[Closed] Remember - Spiders make it OK.

probably on her mobile...

and must have been driving a seriously large 'car' to not realise she'd hit someone - I mean, if you hit a bird you know.

EDIT - found more, she was driving a 106!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/devon/8254310.stm

Looking at a map it appears to be a 60mph road. Two seconds to throw a spider out of the window is 176 feet travelled without looking at the road.

Sounds like careless driving to me. Surely the police would check the mobile phone records in cases like this?

Is it just me who doesn't quite believe the defence?

from the article "You have never sought to blame any external factors in this case."

She hasn't made a defense- hasn't blamed anyone but herself, just described the circumstances of the accident.

Mr Crabb said Mills only realised she had struck the cyclist when she had looked back at the road.

Sounds pretty iffy. Put her in a room of spiders and tell her to pick each one up and carry it out - bet she doesn't.

WTF? You hit a small stone in a 106 and you feel / hear it. So not only wasnt she looking where she was going, she was deaf and completely numb as well? Grrrrr.

The article mentions the [b][url= http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?q=Tedburn+St+Mary&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-a&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Tedburn+Saint+Mary,+Exeter,+Devon,+United+Kingdom&gl=uk&ei=hXIjTPLGBZe8jAej46ku&ved=0CBkQ8gEwAA&ll=50.730344,-3.678575&spn=0.019287,0.038581&t=h&z=15&layer=c&cbll=50.730318,-3.678365&panoid=GZtJOmR5Uf3qP8GQguwGkg&cbp=12,109.91,,0,33.73 ]rumble strip[/url][/b] at the side of the road. I wonder if she veered to the left and was running along that when she struck the cyclists.

Sad for all involved.

Sounds pretty iffy. Put her in a room of spiders and tell her to pick each one up and carry it out - bet she doesn't.

You made me feel bad for laughing at that.

She admitted causing death by dangerous driving. I thought that was an automatic custodial? Instead she was given a two-year driving ban, a two-year community order and sentenced to 200 hours unpaid work.

She was travelling to work when the accident happend, do you think that she'll now cycle as she's been banned from driving?

I think she knew she'd hit something, just didn't realise what because she didn't see him.

I'll bet you my bikes that's a lack of justice right there.

The law is an ass.

So in two seconds she somehow managed to cross the rumble strip, kill a cyclist and not even notice? In a 106?

Purrrrrrleeease....,

It sounds like she's pretty devastated by it. Sometimes custody is meaningless.

[i]It sounds like she's pretty devastated by it. Sometimes custody is meaningless[/i]

What, the accident, the fact she killed someone or her sentence?

She was obviously well advised, and probably did her 'innocent little girl' impression well.

Accidents happen! I feel sorry for both her and the family of the deceased 🙁

seems to me the judge thinks its okay to kill cyclists as long as there is a reason that he believes (doesn't have to be a good one).

"There is no basis for disbelieving your account that you took your eyes temporarily off the road to deal with a creature.

And that makes a difference how? Unless he meant the cyclist when he said creature? Wouldn't suprise me as the judge rides home is his suburbun 4x4 with [s]death[/s] bull bars on the front

not defending her in any way but that is a very fast stretch of dual carriageway.

Why was a charity ride being routed along it?

I'm a little confused here.

She didn't make a defence, she simply said she had made a mistake when dealing with a spider. She admitted the impact was her fault and said exactly why.

She also said she "only realised she had hit the cyclist when she looked back at the road" - meaning she hit something, but didn't know what until she saw him. Not that she didn't know she hit anything.

And for admitting she made a mistake (however terrible the consequences) the judge has shown some leniency as it was not done through intent but lack of thought.

So stop the lynch mob and ask questions of the judge as to why the leniency was applied. The woman appears to have told the truth fairly openly and be very upset about the incident. Put yourself in her shoes, you've made a stupid mistake with catastrophic consequences - of course you'd attempt to minimise your jail time possibly by emphasising the effect it had on you for something you already regret doing but can't change. Its an entirely human response. God, you lot are a mess.

Even if a prison sentence is not suitable for her, surely a lifetime ban on driving is? It is not acceptable (one would hope) to kill someone by accident and then carry on just as before. If you demonstrate your ineptitude at driving, as this woman clearly, and tragically, has, you should have your license taken away.

Unfortunately, we live in a society that sees driving as a right, not as a disgusting, polluting and killing privilege, so far too few people are banned from driving after doing something like this.

The question is what does taking her license off her do? Nothing. It removes someone from the road who would otherwise now be a very VERY careful driver much more aware of their dangers than say a repeat SP30 offender and makes her less able to contribute to society. Not much point.

probably on her mobile...

The police would have checked here phone records.

Yeah, Chris Moyles came on the radio, and it took me two seconds to change the radio station. That's how I killed him. Can I go free now?

[i]The police would have checked here phone records. [/i]

I'm sure they did, but your comment assumes that everyone's mobile is in their name...

Also, she may have been texting, and not had a chance to send the text because she was too busy killing people.

The police would know if she had been on a mobile whether it was in her name or not. As a fatal RTC that would have been investigated at the scene and subsequently through cell site analysis if it was thought necessary.