You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
...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 ? 😉
Well I wasn't going to out you on here, but if you will post an STW thread on FB (now you just need to work out which of your friends I'm friends with - shouldn't be too hard)!
tempted to add her on linkd in and send her a copy of that open letter but i doubt it would make anything any better
http://www.linkedin.com/pub/helen-measures/11/550/b66
that barrister on the other hand.......
http://www.4kbw.co.uk/members/janick-fielding/
another reason to have compulsory dashboard cameras? At the very least the courts would have another view point of what happened rather than just the defendants version of events?
lorry driver that nearly killed a motorcycling friend claimed that my mate had already fallen off his bike before hitting his lorry & therefore was not the lorry drivers fault, the defence team will try every little trick in the book & often the prosecuting team are not brilliantly organised 🙁 if you ever have the misfortune to be a witness to such an incident please make sure that you take pictures etc - it will feel very callous at the time but from experience it will pay dividends in court
What a very sad and frustrating story.
I just looked up Stonor and had a jaunt up and down the road on Streetview.
If whilst following a couple of cyclists, from [url= http://goo.gl/maps/Rypcq ]this angle[/url], some people might have been tempted to overtake. Anybody who thinks it would be OK is challenged to click on the 'move forward' arrow couple of times, then reconsider.
another reason to have compulsory dashboard cameras?
Or a reason for more cyclists to ride with helmetcams?
Not sure how much difference it would make though. Even in her defence version of events, she overtook when she couldn't see that the road was clear - an obvious breach of the Highway Code and commonsense - but for some reason that isn't even "careless" driving, never mind dangerous.
If whilst following a couple of cyclists, from this angle, some people might have been tempted to overtake.
Not a chance. Especially as it is a 30 there with parked cars and driveways onto the road.
But you're right - some would 🙁
I hope this woman is haunted for the rest of her life(if it was my girlfriend she had killed it wouldn't be very long). I suspect she so full of her own importance that she doesn't give a toss though.
we have less rights on the roads in the UK than a dog.
I just looked up Stonor and had a jaunt up and down the road on Streetview.
err A415 not B480 surely?
Not sure how much difference it would make though
A picture / video says a lot more than many words, in the case I was involved in (only went to magistrates court) it pretty much revolved around the google earth image I had downloaded & printed off to submit as evidence
that barrister on the other hand.......
He really is a nasty piece of work isn't he, I'm truly lost for words..........
No matter how narrow the defence, regardless of how implausible it may seem on the facts, if the client insists on running it then Janick will be only too pleased to fight it.
😐
He really is a nasty piece of work isn't he, I'm truly lost for words..........
Thing is, the English legal system is not about the truth, it is about who can put forward the best argument. In theory the best argument with the best evidence should be the truth. Sadly it is all too often not the case.
So for the English system to work you do need the Janick's to put forward arguments. But why would you want to do the work????
sounds like he would fit in well around here ..... no facts - no problem.
nope Aracer youll have to gie me a clue - short of the fact that all i have to go on is that you ride unicycles sometimes i would be looking for a long time but ill guess at TJ or Glupton.
Right first guess
try videoing a driver nearly killing you then getting the legal system to give a shit, if a [url= http://thecyclingsilk.blogspot.co.uk/2013/03/the-criminal-justice-system-only-as.html ]barrister[/url] can't manage it how are mere mortals going to get anything done?Not sure how much difference it would make thoughA picture / video says a lot more than many words,
Video evidence [i]might[/i] help if you actually make it to court, but then again you may get a jury like the one in the OP where, seemingly, they go against the evidence/common sense and instead side with someone like them (ie a driver)
He really is a nasty piece of work isn't he
Holy moley, some of the stuff he's defended is amazing.
He can't spell though.
[b]"Specailist CV"[/b]
From the lawyer link
R v Rattan [2009 – 10] – drink driving [Privately funded] - The defendant, a retired professor, had been found unconscious, in a pool of his own blood, on the floor of a property he was having renovated. After receiving some first aid from his builder, his next recollection, several hours later, was of being stopped by the police while driving a high performance BMW that was not his own, with an unknown young Polish blonde in the seat alongside him
😯
and again
R v Guittierez-Perez [2009] – causing death by dangerous driving [Privately funded] - Counsel was instructed specifically for the appeal of this difficult and tragic matter. The Appellant, for whom leave had been secured, had been sentenced to seven years imprisonment. The brief facts were that, after a failed attempt to commit suicide, she had driven her Range Rover while under the influence of drink and drugs until, after several minor accidents and near-misses, she careered into the barrier outside a primary school and crushed an infant in a pushchair to death in front of its mother and very young siblings.
😯
The man will take on any case
His job is to get people like that cleared.
Wow. Bet he sleeps well at night.
😯 I did not know defence lawyers did "look at some of the dodgy ****ers I've gotten off the hook" testimonials whilst hawking their services.Holy moley, some of the stuff he's defended is amazing.
I guess someone has to, seemingly*, boasting about it on your ad page is pretty grim tho.The man will take on any case
*maybe this is par for the course, I dunno, bit of a (very depressing) eye opener anyway
Anyway, I think we're digressing into that blaming one person thing again here..
I sometimes do deliveries to Kings Bench walk in Temple. If I see him I'll [Comment removed at the request of the barrister's chambers - Mod]
So for the English system to work you do need the Janick's to put forward arguments
I suspect it would work just fine without him and his like - he's just exploiting the system being broken.
I still don't understand how he can put something like that in his closing.
I'll probably get more time for that than killing someone in a car though.
But why would you want to do the work
For the Dollah!
I understand that we have to have a system where people accused of the most awful crimes have a right to defend themselves, and to question the accusers. That is fine. I have no problem with that. And it's worth remembering that plenty of innocent people are accused of doing terrible things. We shouldn't attack the people who defend those people.
But so many of the cases in Janick's CV seem to be "Yeah, the guy did the thing he was accused of, a person is dead because of it, but the police failed to tick a box on this form so I got him off. JUSTICE!". It's that that feels wrong to me. But then that's what he's paid to do, so why wouldn't he advertise the fact that he's good at it?
No problem- kick him soundly in the baws and then hire him to defend ye...
R v Razanskas [2009] – s.18 GBH - An utterly overwhelming case in which the defendant, a Lithuanian kickboxing champion, laid waste to an Afghanistani mini-cab office after employees of the establishment ill-advisedly took his bottle of vodka. Having allegedly taken-on everyone in sight, the defendant left the premises, though not before he had himself accrued significant injuries, including a shattered elbow from which the bones were protruding through skin and shirt. Leaving a lot of blood, other fluids and personal effects behind at the scene, he was said to have made his way home, affording the police a clear and sufficient trail of blood to follow. When the police arrived at his home address they found him naked (clothing already being in the washing machine), his girlfriend dressing his wounds and the knife that had punctured one victim’s lung lying on the floor beside his bed; the victim’s blood on the blade, the defendant’s on the handle. The defendant then went on the run for three years. The defence, in short, was that someone else did it. The defendant had professionally embarrassed one team of solicitors and counsel after the first trial and counsel secured a unanimous acquittal at the retrial. –Isleworth Crown Court.
That last one!!!
I know this part of the road well, in fact she (Dr Measures) probably passed me earlier as I was heading the other way at the time.
I came across the scene but the road was closed & had been for maybe no more than 10-15 minutes.
For my 2c Dr Measures has got away with it. It's a dangerous road & requires care by both a cyclist & motorist to use it. It's not quite straight but the curves that are on it are enough to restrict your view to warrant caution as traffic can & does move along it at speed. There are few decent passing places if any I'm honest.
A number of things jump out at me about this accident:
1. It is very close to a 30 zone (entering a village) otherwise being a 50. If Dr Measures was doing 50 when she overtook, I would ask the question had she really been driving with all due diligence? edit: Not much further along the road once it leaves the village it does straighten & provide a good overtaking place....
2. It really could have been me, there but for the grace of God?
3. I'm heartbroken for the lad & the family of his girlfriend. Truly.
Next time I'm on that road I reckon I'll stop & say hi to Ms Perinova & wish her well.
Dusty now.
I've read several of these and they are always incredibly sad.
This one has really shocked me. And really, really boiled my piss.
I have also had an interest in these cases since my accident in April.I was hit head on by a car traveling on the wrong side of the road. The driver drove off and was later found parked up in a nearby street. I suffered broken tibia in 2 places, broke fibula, broken femur, smashed hip in more than 6 pieces, broken ribs punctured lung and multiple lacerations and bruises, oh and a black eye. My helmet split and bike was in 3 pieces. The driver has shown no remorse and been obstructive to the police all the way through the investigation making official complaints against all the officers involved. The CPS have looked at all the witness statements and evidence and have after 6 months decided it will go to crown court. Charging the driver with 'causing serious injury by dangerous driving'. No date is set yet as it has to go to magistrates court first. Reading all of the stories of other cases I won't hold my breath. I'm still on crutches and won't be back at work until January, my wife and family have all suffered with stress as the police thought I wouldn't recover from the injuries at the time. The law is OK but needs upholding by the judge handing out relevant sentences and drivers need to be educated. I will be back on the MTB but as for road cycling I don't think so.
So very sad for the lady cyclist her freinds and ,boyfreind, and for the UTTER FAILURE OF THE JUSTICE SYSTEM, TO EITHER BAN HER FOR A LONG TIME OR INPRISON HER.
Wow chico - pleased to hear that you survived that shit !
Best of luck in court, if you get there
I've been trying to avoid reading this and getting wound up about another of these cases, but this one is just SO wrong. I'm not anti-car or anti-drivers, anyone can make a mistake etc but how can a jury not think what she did was blatantly and recklessly wrong?
What an utterly depressing read.
As for the lawyer, absolute scum...sickening sickening individual