yes. but me doing 70 and a stopped vehicle in front never.
The real culprits are the scammers their actions caused the whole thing.
I believe this scenario could have happened to anyone and the scammers who orchestrated the whole thing are the ones to blame.
 
70 mph = 31.2928 metres per second

312 meters = 10 seconds.

Even if you increase the stopping distance from 55 to 100 meters, that is still 200 meters to spare.

200 meters 6.5 seconds.

1


2


3


4


5


6, how safe would you feel closing your eyes for 6 seconds at 70mph?


I would need some convincing that a driver travelling at 70mph can't see an obstacle 300 meters away and not have plenty of time to react.

I suspect he was either not paying attention, or more likely suffered the typical white van man attitude of "Pah, I can make it through".



But as I said, dangerous driving or negligence, not death by dangerous driving.

But that's then hair splitting.
 
Sponsored Links
Hmm, so your saying he should have only been charged with dangerous driving? Conveniently forgetting the fact that a death was cause by his dangerous driving. Would you settle for a reduced charge of manslaughter then ?
Whenever I'm driving on a motorway/ 2 or 3 lane A road at 70 mph, I always look well ahead, with the occasional glance in the rear view mirror to see what's behind. I'd reckon on the motorway, I'm aware of everything around me (traffic wise) at all times.
 
I think the point is I can't really blame the van driver because the whole situation came about because of the damn scammers their reckless behavior cause the whole thing .......to me.
 
gasbanni said:
I think the point is I can't really blame the van driver because the whole situation came about because of the damn scammers their reckless behavior cause the whole thing .......to me.
Click to expand...

Yes. The former was unintentional; the latter was intentional.

Still, we live in a country whose judiciary live in their own little world completely divorced from reality.
 
gasbanni said:
I think the point is I can't really blame the van driver because the whole situation came about because of the damn scammers their reckless behavior cause the whole thing .......to me.
Click to expand...

Except 300 meters is a bloody long way away.

Someone who drives on the motorway and can't spot such an obstacle that far ahead (or is so lax) is an accident waiting to happen, he should be charged with dangerous driving as a minimum.

I don't know about death by dangerous driving, but the guys who set it up should be banged up for life.

Oh, and close the ****ing borders to the EU please.
 
I think the point is, while if my car was stationary on the motorway after a crash the last place I would be would be anywhere near it, the death was causes by the van crashing into the static car. Not the attempted staged crash, or the crash that followed it, but his van crashing into that.

That said, Im sure most people have at some point found themselves coming up behind something thats not moving as fast as they thought it was, hit the brakes fairly late, and being very glad it all came to a half in time, this guy just wasnt as luck.

And obvously, the drivers of the passat, should also be punished, and hopefully if nothing else at all, have a ruddy long think about what harm they have caused, inadvertantly or otherwise.


Daniel
 
It's because of this sort of scam, and the generally crap driving of many on the motorways, that i now have a Blackvue Dashboard camera in my van. Takes away any doubt.
 
alumni said:
It's because of this sort of scam, and the generally crap driving of many on the motorways, that i now have a Blackvue Dashboard camera in my van. Takes away any doubt.
Click to expand...

Yes. I have a RoadHawk camera for that very reason. If an accident (incident) were to occur, there's every possibility that the guilty party would lie through their teeth. Nor would I like to rely on independent witnesses: most just want to ignore things and be on their way.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Sponsored Links
Back
Top