nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

No jail for driver who deliberately drove through cyclist at traffic lights

mamax

Only in Ireland, what a joke in any other country this would have been prison and would not have taken this long to go to court, we have a terrible justice system.

http://www.stickybottle.com/latest-news/no-jail-for-driver-who-deliberately-drove-through-cyclist-at-traffic-lights/

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Fian

cdaly_ wrote: »

I think the situation there is that the insurer pays out to the victim but then pursues the formerly-insured for the money.

exactly.

And bear in mind MIBI is there to cover people injured by an uninsured or unidentified driver, so there is cover for people even if they are injured by someone joyriding in a stolen car. Or people injured by someone riding an uninsured e-scooter for that matter.

cdaly_

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

I'm only guessing, but could it be that the other driver has breached their 'agreement' with their own insurer, so their own insurer is no longer liable? The liability would pass back to the driver themselves, and be very unlikely to ever be paid out.

I think the situation there is that the insurer pays out to the victim but then pursues the formerly-insured for the money.

[Deleted User]

Kaisr Sose wrote: »

This is interesting as I was told by a solicitor that an insurance company won't pay compensation for injury where a driver is convicted of a traffic offence that resulted in that injury. Would be nice to know other people ls experience of this.

I'm only guessing, but could it be that the other driver has breached their 'agreement' with their own insurer, so their own insurer is no longer liable? The liability would pass back to the driver themselves, and be very unlikely to ever be paid out.

Fian wrote: »

compensation offered to a victim is normally a mitigating factor, since it shows remorse and also goes some way to redress the harm done to the victim.

Or it shows that the person has access to family money to buy their way out of justice.

Kaisr Sose

Seth Brundle wrote: »

Get yourself a different solicitor!

I was surprised at what they said too and I may have taken it up wrong. I will ask for clarification. Insurance companies will insert anything in their small print to avoid having to indemnify a policy holder.

The guy is a good solicitor. Althouhj there are
lot of poor ones, one should not be so quick to make assumptions.

Seth Brundle

Kaisr Sose wrote: »

This is interesting as I was told by a solicitor that an insurance company won't pay compensation for injury where a driver is convicted of a traffic offence that resulted in that injury. Would be nice to know other people ls experience of this.

Get yourself a different solicitor!

Eamonnator

Kaisr Sose wrote: »

This is interesting as I was told by a solicitor that an insurance company won't pay compensation for injury where a driver is convicted of a traffic offence that resulted in that injury. Would be nice to know other people ls experience of this.

In 2003, my wife and I were involved in a traffic collision. Our car was written off and we were both injured. We were 100% in the right. Insurance company paid compensation for car and our injuries. The driver of the other car was convicted of Careless Driving.
Tbh I don't understand the logic of that solicitors statement. I reckon, if the driver is convicted of an offence, it would incentivise the insurance company to pay compensation.

Kaisr Sose

plodder wrote: »

I thought I read that the victim had already received compensation from a civil action and this is in addition.

In any case, criminal actions are supposed to be taken on behalf of society in general, not least because in this case the guy is a clear danger to others potentially in future, a point that seems to have been completely ignored by the judge.

This is interesting as I was told by a solicitor that an insurance company won't pay compensation for injury where a driver is convicted of a traffic offence that resulted in that injury. Would be nice to know other people ls experience of this.

plodder

I thought I read that the victim had already received compensation from a civil action and this is in addition.

In any case, criminal actions are supposed to be taken on behalf of society in general, not least because in this case the guy is a clear danger to others potentially in future, a point that seems to have been completely ignored by the judge.

Fian

compensation offered to a victim is normally a mitigating factor, since it shows remorse and also goes some way to redress the harm done to the victim. Of course in an RTA there is an insurance company and a pretty straightforward avenue to obtain compensation in the civil context. I understand minor soft tissue injuries so perhaps the victim didn't bother pursuing a claim, though it seems a pretty straightforward case for punitive damages. Maybe civil case in abeyance until criminal case concluded.

CramCycle

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

There is a fundamental issue here. You shouldn't be able to buy justice.

Any question of compensation should be a civil matter. This is a criminal trial. He shouldn't be able to buy his way out of it.

This is the thing I find weird, I know from breaches of the SHWW Act that compensation is not (or should not be) a mitigating factor in sentencing. They are two separate things, there is the criminal case and if the other party wants, there is a civil case but the civil case is completely separate and cases have been overturned based on a judge taking compensation into account in sentencing, as it has nothing to do with a criminal case.

magicbastarder

paddy no 11 wrote: »

What's the cycle hatred about? Have sociologists looked at this? Personally think it's a jealousy thing and certain people who think it's necessary to ape everything that's English and bring it here

i don't think the English angle is really relevant. it's simple psychology (uninformed opinion alert!) - it's that being in a car isolates you from the world around you, especially if you're listening to a certain (cough) 'current affairs' radio station which is portraying you as some sort of victim; but really driving a car isolates you from the effect of driving a car, and limits your ability to communicate with those around you.
genuinely, the majority of the interactions i've had with drivers which have ended well are those where communication has been possible - so usually warm summer days where an open window (or on two occasions, a convertible car with the top down) has facilitated a little bit of explanation. the ones where a driver is shouting at you through a closed window rarely end well.

[Deleted User]

plodder wrote: »

I don't like this idea of trying to pay off victims, though a promise of 10K in two years, isn't worth a whole lot. And six previous convictions means he's used up all his second chances in my book. It's a disgraceful sentence from the judge.

There is a fundamental issue here. You shouldn't be able to buy justice.

Any question of compensation should be a civil matter. This is a criminal trial. He shouldn't be able to buy his way out of it.

mikemac2 wrote: »

Don't the Brits have local magistrates doing much of what our district court judges do

It isn't paid and I suppose is largely done by retired people who want to fill their time. Dunno if its better than what we have though.

Honestly, we don't need well-meaning volunteers providing important public services. Limiting something to volunteers means effectively limiting to a 'comfortable' social class - those who can afford to volunteer, and who aren't working to put bread on the table.

Kaisr Sose

CramCycle wrote: »

If you wanted to push it, either the Gardas Super (although they possibly told them not to pursue). or failing that GSOC.

Thats where I am at.

Seth Brundle

bmc58 wrote: »

Be safer for us all if he was in jail for a while,time for him to mull over his actions.

The driver or Judge Nolan?

bmc58

Rechuchote wrote: »

It seems to be part of a complex of opinions: I've noticed that people who hate "f***ing cyclists" also hate "migrants", and often women.

As for the court case, I'm surprised that someone who used a car as a weapon while having a temper tantrum is allowed to drive again. He'd be safer from himself on a bike.

Be safer for us all if he was in jail for a while,time for him to mull over his actions.

bmc58

is_that_so wrote: »

There'll just be an attachment of earnings.

Yeah! €25 a week for the eight years.What a punishment.

Rechuchote

paddy no 11 wrote: »

What's the cycle hatred about? Have sociologists looked at this? Personally think it's a jealousy thing and certain people who think it's necessary to ape everything that's English and bring it here

It seems to be part of a complex of opinions: I've noticed that people who hate "f***ing cyclists" also hate "migrants", and often women.

As for the court case, I'm surprised that someone who used a car as a weapon while having a temper tantrum is allowed to drive again. He'd be safer from himself on a bike.

magicbastarder

if you were involved in an incident involving a van driven on behalf of a company - say 'the hangry goat' brewery; and you were not at fault, how much liability would the company have in terms of any damages?
i.e. is it all on the driver?

cdaly_

Kaisr Sose wrote: »

I encountered one of these types in a van last February. Having a bad time of it so he takes it out on me. I obviously provoked him in some by slowing him on a narrow part of a road as when the road widened, he overtook me needlessly close, and shouted at me. To get him to pull out, I hit the back of the van with the back of my fist hoping the sound would make him pull out.

He passes and then slows to my pace and drives very close to me forcing me toward the kerb. I had nowhere to go, lost balance, fell outward onto the side of the van and then onto the road. I was very nearly hit by the rear wheel. He stopped up the road, then drove off leaving me on the road with some minor injuries. I reported him and had rear cam footage. It was investigated as a hit and run.

Move on to August, I am, told he will not be prosecuted due to lack of evidence. And a.) that it was a 50/50 thing. b.) I was not badly hurt and c.) I did not report it for three weeks (untrue). No other information.

During the course of the investigation I was informed by the investigating Garda that the driver was ' a nice guy', as if that has any relevance to his behaviour.

I am now in the course of seeking fuller particulars on the decision and who made it. (AGS or DPP). Its so difficult to get meaningful and accurate information. If it got to court I would hate to think Judge Martin would get to decide it.

That incident that resulted in a suspended sentence was even worse than mine and I sympathise with the victim. Justice is not administered fairly or proportionately by our justice system, from ground up. It's a broken system.

You could probably also take a civil case against the driver (should be able to get ID from AGS). Injury, stress etc. Insurer would be involved and would therefore have repercussions for driver...

CramCycle

If you wanted to push it, either the Gardas Super (although they possibly told them not to pursue). or failing that GSOC.

Kaisr Sose

I encountered one of these types in a van last February. Having a bad time of it so he takes it out on me. I obviously provoked him in some by slowing him on a narrow part of a road as when the road widened, he overtook me needlessly close, and shouted at me. To get him to pull out, I hit the back of the van with the back of my fist hoping the sound would make him pull out.

He passes and then slows to my pace and drives very close to me forcing me toward the kerb. I had nowhere to go, lost balance, fell outward onto the side of the van and then onto the road. I was very nearly hit by the rear wheel. He stopped up the road, then drove off leaving me on the road with some minor injuries. I reported him and had rear cam footage. It was investigated as a hit and run.

Move on to August, I am, told he will not be prosecuted due to lack of evidence. And a.) that it was a 50/50 thing. b.) I was not badly hurt and c.) I did not report it for three weeks (untrue). No other information.

During the course of the investigation I was informed by the investigating Garda that the driver was ' a nice guy', as if that has any relevance to his behaviour.

I am now in the course of seeking fuller particulars on the decision and who made it. (AGS or DPP). Its so difficult to get meaningful and accurate information. If it got to court I would hate to think Judge Martin would get to decide it.

That incident that resulted in a suspended sentence was even worse than mine and I sympathise with the victim. Justice is not administered fairly or proportionately by our justice system, from ground up. It's a broken system.

[Deleted User]

mathie wrote: »

This morning on my cycle commute I was at a red light (T junction).
Traffic was coming from the left and they had a green light.
The light turned red for them and a car broke it. (light was now green for us)
Then another car went through the red light.
A third vehicle (van) went to go through the red light.
I moved my bike forward and he stopped, gave me the finger, then noticed the helmet camera and was all apologies.

I moved my bike forward in such a way that he'd 'only' hit my front wheel.
That's what I had to think when I did it.

The roads are getting worse around Dublin.

This is a regular occurrence at the Shanowen Road/Swords Road T junction. I've almost had side on collisions in the car with the kids in the back as a result of people running that red. Mind you I've had near misses with cyclists flying through a red down the swords road too. It's a pretty dangerous junction as you have people gunning down the Shanowen Road to beat the light to turn right.

Seth Brundle

RacoonQueen wrote: »

I can't bring myself to thank this post...wonder if anyone can dig out a case were he has sent someone to prison, would be interested to know what it takes.

Aha, that would be the crime of importing garlic and not paying tax. Whatever about paedos, we can't be having tax dodgers.
He also jailed a man for 15 months for hoax calling 999
https://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/jail-for-man-who-made-hoax-999-call-about-pub-shooting-965977.html

Not condoning either of the above cases but to many people, the honourable judge appears to have his priorities a bit arseways!

CramCycle

goat2 wrote: »

Shocking, If it is true that the same judge presided over all of these cases

It's true and those are only examples, there are more of where that came from.

goat2

Seth Brundle wrote: »

Judge Nolan is how! :rolleyes:

Shocking, If it is true that the same judge presided over all of these cases

Dr_Colossus

You need to rack up 215 previous convictions including 14 for dangerous driving and three for hit-and-runs and be on a 25 year driving ban to receive jail in this country:
If we had a justice system this would never have happened:
https://www.thejournal.ie/paul-connelly-eight-and-half-years-for-man-who-drove-into-pedestrians-on-footpath-after-taking-drugs-and-alcohol-4619152-May2019/

[Deleted User]

Shedite27 wrote: »

How is he allowed go back on the roads with that record of dangerous driving?

Sure how's he gonna get his golf form back if he can't drive to the golf course?

Ferris

RacoonQueen wrote: »

So he doesn't mind child porn or attempted murder but not paying taxes deserves a custodial sentence ( well only for some, not everyone, depends who you are)

Pretty much, he's also not too bothered about rape and abuse.

Not that i'm against jailing tax evaders but there was a lot of talk that Dr Naser was being made an example of. Again, I'm not against this but why not make a similar example of Sean Kearns - such an opportunity wasted.

PaulieC

paddy no 11 wrote: »

What's the cycle hatred about? Have sociologists looked at this? Personally think it's a jealousy thing and certain people who think it's necessary to ape everything that's English and bring it here

It's a complete impotent rage and picking on the perceived weaker person. They have paid for their cars, they pay road tax :rolleyes: and insurance and are fully entitled to be on the roads. Only when they are on the roads, there are so many of them they cause traffic and when they see cyclists whizzing past they get enraged. They can't do anything about the Govt. or CCs unwillingness to help them out so they pick on the next rung down from them.

RacoonQueen

Ferris wrote: »

Also jailed my GP for 18 months for tax evasion. He was guilty as sin but, as stated, certain crimes seem to attract the full rigours of the law from 'Judge' Nolan. He's a disgrace.

So he doesn't mind child porn or attempted murder but not paying taxes deserves a custodial sentence ( well only for some, not everyone, depends who you are)