You are reading a single comment by @MultiGrooves and its replies.
Click here to read the full conversation.
-
I don't know if Alliston's defence made the case that shouting at pedestrians is often more effective and quicker than using a bell or horn. Also swerving on a bike can be an alternative to braking, if you are not going too fast. These points don't seem to have got through to the judge who referred to Alliston's shouting as proof of culpability.
I couldn't stop thinking about this and how this played out in court...Its worrying...I thought this would have been basic knowledge.
MultiGrooves
It seems that the judge has based Alliston's sentence on previous cases, particularly that of Darryl Gittoes http://road.cc/node/155056 . The judge didn't consider the actual circumstances of the cases, Gittoes hit a pensioner in a pedestrian only area while riding a bike with no brakes at all. She did consdier that Gittoes pleaded guilty, he got a 12 month sentence that would have been 18 without the guilty plea.
Would Charlie Alliston have been better advised to plead guilty to Wanton and Furious ... and not guilty to manslaughter? I don't know what the risks are of that strategy but it would have allowed him to express regret/remorse in court.
I don't know if Alliston's defence made the case that shouting at pedestrians is often more effective and quicker than using a bell or horn. Also swerving on a bike can be an alternative to braking, if you are not going too fast. These points don't seem to have got through to the judge who referred to Alliston's shouting as proof of culpability.