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

Garda with no licience,tax, and bald tyres kills two and gets a fine!

lividduck

A Limerick based Garda who had no driving licience, no car tax and two bald tyres when he hit and killed two people has gotten off with a €900 fine!
Justice my arse!
http://www.rte.ie/news/2012/0419/limerick-based-garda-fined-900-for-offences.html
:mad:

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

mathepac

Paparazzo wrote: »

Not nessessarly. If he followed the letter of the law he could have had his licence renewed the week before and still drove.
...

The reports say nothing about "an out of date licence", they say "he had no licence", ever. If the charge was driving on an out-of-date licence, then the reports would say that.

Paparazzo wrote: »

...
The people on the middle of the road were the people who made the biggest mistake here.

No dispute with that and they paid the ultimate price for their stupidity.

BUT

On an unlit stretch of roadway, a Guard would surely be expected to obey at least some of the rules of the road and drive within the limits of his lights, full-beam or dimmed. But then apparently he had no regard for rules or laws.

With headlights in use, how is it possible to not see two man-sized objects in the carriageway? (I mean no disrespect to the two people killed by the lunatic Guard describing them this way, but it's not like the two bodies were the size of cigarette packets). It makes no sense. Either his car, his eyesight or some other defect contributed to the collision and has not (or at least not yet) been investigated.

Why is he not an Ex-Guard now?

lividduck

prinz wrote: »

You're kind of missing the point. If he had a driving license, had taxed the car, had decent tyres in good condition........... he still would have driven over the two lying on the motorway. So in that sense the conditions of the tyres etc obviously were found to have had no bearing on the accident. Now if he had braked or something beforehand and it was found that the bald nature of the tyres played a role in hitting those people then you'd have a valid point.

Having said that, the fine is crazily low, and I hope he's turfed out of the force too.

No, You are kind of missing the point, a member of the Gardai was driving while unqualified to drive an unroadworthy car on a motorway, he got a fine, no ban, no suspended sentence just a fine, furthermore a qualified driver with their lights on is expected to drive in a manner that allows them a clear view of the road ahead and time to stop in an emergency, this unqualified driver didn't see two people on the road and even if he had with two bald tyres it is questionable if he could have stopped.

dillo2k10

hondasam wrote: »

Do you drive?

Yes I do, and If I had off been in his situation, I may hit them too, but I think that the law would say that he is at fault.

HigginsJ

mathepac wrote: »

The reports say nothing about "an out of date licence", they say "he had no licence", ever. If the charge was driving on an out-of-date licence, then the reports would say that.

No dispute with that and they paid the ultimate price for their stupidity.

BUT

On an until stretch of roadway, a Guard would surely be expected to obey the rules of the road and drive within the limits of his lights, full-beam or dimmed.

With headlights in use, how is it possible to not see two man-sized objects in the carriageway? It makes no sense. Either his car, his eyesight or some other defect contributed to the collision and has not (or at least not yet) been investigated.

Why is he not an Ex-Guard now?[/QUOTE]

As it states at the end of the article and has been stated here, it is being investigated by the Ombudsman

HigginsJ

It would clear up alot and be very helpful to know the exact state of his licence.

Am I being presumptious in thinking that a member of the Garda Traffic Corp. would be a qualified driver?

_feedback_

HigginsJ wrote: »

It would clear up alot and be very helpful to know the exact state of his licence.

Am I being presumptious in thinking that a member of the Garda Traffic Corp. would be a qualified driver?

The information isn't great.. It was stated in court that he was a member of the traffic corp, but his Garda station later said he isn't.

I assume that the circumstances of him not having it (never/not renewed) don't matter to the court, and just the fact he does't have it.

Jesus Shaves

Funkstard wrote: »

If you wouldn't mind reading either my post or the article properly you'll see that he has been prosecuted for driving with bald tyres and without insurance or a licence, but none of these (as per an investigation stated in the article) led to the deaths of the two men. Them having a fight in the middle of the motorway, in the dark, is what led to their death.

Bull, Cars do have lights you know, He would have been able to see them and stop in time if his tyres weren't bald
No need to make excuses for him

HigginsJ

elviscostello wrote: »

The information isn't great.. It was stated in court that he was a member of the traffic corp, but his Garda station later said he isn't.

I assume that the circumstances of him not having it (never/not renewed) don't matter to the court, and just the fact he does't have it.

Nice when you get all the facts.

HigginsJ

darokane wrote: »

Bull, Cars do have lights you know, He would have been able to see them and stop in time if his tyres weren't bald
No need to make excuses for him

:eek: Cars do have lights but have you never had a close call on an unlit road no? Someone walking/cycling on the road with no lights?

_feedback_

dillo2k10 wrote: »

Yes I do, and If I had off been in his situation, I may hit them too, but I think that the law would say that he is at fault.

But the law clearly wouldn't?!

Think about it. It is two people in an extremely dangerous place, and they paid the ultimate price when the inevitable happened.

In this case (Link) - a pedestrian was hit by a car on a motorway and claimed compo, saying similar things to yourself.

The judge threw the case out of court saying the pedestrian was completely at fault.

Jesus Shaves

HigginsJ wrote: »

:eek: Cars do have lights but have you never had a close call on an unlit road no? Someone walking/cycling on the road with no lights?

Yes i have, and i didn't kill anyone

Yakult

Hold on, 2 people were lying down in the middle of a motorway??

HigginsJ

Yakult wrote: »

Hold on, 2 people were lying down in the middle of a motorway??

well on the ground fighting by the sounds of things

HigginsJ

darokane wrote: »

Yes i have, and i didn't kill anyone

And were they stationary unlit in the middle of the road on the ground?

hondasam

HigginsJ wrote: »

It would clear up alot and be very helpful to know the exact state of his licence.

Am I being presumptious in thinking that a member of the Garda Traffic Corp. would be a qualified driver?

Does it matter about his d/lic? he failed to produce it so you can assume he does not have one.
He was wrong to drive under the circumstances but it made no difference to the night of the accident. If he had a perfect car, d/lic tax etc he would still have hit them and killed them.

HigginsJ

elviscostello wrote: »

But the law clearly wouldn't?!

Think about it. It is two people in an extremely dangerous place, and they paid the ultimate price when the inevitable happened.

In this case (Link) - a pedestrian was hit by a car on a motorway and claimed compo, saying similar things to yourself.

The judge threw the case out of court saying the pedestrian was completely at fault.

Looks like this will have similar conclusion if this comment from solicitor turns out to be reliable/correct

"The solicitor said while he did not want to dilute the tragic consequences of this accident, the garda was not facing any driving charges and there was no criminal culpability in the case"

HigginsJ

hondasam wrote: »

Does it matter about his d/lic? he failed to produce it so you can assume he does not have one.
He was wrong to drive under the circumstances but it made no difference to the night of the accident. If he had a perfect car, d/lic tax etc he would still have hit them and killed them.

I agree completely with you.

Kess73

mathepac wrote: »

The reports say nothing about "an out of date licence", they say "he had no licence", ever. If the charge was driving on an out-of-date licence, then the reports would say that.

No dispute with that and they paid the ultimate price for their stupidity.

BUT

On an unlit stretch of roadway, a Guard would surely be expected to obey at least some of the rules of the road and drive within the limits of his lights, full-beam or dimmed. But then apparently he had no regard for rules or laws.

With headlights in use, how is it possible to not see two man-sized objects in the carriageway? (I mean no disrespect to the two people killed by the lunatic Guard describing them this way, but it's not like the two bodies were the size of cigarette packets). It makes no sense. Either his car, his eyesight or some other defect contributed to the collision and has not (or at least not yet) been investigated.

Why is he not an Ex-Guard now?

Because where the accident took place is not a straight stretch seeing as the Garda's car was coming off of a sliproad that comes at the motorway at an angle and that also has obstructed views to the left.

People keep making out that it happened on a big open straight stretch of road.

It happened on a stretch that has a sliproad with obstructed views and where the motorway itself has a fairly large bend on it. Throw in two flyovers that are close together and no lighting at all, and you get a small stretch where two men rolling on the ground could not be seen by any vehicle entering the motorway from that sliproad.

Another thing that would have blocked off the sight of the two men who were rolling on the motorway would be the crash barriers which would block the view of any car coming down the slip road.

Any local will know the sliproad by where the accident happened and know that anything the height of two men rolling could not be seen by a car coming down the sliproad, and even if the car was driving at a lower speed, it would have been very hard to not to connect with the two men as the headlights could not have lit that spot until the car had straightened up after leaving the curved part of the sliproad and at that point it would be nigh on impossible to avoid impact.

Personally I think more questions should be asked about who the people in the car that left the scene were and why they did not come forward to say why the men were rolling around on a motorway at night.

It is very simple. Coming down that sliproad at night, your headlights do not light up the motorway in the direction you will be going in advance of you reaching the actual motorway. You do not have a good view to your left and you have to come at the motorway at an angle and then turn left to enter it with your left hand view still obstructed until you are actually on the motorway itself.

Reports of the accident place the two men smack in that blind spot. Short of being able to see through solid objects, I fail to see how the garda or his passenger could have seen then until the very last second. The car's headlights simply could not have picked up on the two men as the light would not have been able to shine in that direction until the car was on the motorway and straightened up from the left hand curve/turn that brings you onto the motorway.

Now if the men had decided to fight on an unlit motorway but did so about 200 or 300 yards further out that motorway then they would have done so at a point where oncoming motorists would have seen them, but the fight or whatever it was was taken place in a blind spot where it was hard to spot and maybe that's why the fight was taking place at that spot, who knows.

Jesus Shaves

HigginsJ wrote: »

And were they stationary unlit in the middle of the road on the ground?

He should have seen them and took evasive action, having bald tyres contributed to their deaths, If he had good tyres there's a great possibility that the deaths could have been avoided, And that's not even mentioning the fact that he shouldn't have been on the road anyway.
Whilst the 2 men shouldn't have been on the motorway fighting on the motorway a driver with a roadworthy car would have avoided the incident

hondasam

darokane wrote: »

Bull, Cars do have lights you know, He would have been able to see them and stop in time if his tyres weren't bald
No need to make excuses for him

That is pure rubbish, have you driven at night? ever encounter someone walking wearing dark clothes and no light?

Yakult

Kess73 wrote: »

I fail to see how the garda or his passenger could have seen then until the very last second. The car's headlights simply could not have picked up on the two men as the light would not have been able to shine in that direction until the car was on the motorway and straightened up from the left hand curve/turn that brings you onto the motorway.

+1. It could have happened to anyone.

MagicSean

mathepac wrote: »

The reports say nothing about "an out of date licence", they say "he had no licence", ever. If the charge was driving on an out-of-date licence, then the reports would say that.

No dispute with that and they paid the ultimate price for their stupidity.

BUT

On an unlit stretch of roadway, a Guard would surely be expected to obey at least some of the rules of the road and drive within the limits of his lights, full-beam or dimmed. But then apparently he had no regard for rules or laws.

With headlights in use, how is it possible to not see two man-sized objects in the carriageway? (I mean no disrespect to the two people killed by the lunatic Guard describing them this way, but it's not like the two bodies were the size of cigarette packets). It makes no sense. Either his car, his eyesight or some other defect contributed to the collision and has not (or at least not yet) been investigated.

Why is he not an Ex-Guard now?

It's the same charge wether you have an expired licence, disqualified licence or no licence.

Kess73

darokane wrote: »

Bull, Cars do have lights you know, He would have been able to see them and stop in time if his tyres weren't bald
No need to make excuses for him

The corner/bend where the fight was happening is one that is pretty blind to cars coming off the sliproad. If two grown men decide to roll about in a spot where an oncoming car cannot possibly see them due to the fact it's headlights will not be facing that direction until the last second, then even good tyres would not have made a difference.

People are assuming that the Garda's car was driving straight along the motorway when the accident happened. The garda's car was coming off of the sliproad, a curved sliproad that enters a motorway at a spot where the motorway itself is entering a pretty big bend.

hondasam

darokane wrote: »

He should have seen them and took evasive action, having bald tyres contributed to their deaths, If he had good tyres there's a great possibility that the deaths could have been avoided, And that's not even mentioning the fact that he shouldn't have been on the road anyway.
Whilst the 2 men shouldn't have been on the motorway fighting on the motorway a driver with a roadworthy car would have avoided the incident

I dunno how you could even type that.

why do accidents happen? why do brand new car with new tyres have difficulty stopping and avoiding hitting things?

MagicSean

darokane wrote: »

He should have seen them and took evasive action, having bald tyres contributed to their deaths, If he had good tyres there's a great possibility that the deaths could have been avoided, And that's not even mentioning the fact that he shouldn't have been on the road anyway.
Whilst the 2 men shouldn't have been on the motorway fighting on the motorway a driver with a roadworthy car would have avoided the incident

What a load of bull****. You've obviously not read any of the thread.

marco_polo

mathepac wrote: »

T
On an unlit stretch of roadway, a Guard would surely be expected to obey at least some of the rules of the road and drive within the limits of his lights, full-beam or dimmed. But then apparently he had no regard for rules or laws.

Imagine all these years I never realised that I should be jamming on the brakes everytime I dim the headlights.

Kess73

Yakult wrote: »

+1. It could have happened to anyone.

I know. As I said earlier I live within a few miles of that stretch and it is not a clear stretch for anyone coming down that sliproad from the Raheen side. The straight stretch of road arguement simply holds no water as the Garda's car was not coming off of a clear or straight stretch. Plus the two men could not have been seen by a car coming off the sliproad as they would have been blocked from view by solid rock and trees when the car was further back the slip road and by the crash barriers as the car tried to take the left turn at the end of the sliproad. At no point whilst on that sliproad would the garda's car have been travelling in a straight line alongside the motorway until the point where it gets to enter the motorway, so at no point would it's headlights have been able to light up where the men were fighting even if there was not a combination of solid rock, trees and finally a crash barrier in the way.

The second that car made the left turn onto the motorway and it's headlights came across those men would have been just as it began to hit them. The men on the ground had no chance imho, and neither did the driver of the car.

HigginsJ

Kess73 wrote: »

I know. As I said earlier I live within a few miles of that stretch and it is not a clear stretch for anyone coming down that sliproad from the Raheen side. The straight stretch of road arguement simply holds no water as the Garda's car was not coming off of a clear or straight stretch. Plus the two men could not have been seen by a car coming off the sliproad as they would have been blocked from view by solid rock and trees when the car was further back the slip road and by the crash barriers as the car tried to take the left turn at the end of the sliproad. At no point whilst on that sliproad would the garda's car have been travelling in a straight line alongside the motorway until the point where it gets to enter the motorway, so at no point would it's headlights have been able to light up where the men were fighting even if there was not a combination of solid rock, trees and finally a crash barrier in the way.

The second that car made the left turn onto the motorway and it's headlights came across those men would have been just as it began to hit them. The men on the ground had no chance imho, and neither did the driver of the car.

Do you know were the 2 guys in the same car and did a 3rd person in the car then drive off when the accident happened?

hondasam

HigginsJ wrote: »

Do you know were the 2 guys in the same car and did a 3rd person in the car then drive off when the accident happened?

http://www.google.ie/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=limerick%20motorway%20garda%20crash&source=web&cd=4&ved=0CE0QFjAD&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.independent.ie%2Fnational-news%2Fgardai-seek-identity-of-second-man-hit-by-offduty-officers-car-2495902.html&ei=SVaQT_-GDoKwhAfT9_SIBA&usg=AFQjCNEQ0VtS8P75gIin-qt_Am-IXsKRtw

I posted this earlier.

Canis Lupus

Was driving the other day and road was closed but barriers had fallen. Had to jump on the brakes and barely made it to a stop a foot from the fallen barriers. This was in broad daylight at around 50mph. No way in hell you'd see two people lying on the road at night in the dark in time to stop. Not a chance.

Who the hell even STOPS to have a fight on a motorway anyway. Darwin awards should be notified.