Victim Blaming x 1000

[shouldbeinbed]

http://road.cc/content/news/186698-...st-launched-petition-calling-compulsory-cycle

WTF!

Mods: I've not spotted this posted on here, but if it has, please merge/delete this.

 

[steve50]

It's been posted on here before and the responses to her proposals were not favourable.

 

[YahudaMoon]

It's been posted on here before and the responses to her proposals were not favourable.

This is updated post dated 18th April on Road CC

Petition closed, here

https://www.change.org/p/public-make-it-law-for-a-cyclist-to-wear-a-helmet

Not sure if comments can be left?

 

[steve50]

This is updated post dated 18th April on Road CC

Petition closed, here

https://www.change.org/p/public-make-it-law-for-a-cyclist-to-wear-a-helmet

Not sure if comments can be left?

15

 

[classic33]

http://www.thamesvalley.police.uk/n...s/newsevents-pressreleases-item.htm?id=331850

 

[glenn forger]

Although charged last September she is still free on tag to this present day even though she pleaded guilty on the 23rd December to Death by careless driving and perverting the course of justice by reporting her car stolen . Mr Greg Mulholland (Lib Dem, Leeds North West) has presented his Criminal Driving (Justice for Victims) Private Members’ Bill in the House of Commons on January 12. It was backed by 31 MPs and will next be heard on March 11th.which we hope will be the end of lenient treatment of drivers.

https://www.change.org/p/micheal-go...are_petition&utm_medium=copylink#delivered-to

 

[glenn forger]

Has anyone informed the court authorities of this very conspicuous evidence that the killer shows not only no remorse, but is actually still hostile towards the deceased victim?

It may influence the otherwise very short sentence that they will hand down, which almost certainly will run conscurrently with the sentence for perverting the course of justice to ensure the least punishment possible, as courts tend to do when drivers kill bike riders.

Wait a minute, you say. How can we know that the courts will be so lenient?

Check the victim's family's Change.org petition. In this, it is reported that AFTER the killer pleaded guilty, they are still free with a tag on remand (not imprisoned on remand) despite the certainty of a custodial sentence.

A killer, who pleaded guilty, is still allowed their freedom.

Note that the court has the power to revoke any freedom-on-bail that might currently be in force; they choose not to. Such is the way the courts reagrd killing, when the victim is on a bike and the killer in a car.

- See more at: http://road.cc/content/news/186698-...calling-compulsory-cycle#sthash.Jr7utawJ.dpuf

She's still free. She may even be driving around.

 

[glenn forger]

She's remanded on a tag.

 

[Deleted member 35268]

Basically, and in summary its

"I was really drunk at the wheel of my car, but that's OK, what's not OK is why the cyclist was allowed to ride without hi-viz and a helmet, because then I might have seen him and not killed him"

Disgusting person.

 

[LCpl Boiled Egg]

She won't get prison time as she's only killed a cyclist whilst drunk. That barely gets you a slap on the wrist these days.

 

[LCpl Boiled Egg]

That's one result out of how many? Not even a good one at that - two and a half years for taking someone's life after leaving them at death's door for fifteen months.

 

[Pale Rider]

Sutton was on bail until she admitted killing the cyclist.

She is now remanded in custody pending sentence next month.

http://www.oxfordmail.co.uk/news/14412958.Woman_to_be_sentenced_for_killing_cyclist_in_hit_and_run/

 

[ManiaMuse]

My email to the Sentencing Judge:

Your Honour​

Re: R. –v- Marian Suzanne Sutton (Case no: T20157179)

I appreciate it is unusual for a member of the public to contact a judge directly but I am concerned about, and somewhat disturbed by the behaviour, of the defendant in this case.

As you are aware, Ms Sutton has pleaded guilty to causing the death of Dr Graham Ruecroft by careless driving whilst under the influence of alcohol. She has also pleaded guilty to perverting the course of justice. You may not be aware that, at some time between December 2015 when she pleaded guilty to perverting the course of justice and April 2016 when she finally pleaded guilty to causing the death by careless driving whilst under the influence of alcohol, Ms Sutton took to the internet to establish a petition calling for mandatory helmets and hi-viz for all cyclists. In so doing, she appears to be blaming Dr Ruecroft for his death – when it was clearly her fault for drinking and driving. The petition she started can be found here: https://www.change.org/p/public-make-it-law-for-a-cyclist-to-wear-a-helmet

If we put to one side any arguments over the efficacy of cycle helmets (and the evidence is not in any way conclusive – please see http://cyclehelmets.org/), there is clearly no evidence to suggest that a cycle helmet or hi-viz offers any protection against a drunk driver. In starting her petition whilst the case against her is still going on, Ms Sutton appears to be demonstrating a complete lack of insight and remorse, and her behaviour seems to show a callous disregard for Dr Ruecroft’s family.

It is my personal view that by driving drunk, killing someone and then lying to the police, Ms Sutton has shown herself unfit for the privilege of holding a driving licence. I do hope the court will give serious consideration to a life ban alongside any custodial sentence.

I must apologise if this email is inappropriate but as a cyclist (and a motorist) I am becoming more and more concerned about the victim blaming that goes on, and the increasing pressure on the most vulnerable road users to take precautions (the efficacy of which are on the whole questionable) to try and protect themselves from the lack of attention, or downright criminal behaviour, of a small minority of motorists. We already struggle to get the police to take action, so when a case like this gets to court it does become something that attracts the attention of the cycling community.

Thank you for taking the time to read this.

Yours sincerely...​

I'm not necessarily expecting it to be read - or to get a response - but sometimes it is worth venting...

If read at all you may find that your email is shared with all the other parties in the case including the defendant as part of disclosure, that might not be what you intended...

But a balanced enough view at least.

 

[jefmcg]

If read at all you may find that your email is shared with all the other parties in the case including the defendant as part of disclosure, that might not be what you intended...

Well, I'd hope so. If the petition was going to affect sentencing, then she has a right to respond. Without forensic analysis, it can't be said for a fact that she started that petition so if she denied it, they would have to look at it in more detail.

Obviously the balance of probability is it was her, but it could have been by a supporter in a misguided attempt to help her, or by someone wishing to incriminate her further.

Previously discussed https://www.cyclechat.net/threads/if-youre-facing-court-youre-not-this-stupid.196610