Ridiculous claim by 'loophole' lawyer

[northwichcat]

Nick Freeman who's nicknamed 'Mr Loophole' is defending Simon Martins who killed Rabbi Hyman Steinberg when driving at 42mph in a 30mph zone. He said the cause of accident was not due to his client speeding but the fact the Rabbi was wearing traditional Jewish black clothing and said if the law forced pedestrians to wear reflective clothing the accident would have been avoided.

 

[yorkie]

Nick Freeman and Simon Martins are clearly scumbags with dubious morals.

Simon Martins should man up and take some responsibility for his pathetic actions, I hope he gets the sentence he deserves. People like them and Gary Hart are an embarrassment to the human race.

 

[IanD]

The morals of Nick Freeman and Simon Martins are questionable and the cause of the "accident" (I believe the police no longer refer to road traffic accident but would rather use the term road traffic collision or some such) was definitely not the fault of the deceased.

However, advising people to make themselves visible whilst walking around at night is pretty reasonable. Indeed, the Govenrment spent a fortune in the seventies on their 'Wear something white at night' campaign. It's just common sense really - make yourself as visible as possible (without necesarily looking ridiculous) for your own safety.

 

[northwichcat]

However, advising people to make themselves visible whilst walking around at night is pretty reasonable. Indeed, the Govenrment spent a fortune in the seventies on their 'Wear something white at night' campaign. It's just common sense really - make yourself as visible as possible (without necesarily looking ridiculous) for your own safety.

I agree that wearing something to make yourself visible could help yourself be seen. However, hi-vis stuff doesn't stand out all that much at night unless you in direct light from streetlights or headlights. If someone's driving at a stupid speed then they'll still see the person too late to react.

 

[Chrisgr31]

Not read the case or the reports and know nothing about the case however 42mph in a 30mph limit area in not necessarially a ridiculous speed. It might be an illegal speed but whether it is a ridiculous speed will depend on other factors to do with location, properties, time of day etc.

 

[Emyr]

A vehicle at 42mph has twice as much kinetic energy to deal with in an emergency than the same vehicle at 30mph.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Not read the case or the reports and know nothing about the case however 42mph in a 30mph limit area in not necessarially a ridiculous speed. It might be an illegal speed but whether it is a ridiculous speed will depend on other factors to do with location, properties, time of day etc.

It is an illegal speed. The law is as it is written.

 

[mbonwick]

I don't think anyone is arguing that the speed is illegal, just whether its 'ridiculous' or not.

Call me a cynic, but I can't help feeling that there'd be less outcry on here if the deceased had been wearing non-religious black clothing.

 

[northwichcat]

It is an illegal speed. The law is as it is written.

Yes any circular road sign with a red border must be obeyed by law.

Only one like this: http://www.drivingtesttips.biz/images/recommended-speed-limit.jpg is an advisory maximum.

 

[IanD]

I don't think anyone is arguing that the speed is illegal, just whether its 'ridiculous' or not.

Call me a cynic, but I can't help feeling that there'd be less outcry on here if the deceased had been wearing non-religious black clothing.

"Outcry" - what on earth are you on about??