On Fri, 09 May 2008 02:17:51 GMT, TimC
<tconnors@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>On 2008-05-09, EuanB (aka Bruce)
> was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
>>
>> Duncan Wrote:
>>> btw: I find it astounding that the police have taken more than a day
>>> to talk to this lunatic. They have the rego, why didn't they scoot
>>> around there asap and have a quiet word?
>> All registration tells the police is who owns the car and the
>> residential address.
>>
>> It doesn't tell the police where that person happens to be at a point
>> in time.
>>
>> Further the incident has already happened, priority for police
>> resources would ****bably have been given to inicidents where the police
>> can make a difference, leaving after the fact policing till quieter
>> times, which is sensible.
>
>Except that it has been re****ted that this guy is already known to
>police, which means he is already suspected of having offended in the
>past, and will offend again. As such, I would have guessed he would
>be one of their highest priority cases. Because he knows he is known
>(and a description of him has been plastered all over the newspapers),
>you can bet he's gone "missing". So we just have to wait for him to
>turn up in Kalgoolie...
>
>And for his sake, he better be hoping someone isn't going to rip out
>his gonads through his throat, when he is found.
I predict he'll get off, if he's ever brought to trial. If a texting
driver can hit a cyclist in a bike lane at 100km/h, shed a few tears
at her trial and be let off with a slap on the wrist (it helps to be
blonde, I guess), or a drunk woman with several priors can drive
through a training bunch killing a cyclist, what hope do we have that
someone will get any penalty when nobody was killed.
Best remedy: sue the bastard for the damage to the bikes, the
potential loss of earnings, pain and suffering, etc. Take his assets.
Of course, that will only make him more aggressive towards cyclists
and the next bunch might not be so lucky.
--
Regards.
Richard.
|
