Causing Death By Careless Driving, really though?

UK PROFESSIONAL DRIVERS FORUMS THE UK PROFESSIONAL DRIVERS FORUM (INTERACTIVE)
1

Did anyone see this? I did a few searches but couldn’t find anything on the forums…

commercialmotor.com/latest-n … V7AGBxJOAg

It’s also in one of the first few pages of the current T&D.

Firstly, RIP to the deseased, a very sad loss.

Secondly, going on all the information available to me, I can’t believe the outcome of this appeal. It seems to centre around the fact of whether or not the lorry driver can be accused of ‘death by careless driving’ if he wasn’t actually driving at the time. Although I think they’re missing the point a little. The guy was stopped with hazard lights at the side of the road whilst assessing his delivery point, I’m assuming for reasons of access etc, as it was maybe his first time there (a situation I would imagine that we’ve all been in at some point or another). Due to the sun being low in the sky the driver of the van was unable to see the lorry ahead of him and ploughed into the back of it at an estimated 50-60mph, and unfortunately died at the scene, God rest his soul.

Now, I’m not personally aware of the conditions at this specific location but it does say that there are double white lines, which would suggest a blind bend or the brow of a hill, or some other location unsuitable for overtaking, which would make me assume it may not have been the best place to pull-up. This doesn’t seem to be an issue here though, as the driver of the van didn’t see the lorry or attempt to overtake it.

I understand that it’s a very delicate situation, but say (for arguments’ sake, God forbid) that this lorry driver had been driving along this same road at 40-45mph and had ploughed into a woman wearing her mp3 player whilst pushing a push chair across the road. Would that have been classed as the woman’s fault for being on the road in a dangerous place when the sun was low in the sky so the driver couldn’t see her? I doubt it. I’d imagine he would’ve been dragged over the coals for ‘not driving to the conditions’, and told that if he couldn’t see the road ahead very well that he should slow down to an appropriate speed.

Now I realise this case is slightly different, as the poor van driver has paid the ultimate price for any mistake he may or may not have made, but I still don’t see how they came to the conclusion that the loory driver is guilty of death by careless driving? We all come across stupid parking day in and day out, and although it’s sometimes dangerous, it can’t always be helped for one reason or another. I just assumed it was our job to navigate around these things, and if we’re driving around a blind bend and a tractor has broken down just around it, then we should be driving at a speed where we can either come to a safe stop or negotiate our way around the obstruction. I know in practice that we take calculated risks all day long, and maybe we are going a little too fast around that blind bend, or when the sun is in our eyes, but it would seem now that it doesn’t matter, as the tractor driver will now be charged with death by careless driving if you end up embedded in the back of his tractor, as he should’ve found a better place to be broken down.

Again slightly different situation, i know, as mostly you really can’t help being broken down, and you should be walking back to put out your warning triangle, but this all takes time too. Do you see my point though? Discuss…

2

We all come across stupid parking day in and day out, and although it’s sometimes dangerous

Think you have answered your own question.

3

keepmeontheroad.co.uk/blog/d … r-comment/

4

Roger Breaker:
Now, I’m not personally aware of the conditions at this specific location but it does say that there are double white lines, which would suggest a blind bend or the brow of a hill, or some other location unsuitable for overtaking, which would make me assume it may not have been the best place to pull-up. This doesn’t seem to be an issue here though, as the driver of the van didn’t see the lorry or attempt to overtake it.

According to this article the driver parked his lorry “just after a blind summit, on a bend, against double white lines”.

Like you I don’t know exactly where the accident happened but it does sound like a dangerous place to park, the article also mentions that the lorry driver should have known that other motorists would have been blinded by the low sun as they came over the brow of the hill.

Having said that, the court heard that the farmer was “driving too fast for the conditions when the accident happened”, so 2 years for the lorry driver does seem excessive to me.

5

journallive.co.uk/north-east … -31028901/

say in here were it happened

6

Interesting replies, thanks. That certainly sheds a bit more light onto the incident, and it sounds as though it was a particularly dangerous place to stop. Although it would’ve been all the same if he’d have been sat there with his right indicator on waiting to turn into a gateway. Then what would the outcome have been?
I’ve personally been driving an artic that’s been rear-ended by a car whilst I’ve been waiting to turn right just after a left-hand bend. That was whilst waiting to turn into a side road, so standard warning signs for the junction were on display prior to the bend, although the driver of the car that rear-ended me either ignored them, just didn’t notice them, or took an aforementioned ‘calculated risk’, which didn’t pay off. Thankfully my incident didn’t end like this one, the guy hit the edge of the rear underrun bar and ended up in a hedge without injury.
I just think it’s a bit harsh, that’s all. I understand that someone’s died, and that’s a horrific outcome and horrible for anyone concerned, but it seems to me that this Mr. Jenkins has been treated a little unfairly. If he was there 10 minutes as was proven, then it would suggest that several other vehicles had passed prior to the ill-fated one. We know what it’s like, hazards on, run in to see what the craic is (may’ve already been looking for the place for 20 minutes), 5 minutes to find someone, 2 minutes for them to get off the phone, “what you got, drive?”, “Ah, we’ll stick that over here… oh hang on, just give us a hand to move this.” “I really should move the truck…” “Yeah just gis’ a hand with these and we’ll have you in mate, I’ve been on my own here all day, it’s been bloody mayhem…” You’re not necessarily considering that someone might die whilst all this is going on. If you’re in and out of RDC’s, factories and ports etc all day, it’s not really a problem, but with home deliveries, farms and shops etc it’s not always so straightforward.
Also, it was mentioned that he should’ve taken time to note that other drivers would be dazzled by the sun, but the sun needn’t necessarily have been out when he pulled-up.
I’m not saying this guy is without blame, far from it. He has a responsibility to act safely as much as the rest of us, but without knowing the bloke, and going with the information we have, with his past record and length of service and experience, I would assume that he’d be blessed with a bit more common sense than can be found with a lot of other motorists today, and he’s been extremely unlucky to be in charge of the vehicle that stood in the way of this other extremely unlucky guy.

That blog, by the way, motionlotion, also seems more concerned with the fact that he’s been convicted of DBCD without actually driving, or indeed being in the vehicle at the time. There are some good points, but personally I don’t have a problem with that, as such. As was said, he was still in charge of the vehicle, especially so as it had been temporarily parked (I guess we’re always temporarily parked!) in a dubious position, so i don’t see a problem with that situation as such. Just my opinion, interesting to hear your view, and to see those links.

7

After reaing all this, I am having difficulty understanding why he was sent to prison for 2 years :open_mouth:
Being a keen motorcyclist and having friends killed on the roads by others in far more serious circumstances and the persons responsible for the deaths getting small fines, or indeed in one case no charges, I find it a very disturbing precedent that has been set here.

With other happenings regarding LGV drivers and their alleged culpability in certain incidents on the roads, it seems as though blame has to be apportioned at any cost. I am not too sure that I am happy being a commercial driver in the current climate, as my ability to think things through when I am tired is obviously a danger to others and this can be proven and see me locked up :open_mouth: Seems perfection is the required standard, I don`t do perfection in any aspect of my existence.

I honestly feel that the world has gone barking…Not sure I wish to be a part of it any longer. I am a positive person with a positive outlook, but the more I see of this, the more I am asking the questions of why we are actually here.

8

Im not going to beat about the bush, im just going to come out and say it -That is ■■■■■■■ ridiculous!

The lorry driver should be aware of sun blinded motorists? Give me a break! The same sun blinded motorists doing 60mph flat out, the same motorists that cant see a bloody great big lorry in the road with his hazards on!

9

^^^^ I couldn’t agree more, with both of you. If I hadn’t been so busy trying (unsuccessfully, it would seem! :wink: ) to dodge replies like the first one, I couldn’t have said it better myself!

10

I wonder what the out come would of been if the truck had been in motion , say 15 mph after pulling away and was then hit…?

11

If the truck had been pulling way it would have been normal driving, even at low speed and the driver would not be at fault.
Ditto if he had been standing waiting to turn, perfectly normal driving, not doing anything wrong.
Maybe a grey area if he had broken down and it could be shown that it was because he hadn’t done his checks etc
He was only at fault in this case because the truck was parked in a dangerous place, something he did have control over.Something he chose to do.
And I do understand that sometimes a driver has little choice over this kind of thing.
I agree with the comments that the penalty does seem excessive in the circs and the fact that the car driver was not driving in a manner that allowed him to stop in the distance he could see to be clear etc. and that this fact should have contributed more to the apportioning of blame.

12

I just find it disturbing that the court accepted that the deceased was driving to fast for the prevailing conditions, yet still went on the blame the lorry driver :open_mouth: In that situation any lorry driver is left without defence in any situation!
As I mentioned, it is a very disturbing precedent that has been set!

13

So…Where is the line going to be drawn?
I have many situations in my mind, where I am put at risk because of errant motorists…Am I going to be held liable and therefore serve a prison sentence, because a motorist is in a hurry and not driving to the conditions and I happen to be in the wrong place at the wrong time?

I have been on a Police Bikesafe course and you are taught to ride in the correct position of the road at all times, I know for a fact this has saved my life twice, along with appropriate speed.

I didn`t sign up to be responsible for other road users 100%, nor am I able to be so, it certainly should not be expected of me, but this decision in court suggests that I am.

If we ever needed a union, then the time has to be now!

14

didn`t sign up to be responsible for other road users 100%, nor am I able to be so, it certainly should not be expected of me, but this decision in court suggests that I am.

No it doesn’t.
What it does suggest is that if you park your truck in a dangerous place and someone is injured/killed even PARTLY because of your actions , you will be held responsible.

15

I wonder if this could have had any bearing on the judges decision to give a sentence of 2 years.

Judge Sloan told him: “You were convicted on overwhelming evidence having tried to heap all the blame for what happened on Mr Kemp.”

Without knowing all of what happened in court I suppose we’ll never know if maybe the lorry driver was partly responsible for his own fate by not accepting that he was partly to blame.

I agree that from what we’ve read in this thread it does appear that the lorry driver has been held totally responsible when it seems pretty certain that he could not have been totally responsible for the accident.

16

tachograph:
I wonder if this could have had any bearing on the judges decision to give a sentence of 2 years.

Judge Sloan told him: “You were convicted on overwhelming evidence having tried to heap all the blame for what happened on Mr Kemp.”

Without knowing all of what happened in court I suppose we’ll never know if maybe the lorry driver was partly responsible for his own fate by not accepting that he was partly to blame.

I agree that from what we’ve read in this thread it does appear that the lorry driver has been held totally responsible when it seems pretty certain that he could not have been totally responsible for the accident.

A good point, maybe if his defence had been more holistic and factual, instead of trying to place blame on the other ‘guilty’ party, it may have been a better result, but having said that…I thought a court only dealt in facts?
My experience of the justice system is this…Emotions or perceived actions are not admissable…It has to be fact and proved to be so.

17

I think the problem here is that, when something like this happens, we all expect a bit of justice. That doesn’t really happen in courts in this country anymore. I believe if the trucker had paid for a better solicitor he would have got off with a lot less, certainly no jail time. You only have to look at the sentences given out here, for the most part they are laughable, not fitting the crime or being consistent in any way.
In this case they seem to have taken little consideration to the stated fact that the van driver was driving too fast for the conditions. Low sun, wet roads, deep snow all over the place & he was still doing, by their estimate, between 50 & 60mph! That’s virtually the max legal speed on those roads in normal conditions. Other drivers got passed him with no trouble. If you get jail in this country for crap parking then they better start building some new ones soon.

18

Slackbladder:
I think the problem here is that, when something like this happens, we all expect a bit of justice. That doesn’t really happen in courts in this country anymore. I believe if the trucker had paid for a better solicitor he would have got off with a lot less, certainly no jail time. You only have to look at the sentences given out here, for the most part they are laughable, not fitting the crime or being consistent in any way.
In this case they seem to have taken little consideration to the stated fact that the van driver was driving too fast for the conditions. Low sun, wet roads, deep snow all over the place & he was still doing, by their estimate, between 50 & 60mph! That’s virtually the max legal speed on those roads in normal conditions. Other drivers got passed him with no trouble. If you get jail in this country for crap parking then they better start building some new ones soon.

The way I read it is that the truck driver was guilty of careless driving/parking.But it was the dangerous driving of the driver who ran into the parked truck at sufficient speed to result in fatality that caused death bearing in mind that it could have been a cyclist or in fact anything or anyone ahead out of sight not a parked truck. :bulb:

19

Surely the van driver was over driving his vision and hit a stationary vehicle, therefore it was his fault, end of. Sure the truck driver would get a mention on his decision to park there.

So what about if a car runs into a truck in the same scenario as this case, the driver is OK but the passenger dies? Would just the trucker get busted or would the car driver get done aswell? Can both of them be done?

Same again but the truck is waiting to turn right, so the trucker can’t be done, of course the car driver would get done.

I rightly or wrongly always thought if you hit a stationary vehicle it was always your fault, unless somebody robbed you of you braking zone, same goes for over driving your vision.

20

This one is even worse in my view longer sentence and even less, if at all, the driver’s fault. Unusually, for once the Daily Mail best rated comments are spot on.

dailymail.co.uk/news/article … ailed.html