I hugged and forgave the lorry driver who killed my husband
“As the judge said, it’s an extremely tragic case. There is no good outcome for anybody. It’s very, very sad to see my family and his life completely ruined.”
standard.co.uk/news/london/i … 29210.html
A very brave and strong lady indeed 
Oh my god! it was an accident and accidents happen.
Thats the way it is there is no “forgivness” The driver did not kill the man it was just a case of wrong time wrong place and a trajedy unfolded.
You can only forgive when someone has done you harm in forethought not because of misfortune.Maybe the driver should have forgiven the poor man on the bicycle,he has to go on living with it.
Bking:
Oh my god! it was an accident and accidents happen.Thats the way it is there is no “forgivness” The driver did not kill the man it was just a case of wrong time wrong place and a trajedy unfolded.
You can only forgive when someone has done you harm in forethought not because of misfortune.Maybe the driver should have forgiven the poor man on the bicycle,he has to go on living with it.
How immensely well informed and big hearted of you - spoken like a true hero.
I will try and avoid big words in the no-doubt pointless hope that a small fragment of reality might sink in, but… FYI: There is no such thing as a road traffic accident - these are recorded as Collisions or Incidents. In short: Someone or something is usually to blame.
In this specific collision, the HGV driver admitted that he was at fault. No grey area there then.
The judge in this case, appears to have read all the case notes, listened to the prosecution - listened to the guilty person’s mitigation and sentenced the driver (who admitted his blame).
On the OP’s point. Yes, an amazing woman and family in face of such a personal tragic loss. I hope they do well in life, continue to be philosophical and forgiving. I also hope that Mr Cox, will eventually recover from his PTSD, that is clearly effecting his and his family’s life.
Boomerang Dave:
Bking:
Oh my god! it was an accident and accidents happen.Thats the way it is there is no “forgivness” The driver did not kill the man it was just a case of wrong time wrong place and a trajedy unfolded.
You can only forgive when someone has done you harm in forethought not because of misfortune.Maybe the driver should have forgiven the poor man on the bicycle,he has to go on living with it.
I will try and avoid big words in the no-doubt pointless hope that a small fragment of reality might sink in, but… FYI: There is no such thing as a road traffic accident - these are recorded as Collisions or Incidents. In short: Someone or something is usually to blame.
That is what the pc brigade want you to think but it’s wrong, they ARE accidents.
I ■■■■■■ the other day and followed through, I was to blame, it was my fault but I didn’t mean to do it, it wasn’t an incident, it was an ACCIDENT.
I believe that accidents are where a person could not do anything reasonable to avoid something happening
Where a person could reasonably do something to avoid it then it is an incident
A new tyre is fitted by experts perfectly and then blows out a few miles up the road causing a vehicle to swerve and kill a pedestrian = accident
An illegal tyre blows out and does that above then that is something which the driver could have prevented from happening = incident
ROG:
I believe that accidents are where a person could not do anything reasonable to avoid something happeningWhere a person could reasonably do something to avoid it then it is an incident
A new tyre is fitted by experts perfectly and then blows out a few miles up the road causing a vehicle to swerve and kill a pedestrian = accident
An illegal tyre blows out and does that above then that is something which the driver could have prevented from happening = incident
ROG,
I’m being direct - for the sake of quick explanation, but these are terms used for legal reasons and what you believe has no importance, it’s what matters in the legal context that is important.
You’re near, but it’s to do with legal responsibility.
E.g: There was a manufacturing defect in your tyre = responsibility of the manufacturer.
You get struck by lightning are rendered unconscious - you collide and have an incident. You are not to blame.
You fall asleep at the wheel because you are tired and should not be driving - you have a collision = incident = you are to blame.
The word “Accident” was removed from such incidents - because the word automatically (in legal terms) removes or dilutes legal responsibility. Therefore… they are all incidents… and all should be investigated.
FarnboroughBoy11:
I ■■■■■■ the other day and followed through, I was to blame, it was my fault but I didn’t mean to do it, it wasn’t an incident, it was an ACCIDENT.
FarnboroughBoy11,
You are confused, this is not about your inability to ■■■■ without ■■■■■■■■ in your pants.
If that condition lasts for more that three days, go seek proper medical advice. 
Boomerang Dave:
Bking:
I also hope that Mr Cox, will eventually recover from his PTSD, that is clearly effecting his and his family’s life.
PTSD? Why has he been to war? accidents happen 
HUMAN ERROR! 
unfortunately both jumped a red light, RIP to the rider, but if you’re hit by a killer juggernaut, there’s only one outcome. Accidents do REALLY happen! 
Boomerang Dave:
FarnboroughBoy11:
I ■■■■■■ the other day and followed through, I was to blame, it was my fault but I didn’t mean to do it, it wasn’t an incident, it was an ACCIDENT.FarnboroughBoy11,
You are confused, this is not about your inability to ■■■■ without ■■■■■■■■ in your pants.
If that condition lasts for more that three days, go seek proper medical advice.
I thought it was safe.
Anyway, I still disagree that there will always be accidents unless someone has caused a crash or collision on purpose.
FarnboroughBoy11:
Boomerang Dave:
Bking:
Oh my god! it was an accident and accidents happen.Thats the way it is there is no “forgivness” The driver did not kill the man it was just a case of wrong time wrong place and a trajedy unfolded.
You can only forgive when someone has done you harm in forethought not because of misfortune.Maybe the driver should have forgiven the poor man on the bicycle,he has to go on living with it.
I will try and avoid big words in the no-doubt pointless hope that a small fragment of reality might sink in, but… FYI: There is no such thing as a road traffic accident - these are recorded as Collisions or Incidents. In short: Someone or something is usually to blame.
That is what the pc brigade want you to think but it’s wrong, they ARE accidents.
I ■■■■■■ the other day and followed through, I was to blame, it was my fault but I didn’t mean to do it, it wasn’t an incident, it was an ACCIDENT.
Nice that you can bring such a lovely comment to this topic about an amazing act of humanity. We’ll done
Fatboy slimslow:
Boomerang Dave:
Bking:
I also hope that Mr Cox, will eventually recover from his PTSD, that is clearly effecting his and his family’s life.PTSD? Why has he been to war?
Fatboy slimslow,
I’m not going to teach you the basics of English, although yourself and some others demonstrate a very good argument in favour of introducing it to the HGV test.
As you said: “HUMAN ERROR!” that is error - not the same as accident. FWIW, I didn’t write the law, that was done by people of ‘High Office’ within the legal system. Not that it makes any real difference - I agree with them.
PTSD, is a condition which some people suffer from, after they have experienced something traumatic. It is not exclusive to the Armed Forces.
switchlogic:
FarnboroughBoy11:
Boomerang Dave:
Bking:
Oh my god! it was an accident and accidents happen.Thats the way it is there is no “forgivness” The driver did not kill the man it was just a case of wrong time wrong place and a trajedy unfolded.
You can only forgive when someone has done you harm in forethought not because of misfortune.Maybe the driver should have forgiven the poor man on the bicycle,he has to go on living with it.
I will try and avoid big words in the no-doubt pointless hope that a small fragment of reality might sink in, but… FYI: There is no such thing as a road traffic accident - these are recorded as Collisions or Incidents. In short: Someone or something is usually to blame.
That is what the pc brigade want you to think but it’s wrong, they ARE accidents.
I ■■■■■■ the other day and followed through, I was to blame, it was my fault but I didn’t mean to do it, it wasn’t an incident, it was an ACCIDENT.
Nice that you can bring such a lovely comment to this topic about an amazing act of humanity. We’ll done
Oh, terribly sorry for lowering the tone on this pink fluffy cloud that is this thread.
So if there is no such thing as an"accident" and they are all “incidents” how is it the police attend RTAs and not RTIs?
Bking:
So if there is no such thing as an"accident" and they are all “incidents” how is it the police attend RTAs and not RTIs?
I thought the police dropped rta in favour of rtc (collision) a good number of years ago for this very reason?
stevieboy308:
Bking:
So if there is no such thing as an"accident" and they are all “incidents” how is it the police attend RTAs and not RTIs?I thought the police dropped rta in favour of rtc (collision) a good number of years ago for this very reason?
Along with all other emergency services, that’s precisely what they did.
Journalists often still use the word accident, but only to feed the masses a language they are comfortable with, the legal system has no room for such weakening of terminology.
The word ‘accident’ implies an unfortunate incident that could not have been avoided, something that can happen unexpectedly and without blame, leaving nothing to investigate, nothing to learn and therefore no room for improvement. That is a very old fashioned way of looking at RTC’s - in which there is usually at least one person to blame - and often more than one person to blame - where if one party was better at driving, they could have avoided their own involvement or prevented the whole incident.
Just goes to show the truth in the old addage that the law and those who practise it are asses.We can have a nuclear"accident" where thousands can be zapped with thousands of rontgens of hard radiation yet every minor car accident is an incident and somebody has to be held to blame.What a crap filled world we live in!
The word ‘accident’ was dropped because of the desperate need of authorities etc to be able to apportion blame on one party or the other.
This ‘blame’ culture was all but eradicated on the railway years ago when investigating incidents, serious or otherwise.
We investigated what happened, wrote reports around the facts and then made recommendations designed to prevent reoccurance…
Bking:
Just goes to show the truth in the old addage that the law and those who practise it are asses.
That sir is quality! You’ll never know how much we laughed and laughed here.
Bking:
We can have a nuclear"accident" where thousands can be zapped with thousands of rontgens of hard radiation yet every minor car accident is an incident and somebody has to be held to blame.What a crap filled world we live in!
There is no such thing as a nuclear accident!
There’s a hole in my bucket dear Liza dear Liza…
Boomerang Dave:
stevieboy308:
Bking:
So if there is no such thing as an"accident" and they are all “incidents” how is it the police attend RTAs and not RTIs?I thought the police dropped rta in favour of rtc (collision) a good number of years ago for this very reason?
Along with all other emergency services, that’s precisely what they did.
Journalists often still use the word accident, but only to feed the masses a language they are comfortable with, the legal system has no room for such weakening of terminology.
The word ‘accident’ implies an unfortunate incident that could not have been avoided, something that can happen unexpectedly and without blame, leaving nothing to investigate, nothing to learn and therefore no room for improvement. That is a very old fashioned way of looking at RTC’s - in which there is usually at least one person to blame - and often more than one person to blame - where if one party was better at driving, they could have avoided their own involvement or prevented the whole incident.
I do love how the authorities get their priorities in the right order, ‘right, first things first, what words should we use?’…
switchlogic:
I do love how the authorities get their priorities in the right order, ‘right, first things first, what words should we use?’…
I understand what you mean, but I don’t think it precisely follows that order.
When you think about it, we are all wordsmiths to some degree or another. Practical people, often dealing with what is there ‘right in front of them’ are not interested in the academic implications of an immediate situation. I would say this is true for the mainstream ‘hands-on’ peeps of the emergency services. A Firefighter attending a serious incident isn’t interested in what the incident is termed, he or she is only interested in the practicalities of saving life - in the immediate sense.
Beyond that, it all becomes quite academic, with boffins and lawyers churning over every aspect. What has happened historically is that ‘The Great Unwashed’ have become victims of a system that does not allow for accidents, and have been aggrieved - or felt some sense of injustice at what they ‘incorrectly’ thought should have been put down to “An Act of God”. The accused, stood in court not understanding why the judge is saying - you will go to prison for ‘X’ amount of time - must be a real shock to the system. So the first thing that must change is education, understanding and possibly a main part of that process is also greater awareness of the terms used to describe such incidents.
When the majority of people realise that there is ‘no such thing as an accident’ they are one step away from becoming much better at what they do.
The tried and tested evidence is that, people who take ownership of their actions (responsibility) without excuse, are better at what they do. Tis one reason why we have the best trained Armed Forces in the world - in the British Armed Forces - there is not such thing as an accident. If it’s good enough for them, it’s good enough for everyone.