A very sad day for justice in Tasmania

[silentC]

The last one at that same spot (2007) was charges dropped due to mental illness.

I used to cross the road at that spot every morning to catch a train. It's not a great intersection and people drive too fast. It's a shame they didn't move the bus stop or put in bollards or something after the last fatal there. Very sad for the family.

[jules21]

it depends on the circumstances - what actions led her to lose control and end up in a shop? if she was attempting a dangerous manoeuvre then this may have led to the more serious charges than applied for the cyclist's death. however, if they've just reasoned "that's outrageous! she has killed a pedestrian" then it would seem to be a double standard.

[find_bruce]

it depends on the circumstances - what actions led her to lose control and end up in a shop? if she was attempting a dangerous manoeuvre then this may have led to the more serious charges than applied for the cyclist's death. however, if they've just reasoned "that's outrageous! she has killed a pedestrian" then it would seem to be a double standard.

Essentially the same charges to those in relation to the driver seriously injuring 7 cyclists on Southern Cross Drive in March 2014, except the cyclists were fortunately not killed.

One interesting difference is that it took nearly 3 months to charge the driver in the March collision but only 1 day in this latest matter.

[jules21]

i see the delay in charges for the SC drive incident as a good thing - police were willing to ensure they investigated properly.

the tassie one is a mystery though. sorry tassie people, but i wonder if it was just simple incompetence/prejudice by tassie authorities.

[silentC]

what actions led her to lose control and end up in a shop?

There is a dog leg in Railway Pde. I assume she failed to negotiate it after taking off from the lights and it's more or less a straight line from the intersection to the chemist window via the bus stop.

[biker jk]

The last one at that same spot (2007) was charges dropped due to mental illness.

I used to cross the road at that spot every morning to catch a train. It's not a great intersection and people drive too fast. It's a shame they didn't move the bus stop or put in bollards or something after the last fatal there. Very sad for the family.

She was a refugee from North Africa and claimed she was traumatised by the civil war such that she mistook the accelerator for the brake. Don't we have a great legal system?

[human909]

The crux of the problem is that sending otherwise productive members of society for genuine negligence and accidents isn't really that useful. However where the situation is common place and the consequences can be severe we need to take the offense seriously and punish it appropriately.

There were hundreds of people "accidently" being killed by drunk drivers before people said enough is enough we need to dissuade this activity with extremely harsh penalties. We have also cracked down on speed. The consequence of all this is that if you kill someone negligently with you car when speeding or drinking the penalties are severe. If you kill somebody negligently when those aren't involve the penalties are pathetic. Quite frankly we have focused too much on speed and drink and not enough on plain negligence.

Close passing cyclists is no different to drink driving. 999 times out of 1000 there is no harm. However it is the 0.1% of the time that the consequences are devastating.

[hunch]

Funny, they just had the injustice of bail for the driver and the council inaction on making the "dangerous" bus stop safer on ch7 news.

Talking head has the broadcast van in the background, parked on the bend, in a no parking zone and not observing the required distance from a bus stop, creating a sight line hazard due to the size of the thing, good work!

[michael_w]

i see the delay in charges for the SC drive incident as a good thing - police were willing to ensure they investigated properly.

the tassie one is a mystery though. sorry tassie people, but i wonder if it was just simple incompetence/prejudice by tassie authorities.

This (SC Drive incident) is meant to be heard in the Downing Centre this month. Given that we are close to the end of the month does anybody know if this has already slipped through or when it is scheduled for? Or has it been delayed again?

[Derny Driver]

Tamanian court again ...
http://www.themercury.com.au/news/scale ... 7082821057" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[jules21]

Tamanian court again ...
http://www.themercury.com.au/news/scale ... 7082821057" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

surely this is illegal?

Although police thought he was drunk, he passed a breath test. He refused a blood test in hospital.

[biker jk]

Tamanian court again ...
http://www.themercury.com.au/news/scale ... 7082821057" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Amazing! I repeat my argument that you can not give judges discretion on sentencing without accountability for their decisions. This system of discretion without accountability will continue to deliver unjust sentencing.

[Mulger bill]

Well, that's my dinner wasted.

I've tried to put my thoughts down for a few minutes now and each time I've reminded myself that the words would force me to give myself a temporary ban.
Lets just say that that judge could be used to tighten screws OR break a chain with equal facility...

[yugyug]

That judge is a hypocritical f****w*t. How dare he patronize the victim by claiming he can't possibly do justice to his suffering, yet still let the aggressor off on the lightest of sentencing. Grrr. It's clear the aggressor lied to police and was obviously high on (probably) some kind of driving impairing downer that doesn't show up on a breath test but leaves him cogent enough to refuse a blood test. My guess is benzos, but it could have been heroin or anything.

[Mububban]

Ugh. Legal system vs justice system. Repeat offender, lying, apparently off his face, but let's let him get off effectively scott free. Ggggrrrr!!!!!

[myforwik]

The thing I hate about this isn't the lite punishment, its the fact that he and probably 99% of drivers do not drive for the unexpected. Put a brick wall in the middle of the road, and this guy would come around a corner and smash into it and kill himself. Most drivers drive as if the road is clear, and only expect a vehicle doing slightly slower than them to be the only obsticle. This is the number one reason why our roads are still so dangerous.

As for the light justice... well what do you expect? THe maximum sentence possible was only 12 months. Justice was over before he even walked into the court room, having a maximum punishment of 1 year for killing someone is ridiculous. Apparently in most states if you kill someone accidently in your car, its only 1 or 2 years. You will only actually go to prison if you were on drugs or drink driving.

[exadios]

The thing I hate about this isn't the lite punishment, its the fact that he and probably 99% of drivers do not drive for the unexpected. Put a brick wall in the middle of the road, and this guy would come around a corner and smash into it and kill himself. Most drivers drive as if the road is clear, and only expect a vehicle doing slightly slower than them to be the only obsticle. This is the number one reason why our roads are still so dangerous.

As for the light justice... well what do you expect? THe maximum sentence possible was only 12 months. Justice was over before he even walked into the court room, having a maximum punishment of 1 year for killing someone is ridiculous. Apparently in most states if you kill someone accidently in your car, its only 1 or 2 years. You will only actually go to prison if you were on drugs or drink driving.

Not driving for the unexpected is a matter of training and testing - which is where I believe the emphasis should lie.

[Shred11]

Just in case you thought the above sentence was a once-off mistake, today we have another one:

http://www.examiner.com.au/story/263660 ... urt/?cs=95

A guy who mowed down a cyclist in near perfect driving conditions, on a wide, straight section of road, where the cyclist was riding on the road shoulder on the left-hand side of the left lane. At that time of day, the Sun would have been from behind the driver's left shoulder, so no questions of "the Sun was in my eyes" as a defence. The vehicle operator (definitely not a "driver") was sentenced to... 4 months jail, wholly suspended and 18 months disqualification. I see no mention of a fine.

If memory serves me correctly, here's the section of road that the offence occurred on:
https://www.google.com.au/maps/(AT)-41.396 ... 2PCQdg!2e0

Surely a driver who kills someone in this situation should _never_ get behind the wheel again. If he wasn't texting and it wasn't deliberate, then how the heck did this happen?

[EDIT: cyclist was riding on the road, his training partner was on the road shoulder]

[human909]

Not only is the suspended sentence a travesty. But 4 months for killing somebody!?

Reckless P platers who wrap their car around a tree and kill a mate get multi year sentances. But of course cyclists lives aren't worth the same as those in cars.

[Mulger bill]

Well that's another count of contempt of court I'm facing...

System be broke but is it the laws that are wrong or the actions of the beak?

[Shred11]

The story keeps getting better. Updated article in today's Exaggerator:

http://www.examiner.com.au/story/263854 ... oids-jail/

Fourteen seconds and 400 metres was the estimated time and distance that driver Timothy Wayne Yole had to see the two cyclists in front of him.

The weather was fine, the visibility excellent and traffic light, but Yole failed to see any cyclist until he ran into the back of one of them.

Trevallyn’s Lewis Hendey, 21, wearing a helmet and brightly coloured cycling attire, was on a training ride with his best mate on the West Tamar Highway at Riverside.

(The offender) had three fines for speeding, two for seatbelt offences and one for driving without reasonable consideration for other road users.

In any fatal traffic incident, as a society, we need to learn from the events that caused the crash and ensure that it never happens again. In this case, the crash wasn't due to bad weather or road conditions. It wasn't due to any mistake on the cyclist's part and it wasn't due to any mechanical defect in the car. It was caused purely by the incompetence of the person behind the wheel of the car. Not only that, the offender's prior convictions indicate a cavalier attitude to road safety. The prior conviction for "driving without reasonable consideration for other road users" is particularly damaging. Surely, this person should never, ever drive any form of motorised vehicle again... Maybe I'd make an exception for a mobility scooter when he's old enough to be in a nursing home.

[il padrone]

My take on this - there was intent to do harm. Rider in the shoulder, rider in the lane. "How dare he take road space instead of riding in the 'bike lane'. I'll learn 'im".

A close shave that went arse-up for all (except the driver it seems).

[Shred11]

A close shave that went arse-up for all (except the driver it seems).

I was discussing this with a friend this morning. He said the same thing - given the location of the damage to the ute and other factors, it seems to be the only logical explanation. This was most likely a "punishment pass" that went wrong.

I can only hope that the Director of Public Prosecutions appeals this inadequate sentence.

[il padrone]

‘‘No evidence of any evasive action by Mr Yole shows he was not paying attention.

‘‘This was no momentary lapse.’’

"....shows a deliberate act" is the other view to be concluded.

[find_bruce]

I can only hope that the Director of Public Prosecutions appeals this inadequate sentence.

Sorry to dash your hopes, but there is almost no chance of that happening for two reasons.

1) The driver was convicted of negligent driving causing grievous bodily harm

32. Reckless driving
...
(2B) A person must not cause grievous bodily harm to another person by driving a motor vehicle on a public street negligently.
Penalty:
In the case of –
(a) a first offence, a fine not exceeding 10 penalty units [$1,300] and imprisonment for a term not exceeding 6 months; and
(b) a subsequent offence, a fine not exceeding 20 penalty units [$2,600) and imprisonment for a term not exceeding 1 year.

It sounds like his first offence - for negligent driving that is - so the maximum is still only 6 months.

The better directed question is in the circumstances, why was he only charged with negligent driving and not reckless driving, which carries a maximum penalty of imprisonment for 2 years and a fine of $2,600

2) Tasmania's Director of Public Prosecutions, Tim Ellis SC, was himself found guilty of causing death by negligent driving "by driving his vehicle 1 to 1.5kms on the incorrect side of the road leading to the collision"

Ellis is appealing that conviction

A further complication is that his former barrister has since been appointed Solicitor General, the post that would traditionally advise the government on whether Ellis should remain DPP if his conviction stands.