Bristol Bus Driver

schmako

What a totally avoidable situation. So one broke his leg and bike and the other got fired and jailed. Might teach them both to be a little less stupid next time they get into a similar situation..

rockmonkeysc

Obviously what the bus driver did was terrible & he deserves his prison sentence but the cyclist was a bit of an idiot. Shout some abuse & flip the bird then leave it & ride off. It's a bad idea to wind up someone in control of a bus weighing several tons when your on a bike, you don't know if that driver is mentally unstable, or what's in his head or how far you can push him before he snaps. Someone else could have pushed him to the edge already that day.
Also you don't know who started this situation, the cyclist may have done something stupid like overtake the bus up the inside in a dangerous place
I'm sure this isn't all one sided & I'm certainly not defending the bus driver at all but the cyclist obviously provoked the him.

diy

supersonic wrote:

How do/are the 'rules' of the Highway code taken into account in law?

Those which are law are backed up by statute: http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/TravelAndTr ... /DG_069869

As a convention those which are backed up by statute normally say MUST/MUST NOT and quote the relevant act. Those which say should/should not are just good advice, but failure to comply could lead to a prosecution under the general driving standard laws (e.g. inconsiderate driving)

e.g.
129 Double white lines where the line nearest you is solid. This means you MUST NOT cross or straddle it unless it is safe and you need to enter adjoining premises or a side road. You may cross the line if necessary, provided the road is clear, to pass a stationary vehicle, or overtake a pedal cycle, horse or road maintenance vehicle, if they are travelling at 10 mph (16 km/h) or less.

[Laws Road Traffic Act sect 36 & The Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions regs 10 & 26]

supersonic

Could dispbeying rules be grounds for dangerous driving/cycling?

diy

supersonic wrote:

Could dispbeying rules be grounds for dangerous driving/cycling?

sort of, ish,

see: cps guide:
http://www.cps.gov.uk/publications/pros ... olicy.html

but dangerous driving and dangerous cycling are covered by different sections of the same act:
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/52/section/2A
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/52/section/28

mintedox

Looks to me the lights are changing or are on red. Shocking display of driving and anger.

sandy771

diy wrote:

No argument there, but there is a subtle difference between murder and attempted murder beyond the obvious (i.e. someone dies). For attempted murder (which was the cry here) there needs to be intention to kill only (not intent to commit gbh or murder)

I only started studying law for fun and there was a reason I didnt finish my studies

The Rookie

Its clear that the court, with all the facts (or at least a lot more than we have) took into account the cyclists behavious in mitigation or the senatnce would have been a lot higher. Ponificating without those facts is interesting, but ultimately pointless!

Simon

chez_m356

RockmonkeySC wrote:

you don't know if that driver is mentally unstable, or what's in his head or how far you can push him before he snaps. Someone else could have pushed him to the edge already that day.

not really the type of person who should be driving a bus, with other peoples lives in his hands then, wouldn't you say

sandy771

The Beginner wrote:

Its clear that the court, with all the facts (or at least a lot more than we have) took into account the cyclists behavious in mitigation or the senatnce would have been a lot higher. Ponificating without those facts is interesting, but ultimately pointless!

Simon

[pedant]as we dont have anything more than the video report, nothing is clear and we have no idea whether the court took into account the cyclists behaviour - although it would seem likely[/pedant]

diy

The facts are largely irrelevant when the defendant pleads guilty unless there is a view that they are unfit to plea. From the reports of the summing up its clear the defence pleaded guilty with mitigation of provocation leading to "a moment of madness".