In the news

Might in fact be a good time to buy up some cheap coins until the next alternative inevitably comes along...

I just watched Alan Sugar interviewed on the channel 4 news and he didn't strike me as a cunt? I'm confused.

I just watched Alan Sugar interviewed on the channel 4 news and he didn't strike me as an utter and complete cunt? I'm confused.

He's alright... still a cunt though.

While we are on the subject of the NSA.
Tormail was brought down by them a couple of weeks ago after the founder of Freedom hosting was arrested. FBI use the usual rhetoric of looking for nonces which is fine, but you can't help but feel this is just a pretext for what they are really after. The big players behind Silkroad

http://www.dailydot.com/lifestyle/tor-tormail-dark-web-communication-pgp/

Anyone who thinks they are completely safe in the Dark web should think again

sage, mike.

Jolly good article about 4chan and web culture in general
http://www.dailydot.com/business/4chan-10-years-christopher-moot-poole/

sage, mike.

Aye..

Seems like Mr DPR was not all that careful.
Remember they are on to you, or us, or anyone

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-24371894

Jolly good article about 4chan and web culture in general
http://www.dailydot.com/business/4chan-10-years-christopher-moot-poole/

Very, very interesting. Enjoyed that.

Ah, Henley. So many cunts driving around the skinny roads there. I've had loads of dumb passing moves because the fuckwits never allow for the fact there might be slower traffic around a bend.

Cleared:

http://road.cc/content/news/95681-pharmaceutical-consultant-who-killed-cyclist-while-driving-wrong-side-road

Stunning decision. Lost for words.

How, what... It's unbelievable. So soon after the driver in the Audrey Fyfe case was handed a lenient sentence as well. (different legal system but still).

It's a fucking joke.

but she was on the wrong side of the road and couldn't see what was coming?
I think it's fairly safe to assume that if one of the cyclists was on the bike for the first time, they would hardly have been tearing round the corner.
no charge at all? could have happened to anyone?
completely un fucking believable.

Could be that the jury decided that it wouldn't have happened had she not been a 'new' cyclists.

Talk about the elephant in the room.

what the actual fuck?

wonder if id get in trouble for taking her out while riding on the pavement

Does rather suggest that if you are going to hit a cyclist, make sure you kill them so they can't contradict your version of events

There was a witness, his version seemed accepted.

It just seems that being on the wrong side of the road, heading towards a cyclist and not attempting to break is not dangerous even though someone was killed o_O.

Wasn't the charge of causing death by careless driving was introduced because juries wouldn't return guilty verdicts on the more serious charge of causing death by dangerous driving?

Maybe the solution to more convictions would be to charge people with 'causing death by not giving a shit while driving', which would carry a maximum sentence of a bit of a telling off from the judge?

Guilty!

On second thoughts, they'd probably still be let off.

^^ Surely it comes down to whether they believe her version (that the victim fell over in front of her), or the boyfriend's (that there just wasn't enough room and she hit the victim).

I would argue that overtaking on a bend is inherently dangerous.

^ unfortunately this is one of the failings of a trial by jury system.

^ unfortunately this is one of the failings of a trial by jury system.

Pretty much.

Jury sympathise with driver, think it's simply an 'accident' that there was no way of avoiding it, thereforth let off.

but the whole point of giving cyclists (and horses) space when you pass is that they might wobble, either because you startle them or because there's something in their path or because they're a bit wobbly.
presumably if a motorbike came around the corner it would be faster, she would have even less time to react, there would be even less space for it to pass without being hit. I guess she might think to attempt to brake though. y'know, hitting a motorbike might hurt you.

but in general it's just the whole - you chose to overtake on a bend when you couldn't see two people coming the other way, relatively slowly. you then did nothing to avoid endangering them. and yet there is no charge.

Not to mention that it seems fairly obvious that it was the driving which caused the victim to panic and fall off. How you can claim a defence of "It's not my fault if I hit a cyclist who falls off in front of me" when it's very likely your fault they fell is quite incredible.

It's mind boggling. Is there any appeal/similar?

Break Highway Code 162, 166 and 167.

Did not found guilty.

^^ short answer probably not.

Although good old Tony Blair tried to role back the principle of double jeopardy it still largely stands. If you are innocent, you are innocent. You can't be retried for the same crime twice (except when you can).

However, the family could pursue a civil action which would be on the balance of probability. I'm not 100% sure what the deal is with pursuing a private criminal action - ie whether it is possible to bring a second private prosecution for the same crime. I would have thought that a civil action would have a good chance of success.