Woohoo! I'm a human rights lawyer and sue the police for a living- bring on the ill-feeling!
The fact is that pretty much anything can be a weapon and the comment in this case was just about the potential danger posed by something huge, mobile and, er, white- and driven recklessly, or with the intent to damage.
Charges do seem lenient when cyclists or peds are killed by drivers (sober or drunk) but intent is an issue and the sentence needs to be proportionate when baring in mind murder, etc. If someone deliberately kills someone else then the method is irrelevant. The difficulty in an RTA situation would be proof.
Anyway, my first proper post and I'm talking shop...
Woohoo! I'm a human rights lawyer and sue the police for a living- bring on the ill-feeling!
The fact is that pretty much anything can be a weapon and the comment in this case was just about the potential danger posed by something huge, mobile and, er, white- and driven recklessly, or with the intent to damage.
Charges do seem lenient when cyclists or peds are killed by drivers (sober or drunk) but intent is an issue and the sentence needs to be proportionate when baring in mind murder, etc. If someone deliberately kills someone else then the method is irrelevant. The difficulty in an RTA situation would be proof.
Anyway, my first proper post and I'm talking shop...