IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Trials and Errors
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 18th March 2023, 08:35 AM   #641
Bob001
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: US of A
Posts: 16,613
Originally Posted by Gulliver Foyle View Post
Part of living in a free society is not causing offence to others.

Most societies have enough sense to not copy the US's obsession with free speech absolutism.

Going to jail if you offend others is pretty much the definition of a society that is not free. In Iran women are being tortured because they are "offending" their elders by not wearing scarves. In Russia people are getting shipped to the Gulag for criticizing Putin. And in the U.S., state legislators are trying to send people to jail for providing information about abortion. If someone is injured by speech, he can avail himself of the courts: Dominion vs. Fox. But criminalizing speech itself is a dangerous path. Sensible people don't want the State to have so much power.
Bob001 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th March 2023, 10:03 AM   #642
Thermal
Penultimate Amazing
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: In the Troll Ignoring Section
Posts: 22,645
Originally Posted by Bob001 View Post
I got that. I even noted it. I just don't think "shouting and swearing" by themselves merit a long jail sentence. A weekend? Maybe. But 40 weeks is absolutely crazy.
Shouting and swearing, standalone, could easily be simple assault here in the States (using the common standard of putting you in fear of imminent harm etc).Coupled with moving aggressively towards a person while flailing arms around would certainly pass muster for assault in many cases. The prosecution likely didn't bother with the lesser charges, as the manslaughter suffices.
__________________
"Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect" -Mark Twain
"Half of what he said meant something else, and the other half didn't mean anything at all" -Rosencrantz, on Hamlet
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th March 2023, 10:27 AM   #643
Bob001
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: US of A
Posts: 16,613
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Shouting and swearing, standalone, could easily be simple assault here in the States (using the common standard of putting you in fear of imminent harm etc).Coupled with moving aggressively towards a person while flailing arms around would certainly pass muster for assault in many cases. The prosecution likely didn't bother with the lesser charges, as the manslaughter suffices.

We're not talking about the pedestrian. We're talking about this guy.
https://www.herefordtimes.com/news/1...earing-street/

Sounds like an obnoxious drunk, nothing more.
Bob001 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th March 2023, 10:38 AM   #644
GlennB
Loggerheaded, earth-vexing fustilarian
 
GlennB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Wales
Posts: 29,730
Originally Posted by Bob001 View Post
We're not talking about the pedestrian. We're talking about this guy.
https://www.herefordtimes.com/news/1...earing-street/

Sounds like an obnoxious drunk, nothing more.
"In 1968, in the case of Powell v. Texas, the Texas law against public intoxication was challenged in the Supreme Court of the United States for alleged violation of Eighth Amendment, which forbids cruel and unusual punishment. The court upheld the law, ruling that criminalizing public intoxication was neither cruel nor unusual. "
GlennB is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th March 2023, 11:08 AM   #645
Thermal
Penultimate Amazing
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: In the Troll Ignoring Section
Posts: 22,645
Originally Posted by Bob001 View Post
We're not talking about the pedestrian. We're talking about this guy.
https://www.herefordtimes.com/news/1...earing-street/

Sounds like an obnoxious drunk, nothing more.
But it ties back in to the OP
__________________
"Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect" -Mark Twain
"Half of what he said meant something else, and the other half didn't mean anything at all" -Rosencrantz, on Hamlet
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th March 2023, 04:03 AM   #646
P.J. Denyer
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 9,142
Originally Posted by GlennB View Post
"In 1968, in the case of Powell v. Texas, the Texas law against public intoxication was challenged in the Supreme Court of the United States for alleged violation of Eighth Amendment, which forbids cruel and unusual punishment. The court upheld the law, ruling that criminalizing public intoxication was neither cruel nor unusual. "
The Supreme Court of the United States isn't going to have any bearing on that case.
__________________
"I know my brain cannot tell me what to think." - Scorpion

"Nebulous means Nebulous" - Adam Hills
P.J. Denyer is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th March 2023, 04:20 AM   #647
jimbob
Uncritical "thinker"
Moderator
 
jimbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 30,070
Originally Posted by P.J. Denyer View Post
The Supreme Court of the United States isn't going to have any bearing on that case.
It is to the derail as to whether it was appropriate to jail someone who had been given a suspended sentence for disorderly behaviour and who broke the terms of his sentence.

Especially whether it's the sort of thing that wouldn't happen in the US.
__________________
OECD healthcare spending
Public/Compulsory Expenditure on healthcare
https://data.oecd.org/chart/60Tt

Every year since 1990 the US Public healthcare spending has been greater than the UK as a proportion of GDP. More US Tax goes to healthcare than the UK
jimbob is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th March 2023, 04:39 AM   #648
GlennB
Loggerheaded, earth-vexing fustilarian
 
GlennB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Wales
Posts: 29,730
Originally Posted by P.J. Denyer View Post
The Supreme Court of the United States isn't going to have any bearing on that case.
I was responding to Bob001's suggestion that 'free speech' by abusive drunks in public in the USA isn't subject to laws.
GlennB is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th March 2023, 05:51 AM   #649
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 44,144
Originally Posted by Bob001 View Post
I got that. I even noted it. I just don't think "shouting and swearing" by themselves merit a long jail sentence. A weekend? Maybe. But 40 weeks is absolutely crazy.
This is "The January 6th Rioters were just 'walking around a building'" level of stupid disingenuous.

This is "Jeffry Dahmer, I mean come on how can you arrest a guy for just eating a meal?" level.
__________________
"If everyone in the room says water is wet and I say it's dry that makes me smart because at least I'm thinking for myself!" - The Proudly Wrong.
JoeMorgue is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st March 2023, 08:26 AM   #650
jeremyp
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: ZZ9 Plural Z Alpha
Posts: 2,804
Originally Posted by jimbob View Post
And she didn't bother to even try to do anything to help afterwards.
I'm not sure that that is the case. I have seen a report that says she did offer assistance but was told to keep out of it by other passers by who were rendering aid. She then decided to leave the scene without waiting for emergency services (which is probably illegal in itself).

I can't locate the article where I read that, unfortunately, so take it with a pinch of salt but I don't think it's a 100% given that she "didn't bother to even try to do anything to help".
jeremyp is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st March 2023, 08:33 AM   #651
jeremyp
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: ZZ9 Plural Z Alpha
Posts: 2,804
Originally Posted by Gulliver Foyle View Post
Having finally watched the footage, there's definitely a push there. Grey plants her right leg solidly and then pushes off it in the direction of her victim and all she needed was a slight contact.

That was deliberate and premeditated.
Originally Posted by Gulliver Foyle View Post
If the video had shown the point of contact the peelers would have charged her with murder at the very least. Because that's missing there wasn't enough to bring such charges.
Wait, what?

I could understand these two messages if they were the other way around.

Your first message is either incorrect or the evidence was not solid enough that the rozzers felt they could get a conviction for murder.
jeremyp is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st March 2023, 08:59 AM   #652
Segnosaur
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Canada, eh?
Posts: 19,906
Originally Posted by Bob001 View Post
She is also mentally and physically disabled and has lived in supervised care all her life.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/she-wont-...124113262.html
Grey has cerebral palsy, is partially blind, suffers from cognitive issues and has been living in shelter accommodation for most of her life.

This is just not someone who belongs in prison. She's already in a state facility. House arrest with an ankle monitor would make whatever point needs to be made.
Cerebral Palsy is largely a situation that affects motor control. It might explain why she had control of only one arm, but does not necessarily indicate any sort of mental defect that would affect judgement.

Partly blind, but as others have pointed out, she was still able to see the cyclist from at least a little ways away.

Not sure what they mean by 'cognitive issues', since it seems to be pretty vague. Which could mean impairment in memory or concentration (which wouldn't explain why she felt entitled to claim the entire sidewalk as her domain) or judgement (which might explain her actions, but later on she felt compelled to lie in an attempt to cover up her actions... so, probably not.)

Being in a 'facility' doesn't really mean much if we don't know the reason why she was there. An individual could have full control over their mental faculties yet still be in such a facility because of physical impairments.

So nothing in her medical situation or living condition indicates that her "claim the entire path" attitude was based on anything but a bad attitude.
__________________
Trust me, I know what I'm doing. - Sledgehammer

I'm Mary Poppins Y'all! - Yondu

We are Groot - Groot
Segnosaur is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st March 2023, 09:29 AM   #653
Segnosaur
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Canada, eh?
Posts: 19,906
Originally Posted by Bob001 View Post
If the cyclist had felt threatened she could have chosen to walk her bike
As others have already pointed out....

If a cyclist feels threatened by some pedestrian acting in an aggressive manner, WHY WOULD THEY WANT TO MAXIMIZE THE TIME THEY MIGHT INTERACT WITH THAT PERSON?

The smart thing to do would be to get by them as quickly as possible, rather than stop and have them potentially cause more harassment or conflict.

This has been pointed out to you by other posters multiple times, yet you seem to ignore the point. Why is that?
Quote:
or pass at the pedestrian's other side
1) The pedestrian was walking down the middle of the path, which already reduced the amount of space the cyclist had to pass.

2) How would the cyclist not have known that the pedestrian would not have started waving their other arm as they go by as well? (The pedestrian did not have full control of both arms, but the cyclist would not have known that.)

3) A bike has limited ability to make quick lateral movements. If the cyclist was already on the right side, trying to swerve to get around a belligerent pedestrian on the left side would have risked collision with the pedestrian, or collision with the fence.

Ultimately you are demanding the cyclist take actions to deal with the pedestrian (dismount their bike, change sides, etc.) all of which either require additional effort on their part, or have their own risks. On the other hand, for the pedestrian to have avoided the accident, all they would have to do is.... stop being a jerk by waving your hand in a way that interferes with others. Not sure about you, but I am more than capable of walking down a sidewalk without waving my arms around in a way that might potentially hit others.
__________________
Trust me, I know what I'm doing. - Sledgehammer

I'm Mary Poppins Y'all! - Yondu

We are Groot - Groot
Segnosaur is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st March 2023, 09:35 AM   #654
Segnosaur
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Canada, eh?
Posts: 19,906
Originally Posted by Bob001 View Post
I got that. I even noted it. I just don't think "shouting and swearing" by themselves merit a long jail sentence. A weekend? Maybe. But 40 weeks is absolutely crazy.
A little context is important here.

Your right to engage in free speech needs to be tempered with a person's right NOT to hear your speech if they chose not to (i.e. I shouldn't have to listen to you shouting if I am in a public place or on my own property.)

And before complaining about a "log jail sentence", you should wonder... was this a first offence or a repeat offender? (If its a repeat offence, then obviously the short sentence was not enough to deter their behavior.)
__________________
Trust me, I know what I'm doing. - Sledgehammer

I'm Mary Poppins Y'all! - Yondu

We are Groot - Groot
Segnosaur is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st March 2023, 10:25 AM   #655
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 44,144
Originally Posted by Segnosaur View Post
As others have already pointed out....

If a cyclist feels threatened by some pedestrian acting in an aggressive manner, WHY WOULD THEY WANT TO MAXIMIZE THE TIME THEY MIGHT INTERACT WITH THAT PERSON?
People treat "fear" as just a magic word to throw out and seem to think you can just say "I'm scared" and then not act in any logical, congruent, or consistent way that a person who was actually scared would act.

If I'm scared of something I don't suddenly turn my disability dial up to 11 and move towards it waving my hands and screeching.
__________________
"If everyone in the room says water is wet and I say it's dry that makes me smart because at least I'm thinking for myself!" - The Proudly Wrong.
JoeMorgue is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st March 2023, 12:15 PM   #656
RolandRat
Graduate Poster
 
RolandRat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Essex UK
Posts: 1,655
If anyone had a right to be scared, it was the 70 year old cyclist being confronted by an angry abusive individual swinging their arms around.
RolandRat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st March 2023, 12:17 PM   #657
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 44,144
Originally Posted by RolandRat View Post
If anyone had a right to be scared, it was the 70 year old cyclist being confronted by an angry abusive individual swinging their arms around.
The fact that the victim was 70 and the aggressor was only 3 year older than me is something the apologist have heavily glossed over in this thread.
__________________
"If everyone in the room says water is wet and I say it's dry that makes me smart because at least I'm thinking for myself!" - The Proudly Wrong.

Last edited by JoeMorgue; 21st March 2023 at 12:25 PM.
JoeMorgue is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st March 2023, 12:21 PM   #658
jimbob
Uncritical "thinker"
Moderator
 
jimbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 30,070
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
The fact that the victim was 70 and the aggressor was only a 3 year older than me is something the apologist have heavily glossed over in this thread.
77 but yes.
__________________
OECD healthcare spending
Public/Compulsory Expenditure on healthcare
https://data.oecd.org/chart/60Tt

Every year since 1990 the US Public healthcare spending has been greater than the UK as a proportion of GDP. More US Tax goes to healthcare than the UK
jimbob is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st March 2023, 09:53 PM   #659
Pulvinar
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 1,473
I didn't see it mentioned here, but I wonder if the pedestrian had had previous bad encounters with cyclists, or this one in particular. Knocked down or something.

Not that it should excuse her behavior, but it might explain it.
Pulvinar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd March 2023, 05:06 AM   #660
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 44,144
Originally Posted by Pulvinar View Post
I didn't see it mentioned here, but I wonder if the pedestrian had had previous bad encounters with cyclists, or this one in particular. Knocked down or something.

Not that it should excuse her behavior, but it might explain it.
There's plenty of previous cases of HER harassing cyclists. The Judge specifically called her out for acting like she owned the sidewalk.
__________________
"If everyone in the room says water is wet and I say it's dry that makes me smart because at least I'm thinking for myself!" - The Proudly Wrong.
JoeMorgue is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd March 2023, 08:09 AM   #661
kookbreaker
Evil Fokker
 
kookbreaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 14,542
Having now read this thread, it reminds me of an email list I was on for frequent cyclists on the river pathways in my city. One of the ongoing email threads was the "Cast of characters" which was a list of heroes, villains, and oddballs who anyone who rode the trail would encounter sooner or later. This aggressive woman reminds me of one of the villains but that person never took such overt antics.
__________________
www.spectrum-scientifics.com <-
kookbreaker is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd March 2023, 08:38 AM   #662
Nessie
Penultimate Amazing
 
Nessie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 14,758
Originally Posted by Segnosaur View Post
As others have already pointed out....

If a cyclist feels threatened by some pedestrian acting in an aggressive manner, WHY WOULD THEY WANT TO MAXIMIZE THE TIME THEY MIGHT INTERACT WITH THAT PERSON?

The smart thing to do would be to get by them as quickly as possible, rather than stop and have them potentially cause more harassment or conflict.

This has been pointed out to you by other posters multiple times, yet you seem to ignore the point. Why is that?

1) The pedestrian was walking down the middle of the path, which already reduced the amount of space the cyclist had to pass.

2) How would the cyclist not have known that the pedestrian would not have started waving their other arm as they go by as well? (The pedestrian did not have full control of both arms, but the cyclist would not have known that.)

3) A bike has limited ability to make quick lateral movements. If the cyclist was already on the right side, trying to swerve to get around a belligerent pedestrian on the left side would have risked collision with the pedestrian, or collision with the fence.

Ultimately you are demanding the cyclist take actions to deal with the pedestrian (dismount their bike, change sides, etc.) all of which either require additional effort on their part, or have their own risks. On the other hand, for the pedestrian to have avoided the accident, all they would have to do is.... stop being a jerk by waving your hand in a way that interferes with others. Not sure about you, but I am more than capable of walking down a sidewalk without waving my arms around in a way that might potentially hit others.
For it to be manslaughter, there has to be an act that is reckless. Deliberately pushing the cyclist into the road, would obviously be reckless. Shouting and gesticulating at them, not so. A slight contact, if that did happen, not so.

Plenty of cyclists have been shouted at to get off pavements, I was as a kid, without people dying, so it is not an obviously reckless act, unlike say shoving the cyclist into the road.
__________________
Audiophile/biker/sceptic
Nessie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd March 2023, 08:45 AM   #663
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 44,144
Plenty of people run stop signs without killing someone. It doesn't mean that running a stop sign can never be reckless.

The fact that someone died isn't some minor side detail.
__________________
"If everyone in the room says water is wet and I say it's dry that makes me smart because at least I'm thinking for myself!" - The Proudly Wrong.
JoeMorgue is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd March 2023, 09:27 AM   #664
Nessie
Penultimate Amazing
 
Nessie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 14,758
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
Plenty of people run stop signs without killing someone. It doesn't mean that running a stop sign can never be reckless.

The fact that someone died isn't some minor side detail.
Shouting and gesticulating at someone, is normally regarded as low level crime. In Scotland it would be a breach of the peace or S38 CJL(S)A 2010. It is not normally dealt with as a serious crime, such as culpable and reckless conduct.

If she did make contact, it would be a simple assault at best, and certainly not a serious assault. Even then, I doubt mens rea could be proved, as the contact could have been unintentional.

I think to be reckless to prove manslaughter, there would need to be a shove, to push the cyclist into the road.
__________________
Audiophile/biker/sceptic
Nessie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd March 2023, 09:29 AM   #665
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 44,144
Originally Posted by Nessie View Post
Shouting and gesticulating at someone, is normally regarded as low level crime.
And running a stop sign will just get you a ticket, while running a stop sign and running over a pedestrian will not.

Again the fact that she killed someone makes a difference. This is exactly zero percent hard to understand.

"Jesus I fire my pistol on the gun range all the time, but the one time I hit the neighbor with it it's magically different!"

Yes if you do the same thing over and over but one time it kills someone legally that one time is different. This is not hard to understand.
__________________
"If everyone in the room says water is wet and I say it's dry that makes me smart because at least I'm thinking for myself!" - The Proudly Wrong.
JoeMorgue is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd March 2023, 09:34 AM   #666
Segnosaur
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Canada, eh?
Posts: 19,906
Originally Posted by Nessie View Post
For it to be manslaughter, there has to be an act that is reckless. Deliberately pushing the cyclist into the road, would obviously be reckless. Shouting and gesticulating at them, not so. A slight contact, if that did happen, not so.
Do you really think people LIKE getting hit? Do you think cyclists are all running around thinking "I hope someone smacks me in the face when I ride by them"?

If someone is waving their arms in a way that is close enough to actually make contact, I am not going to think "Well, I WANT to get hit" or "Well, obviously I can tell this is only going to be a light contact". I am going to assume that whatever this person is doing CAN cause harm if I don't take action. (Which in this case involved swerving in a way that caused them to go into traffic.)

Heck, for all we know the only reason there wasn't a push or a more serious hit was because the cyclist ended up going into the street.

Once again:

Pedestrian acts combative.
You: The cyclist was to blame because they didn't react in a way that I approve of in dealing with a jerk
Others: Maybe the pedestrian shouldn't have acted like a jerk
__________________
Trust me, I know what I'm doing. - Sledgehammer

I'm Mary Poppins Y'all! - Yondu

We are Groot - Groot
Segnosaur is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd March 2023, 09:44 AM   #667
kookbreaker
Evil Fokker
 
kookbreaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 14,542
Didn't we already establish that there was contact between the pedestrian and the cyclist (per the pedestrian's admission)?
__________________
www.spectrum-scientifics.com <-
kookbreaker is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd March 2023, 09:48 AM   #668
Nessie
Penultimate Amazing
 
Nessie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 14,758
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
And running a stop sign will just get you a ticket, while running a stop sign and running over a pedestrian will not.

Again the fact that she killed someone makes a difference. This is exactly zero percent hard to understand.

"Jesus I fire my pistol on the gun range all the time, but the one time I hit the neighbor with it it's magically different!"

Yes if you do the same thing over and over but one time it kills someone legally that one time is different. This is not hard to understand.
There has to be reasonable belief an act is inherently dangerous. From the CPS

https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidanc...d-manslaughter

"In judging whether the act was dangerous the test is not did the accused recognise that it was dangerous but would all sober and reasonable people recognise its danger."

Running stop signs and firing guns are obviously and inherently dangerous, which is why both are associated with a risk of death. Shouting and gesticulating is not normally associated with a risk of death. People do not die by being shouted and pointed out, they do by running stop signs and being shot.

If you were with someone who shouted and gesticulated at another, would you say to them, bloody hell, you could have killed someone? I bet you would say that if you were the passenger in a car that ran a stop sign.
__________________
Audiophile/biker/sceptic
Nessie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd March 2023, 09:52 AM   #669
Nessie
Penultimate Amazing
 
Nessie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 14,758
Originally Posted by kookbreaker View Post
Didn't we already establish that there was contact between the pedestrian and the cyclist (per the pedestrian's admission)?
From the CPS

https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidanc...d-manslaughter

"Unlawful act manslaughter requires proof that the defendant committed a relevant crime, with the mens rea for that crime. The unlawful act must therefore be criminal in nature and must also be dangerous - R v Larkin [1943] KB 174."

There was no mens rea that the pedestrian intended to hit the cyclist as all she was doing was gesticulating. Even if there was contact, it was a minor one that in isolation, would be a minor, simple assault that would never be prosecuted.
__________________
Audiophile/biker/sceptic
Nessie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd March 2023, 09:53 AM   #670
Disbelief
Illuminator
 
Disbelief's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,204
Originally Posted by Nessie View Post
There has to be reasonable belief an act is inherently dangerous. From the CPS

https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidanc...d-manslaughter

"In judging whether the act was dangerous the test is not did the accused recognise that it was dangerous but would all sober and reasonable people recognise its danger."

Running stop signs and firing guns are obviously and inherently dangerous, which is why both are associated with a risk of death. Shouting and gesticulating is not normally associated with a risk of death. People do not die by being shouted and pointed out, they do by running stop signs and being shot.

If you were with someone who shouted and gesticulated at another, would you say to them, bloody hell, you could have killed someone? I bet you would say that if you were the passenger in a car that ran a stop sign.
We know for a fact it was dangerous because contact was admittedly made and the cyclist is dead.
__________________
Zensmack (LastChild, Laughing Assassin, RazetheFlag, Wastrel, TruthbyDecree) - Working his way up the sock puppet chain, trying to overtake P'Doh. Or, are they the same?

Quote me where I said conspiracists use evidence. - mchapman
Disbelief is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd March 2023, 09:53 AM   #671
kookbreaker
Evil Fokker
 
kookbreaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 14,542
Tell it to the judge then.
__________________
www.spectrum-scientifics.com <-
kookbreaker is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd March 2023, 09:56 AM   #672
Nessie
Penultimate Amazing
 
Nessie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 14,758
Originally Posted by Segnosaur View Post
Do you really think people LIKE getting hit? Do you think cyclists are all running around thinking "I hope someone smacks me in the face when I ride by them"?
To make your point, you have had to grossly exaggerate the level of contact that took place.

Quote:
If someone is waving their arms in a way that is close enough to actually make contact, I am not going to think "Well, I WANT to get hit" or "Well, obviously I can tell this is only going to be a light contact". I am going to assume that whatever this person is doing CAN cause harm if I don't take action. (Which in this case involved swerving in a way that caused them to go into traffic.)

Heck, for all we know the only reason there wasn't a push or a more serious hit was because the cyclist ended up going into the street.
The CCTV shows the cyclist overbalanced and fell after she had passed, so to push her, the pedestrian would have had to turn and run after her.

Quote:
Once again:

Pedestrian acts combative.
You: The cyclist was to blame because they didn't react in a way that I approve of in dealing with a jerk
Others: Maybe the pedestrian shouldn't have acted like a jerk
Which does not prove manslaughter. There has to be an act that the reasonable bystander (sometimes referred to as the man on the Clapham omnibus) would recognise as dangerous.
__________________
Audiophile/biker/sceptic
Nessie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd March 2023, 09:59 AM   #673
Nessie
Penultimate Amazing
 
Nessie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 14,758
Originally Posted by Disbelief View Post
We know for a fact it was dangerous because contact was admittedly made and the cyclist is dead.
Wrong way round. The act has to be regarded as dangerous to prove manslaughter, not the consequences.

https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidanc...d-manslaughter

"An objective test must be applied to the question as to whether an accused's unlawful act, from which death results, was dangerous."

If someone does something that a reasonable person would not regard as dangerous and it causes death, that is not manslaughter. By your argument, shouting and gesticulating are now acts that are to be associated with causing death.
__________________
Audiophile/biker/sceptic
Nessie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd March 2023, 10:00 AM   #674
kookbreaker
Evil Fokker
 
kookbreaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 14,542
I love how in your OP you were presenting this as "just a pedestrian shouting at a cyclist" and now you are backpedaling and trying to use the legal definitions to avoid the fact that this woman's actions caused another's death.

I'm not familiar with the UK legal system, but I am sure they have a way of appealing a judgement if the Judge was way off base in their ruling. Is that happening?
__________________
www.spectrum-scientifics.com <-
kookbreaker is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd March 2023, 10:10 AM   #675
GlennB
Loggerheaded, earth-vexing fustilarian
 
GlennB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Wales
Posts: 29,730
Originally Posted by Nessie View Post
The CCTV shows the cyclist overbalanced and fell after she had passed, so to push her, the pedestrian would have had to turn and run after her.
This is simply untrue. The overbalancing begins when they are roughly level but the cyclist's forward motion continues briefly as she falls. In the last moments, as they draw level, Grey is turning and leaning towards the cyclist.

Do you know how to step through a video like this frame-by-frame? Pause it then tap '.' for one frame forward, or ',' for one frame backwards.
GlennB is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd March 2023, 10:10 AM   #676
jimbob
Uncritical "thinker"
Moderator
 
jimbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 30,070
Originally Posted by Nessie View Post
<snip>


The CCTV shows the cyclist overbalanced and fell after she had passed, so to push her, the pedestrian would have had to turn and run after her.



Which does not prove manslaughter. There has to be an act that the reasonable bystander (sometimes referred to as the man on the Clapham omnibus) would recognise as dangerous.
Firstly, I have seen people have slight contacts, start an almost imperceptible wobble and then fall a short time afterwards as they overcorrect the initial.


Secondly, it's pretty reasonable to suppose that if you put yourself into the way of a cyclist and then spook them as they're passing that they might fall into the road. And that regardless of oncoming traffic, that could cause severe harm to an elderly woman (given the risks of fracture for elderly women in particular).
__________________
OECD healthcare spending
Public/Compulsory Expenditure on healthcare
https://data.oecd.org/chart/60Tt

Every year since 1990 the US Public healthcare spending has been greater than the UK as a proportion of GDP. More US Tax goes to healthcare than the UK
jimbob is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd March 2023, 10:11 AM   #677
GlennB
Loggerheaded, earth-vexing fustilarian
 
GlennB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Wales
Posts: 29,730
Originally Posted by kookbreaker View Post
I love how in your OP you were presenting this as "just a pedestrian shouting at a cyclist" and now you are backpedaling and trying to use the legal definitions to avoid the fact that this woman's actions caused another's death.

I'm not familiar with the UK legal system, but I am sure they have a way of appealing a judgement if the Judge was way off base in their ruling. Is that happening?
The prosecution is appealing on the grounds that the sentence was too lenient. Not sure about any defence appeal.
GlennB is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd March 2023, 10:14 AM   #678
Nessie
Penultimate Amazing
 
Nessie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 14,758
Originally Posted by kookbreaker View Post
I love how in your OP you were presenting this as "just a pedestrian shouting at a cyclist" and now you are backpedaling and trying to use the legal definitions to avoid the fact that this woman's actions caused another's death.

I'm not familiar with the UK legal system, but I am sure they have a way of appealing a judgement if the Judge was way off base in their ruling. Is that happening?
From the OP, I said "The lady pedestrian shouts and points at the cyclist to get off the pavement..."

The thread title limits the characters that can be used, hence I missed out the pointing part.

I am quoting CPS guidance and explaining how shouting and pointing are not what a reasonable person would call reckless and recognisably dangerous.
__________________
Audiophile/biker/sceptic
Nessie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd March 2023, 10:15 AM   #679
Segnosaur
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Canada, eh?
Posts: 19,906
Originally Posted by Nessie View Post
Quote:
Do you really think people LIKE getting hit? Do you think cyclists are all running around thinking "I hope someone smacks me in the face when I ride by them"?
To make your point, you have had to grossly exaggerate the level of contact that took place.
No I do not have to exaggerate the level of contact.

Once again... PEOPLE DO NOT LIKE GETTING HIT. Not sure why that concept is difficult for you to understand.

Even if there was no actual contact, THE CYCLIST COULD NOT HAVE KNOWN WHAT THE LEVEL OF CONTACT WAS GOING TO BE before hand. (Someone is jamming their hand in my path... are they going to withdraw it at the last second? Push me when I go by? Clothesline me?) This will alter the way the cyclist was riding.

Its like the bully who raises their fist, acting like they are going to punch someone, then when their victim flinches, the bully laughs at them. In your case you would side with the bully. Except in your case you'd be laughing along with the bully.
Quote:
The CCTV shows the cyclist overbalanced and fell after she had passed, so to push her, the pedestrian would have had to turn and run after her.
Once again..... PEOPLE DO NOT LIKE GETTING HIT. Threatening contact (like for example waving your arm in their path) is going to cause most cyclists to adjust.

Quote:
Which does not prove manslaughter. There has to be an act that the reasonable bystander (sometimes referred to as the man on the Clapham omnibus) would recognise as dangerous.
Not sure about you, but if I jam my hand in the path of someone riding a bike, I'm going to assume that there is a significant chance I might knock them off balance (even accidentally) or otherwise cause them to fall or crash if I misjudge the distance to the cyclist and make stronger contact than I intended.

Of course in your world cyclists like getting hit. But its not that way in the real world.
__________________
Trust me, I know what I'm doing. - Sledgehammer

I'm Mary Poppins Y'all! - Yondu

We are Groot - Groot
Segnosaur is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd March 2023, 10:16 AM   #680
Nessie
Penultimate Amazing
 
Nessie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 14,758
Originally Posted by GlennB View Post
This is simply untrue. The overbalancing begins when they are roughly level but the cyclist's forward motion continues briefly as she falls. In the last moments, as they draw level, Grey is turning and leaning towards the cyclist.

Do you know how to step through a video like this frame-by-frame? Pause it then tap '.' for one frame forward, or ',' for one frame backwards.
My point was, no push and a contact that, due to mens rea, is unlikely to be legally an assault.
__________________
Audiophile/biker/sceptic
Nessie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Trials and Errors

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:29 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2023, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.