Forum menu
...if 12 good men and true reckon that this is reasonably driving for a competent and careful driver
As always, before somebody points out I'm just relying on a biased report by a journalist, would you like to point out what is factually incorrect in that article which excuses the driver. Given my interpretation of the intention of the law she should have been found guilty of DBDD, let alone DBCD.
Jury bias. Likely that 10-12 of them drive, how many cycle?
I wonder if it's right for juries be used in these cases. It's the 'there but for the grace of god go I' point that's very well discussed on the cyclingsilk's blog.
[url= http://thecyclingsilk.blogspot.co.uk/2009/11/cycling-against-car-culture.html ]The problem summed up [/url]
One of the worst ones for me was the van driver who killed a cyclist.
He was tailgating the car in front (when asked to estimate the stopping distance at the speed he was driving he underestimated it by 80% or something stupid) so closely that when the car in front moved out to pass the cyclist he couldn't react in time and ploughed into the back of her.
That's not my 'drivers are all horrible' viewpoint on it. That was the driver's defence in court. "I'm not guilty of causing death by careless driving (not dangerous, naturally) because when I killed the cyclist my view was obstructed because I was tailgating the car in front." Or, "I'm not guilty of causing death by careless driving because when I killed her I was driving carelessly".
It worked. Not guilty. 🙁
I'm gobsmacked .. 😯
Holy shit. A tragedy in so many ways. (The OP's link)
The sad thing is that this kind of injustice is so common now that I am entirely unsurprised by the verdict.
Jury's don't cycle and many of them will have made equally stupid driving decisions and got away with it.
[b]CTC Road Justice Campaign[/b]:
http://www.roadjustice.org.uk/get-involved
i find it shocking that so many think overtaking on a blind bend/hill is acceptable and safe. I say that because everyday to and from work i have to negotiate a section of road, double white lines and yet cars have to overtake.
The verdict isn't really surprising, more depressing than surprising. I can guarantee that there are people on here who will think what she did was fine as well, and that "cyclists" are that stupid is something i find far more depressing.
She was overtaking a cyclist at 50mph round a curve in the road, had a chance to slow down upon seeing the two oncoming cyclists but chose not to.
Madness.
The thing which really shocks me about this case is that the defence barrister apparently said in summing up: “Ben Pontin said it was a stupid decision to overtake. It was nowhere near as stupid as Mr Pontin’s decision to put Denisa Perinova on that bike in the first place.
“He ought not to have been so reckless with the life of his young girlfriend and he failed with terrible consequences.”
Now I understand that it's the job of the defence barrister to do whatever it takes to get their client off, but isn't this much the same as blaming a rape victim for wearing a short skirt? How was Mr Pontin supposed to know he'd encounter a driver quite as [s]dangerous[/s] [s]careless[/s] careful and competent as Helen Measures.
Seems Dr Measures, a top cancer specialist FWIW, has not contacted the family to show any remorse or express her sympathies:
[url= http://www.henleystandard.co.uk/news/news.php?id=1363185 ]Letter from parents of victim[/url]
Not sure how many lives a [i]top cancer specialist[/i] can save to rebalance the equation but I hope she can express her sorrow to the parents (while satisfying the insurance company's liability concerns).
[i]Letter from parents of victim[/i]
That's impossible for me to read in it's entirety. So sad, so frustrating, so wrong...
and before those continue to judge her for her first ride out on the bike
our daughter was an experienced and competent cyclist, having cycled since a very early age in the Czech Republic around our local towns and villages.
“Ben Pontin said it was a stupid decision to overtake. It was nowhere near as stupid as Mr Pontin’s decision to put Denisa Perinova on that bike in the first place.“He ought not to have been so reckless with the life of his young girlfriend and he failed with terrible consequences.”
im not a violent man but he would have been punched spark out if he dared to say that about ANYone i rode with and that happened to them. equally - i wonder what her defence would have been should it have been a car coming towards her.
Dr Measures, a top cancer specialist
As someone on road.cc said:
She's actually managed a successful Lance Armstrong defence."I've done nothing wrong. Oh, and by the way, Cancer."
My piss is well and truly boiling. What exactly needs to happen for the justice system to wake up?
My word, such a sad story. If ever there was a case for the system to change this has to be up there.
“He ought not to have been so reckless with the life of his young girlfriend and he failed with terrible consequences.”
What an utterly despicable thing to say.
I wonder if he would have used the same tact if it had been an oncoming learner driver that Dr Measures ploughed into? Or maybe the local riding school?
everyday to and from work i have to negotiate a section of road, double white lines and yet cars have to overtake.
I'll be driving the A68 from Newcastle to Edinburgh and back tomorrow - most of it is one lane and you get occasional tractors, HGVs and caravans, so I can pretty much guarantee I will see at least two potentially fatal completely blind overtakes on each journey.
My piss has well and truly been boiled by the outcome of this court case.
What relevance is the job of the woman who was driving and why did the judge emphasise it to the jury in his summing up?
Why was the capability of the cyclist called into question in the defending barristers summing up without any evidence to back up his claim?
Why was the capability of the cyclist called into question in the defending barristers summing up without any evidence to back up his claim?
Indeed - when all available evidence suggests she was an experienced cyclist. I'm wondering if barristers can say whatever they like in the summing up - I'd always thought it was supposed to be evidence based.
read about this the other week, can't believe it. HTF can a jury decide that overtaking on a blind bend, seeing the cyclists ahead and carrying on with the overtake and killing someone is acceptable driving? This was even the cut price careless driving charge which IIRC is a slap on the wrists and "try not to do it again" sentence so they'd have known she wasn't going to get sent down for it.
So annoying.
Why was the capability of the cyclist called into question in the defending barristers summing up without any evidence to back up his claim?
There was evidence that she hit her boyfriends wheel with her own and lost control of the bike. Dr Measures claimed she fell into her path.
Indeed - when all available evidence suggests she was an experienced cyclist.
I thought she was a novice?
road.cc story says: "It was her first ride on a bike that Mr Pontin had recently bought her"
I thought she was a novice?
Not according to the link TPTCruiser gave above - just the first ride on the bike I think, but it seems the defence successfully managed to distort that (though that may be down to the journalism).
scary if accurate.just the first ride on the bike I think, but it seems the defence successfully managed to distort that
There was evidence that she hit her boyfriends wheel with her own and lost control of the bike. Dr Measures claimed she fell into her path.
The coverage seems to indicate the boyfriend had to take some evasive action due to the overtaking move. *Massive Assumption alert* The victim probably tried the same, clipped his back wheel and fell in front of the car.
Regardless of her falling off the driver was still overtaking other cyclists on a blind bend at 30mph, didn't slow down when she then found two other riders in her path, felt that she could continue the overtake and ended up causing the death of the victim.
How is there no consequences for the driver despite the overtaking move sounding careless in the first place?
The whole "I did something reckless which caused someone else to fall off their bike, how could I possibly have predicted that, how could that be my fault?" thing is just unbelievable tbh. She didn't just randomly fall off in the street.
poor judgement on over taking on a blind corner? if she waited for the corner to clear.....
she gave plenty of room for the cyclists on her side, but on a bend? again poor judgement
"It was her first ride [i]on a bike that Mr Pontin had recently bought her[/i]". Just like if I buy a new bike it will be "the first ride on a bike that I had recently bought". It doesn't make me a novice.
From what I've read of the case I think it seems like the driver failed to spot the cyclists, overtook around a blind bend, would have hit Ben head on but he swerved left to avoid the car and in doing so cut across the path of Denisa. Either she didn't move out of the way and was hit by the car or she hit her front wheel on Ben's rear wheel and fell into the path of the car.
The only person who saw her fall was driver.
The whole "I did something reckless which caused someone else to fall off their bike, how could I possibly have predicted that, how could that be my fault?" thing is just unbelievable tbh. She didn't just randomly fall off in the street.
+100
by her own defence
the only place i expect to see a car on a blind corner is on its own side of the road. - although more and more recently i find my self thinking "what if" and slow down even more for the corner.
can this be appealed?
Can you imagine that another driver coming round that bend would ever have been blamed for a collision with a car on the wrong side of the road because they weren't able to take evasive action?
This just beggars belief.
The parents letter is incredibly sad but makes some very pertinent points about the judicial system with respect to time to get to trial (including delays because the defence lawyer went on paternity leave) and discrepencies such as a the passenger in the doctors car not even being called as a witness.
Ultimately another family has lost a child (and that child her life) and I cannot begin to imagine, as a father, how that would feel.
Something must be done to stop this - cycling is becoming increasingly popular and it may be my imagination but so are incidents like this.
Heartfelt condolences to the family and also to Ben who was subjected to such a ridiculous and callous summing up by the defence lawyer.....
just the first ride on the bike I think, but it seems the defence successfully managed to distort that (though that may be down to the journalism).
Hmm.. [url= http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/10348435/I-cant-help-it-if-a-cyclist-falls-over-says-scientist-accused-of-killing-rider.html ]Telegraph says[/url]:
Denisa Perinova, a 21-year-old waitress, was on her first bike ride with her new boyfriend, Ben Pontin, when she was killed in the collision.The novice cyclist allegedly lost control of her £300 second-hand bicycle - a gift from her new boyfriend just four days earlier
Not that it makes any odds - she shouldn't have needed to be dodge oncoming traffic on a corner, regardless of her experience, and trying to blame her boyfriend is an incredibly low blow.
A doctor with a god complex.
But where have the Telegraph got it from?
Her parents said she regularly cycled.
In any case, "it's okay because it was only a novice cyclist" doesn't really work as a defence....
yes the telegraph seems to think that owning a new bike for 4 days makes you a novice - see the letters from the parents above.
This is the sort of reason why I say that all "minor" incidents (like recently where someone here was run into by a dozy git not looking where they were going, but remarkably was only lightly injured) should be pursued through the legal system to the fullest extent possible. Yes, I know it doesn't address the obvious injustice of this case, but it's better than nothing.
I would also pursue this driver('s insurance) til the pips squeak. Balance of probability is a lower standard of proof than beyond reasonable doubt.
and trying to blame her boyfriend is an incredibly low blow.
Agreed. Someone found the defence lawyer's website. He specialises in 'challenging' cases, or something like that. It basically read as "have you raped someone? Need to discredit them so you can stay out of trouble? Then call me now on 0800-SCUM-BAG. NOW!"
I sincerely hope Dr Measures gets terminal fanny cancer.
can this be appealed?
Does this answer your question?
Dear Mr O’LoughlinThank you for your email to the Attorney General's Office.
As the jury in the case of Dr Helen Measures found her not guilty and she was subsequently aquitted, no sentence was imposed and it will therefore not be possible for this office to review this case as unduly lenient.
Full details of the unduly lenient scheme can be found on our website, the address is: https://www.gov.uk/complain-about-low-crown-court-sentence
Yours sincerely
James Ross
Correspondence Unit
When all is said and dne and in the simplest terms she overtook without being able to see clearly ahead, so she did so dangerously. End of.
If it had been another car coming the other way she would have been done, no doubt.
aye - maybe next time she overtakes on a blind corner the vehicle she hits will be bigger than her.
can this be appealed?
Probably not appealed, but I wonder if there could be something found that might have caused a mistrial, maybe due to the direction given by the judge.
I feel empty inside... 🙁
Oh BTW hi to Terry Davidson 😉
is that a subtle way of reminding me my id is visible on the net ? 😉