Emma Way

daviesee

Someone was asking about progress the other day.

Timely news report from the BBC - summoned to court.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-norfolk-23324422

DrLex

Good news!

Driving without due care and attention - maximum penalty £2,500 fine, 9 points and disqualification at the magistrates' discretion.
Failing to report or leaving the scene of an accident is maximum 6 months in jail.

I'm thinking £30 and a telling-off is the likely outcome here, as defending solicitor will harp on about public shaming & loss of traineeship as punishment already received, and the Norfolk woodentops will buy it.

sketchley

As discussed before she would need to give a good reason why she didn't stop or report. She kind of ruined the "I didn't reliase I had hit him" defence with the tweet. Although that being said her solictor that prep her for the interview seem to be a doing a reasonable job of damage limitation on this front. Everything I've read is that Failure to stop and Failure to report combined are treated very seriously if found or guilty then she should expect a driving ban.

Good!

gabriel959

Great news! At least she will get a scare.

markhewitt1978

You're forgetting that a cyclist is involved. The way the law seems to work in this country, we have reverse presumed liability, so that the cyclist is always to blame in some way...

DonDaddyD

Her twitter post is a prime example of the disassociative attitude some drivers have of cyclists.

"Definitely hit a cyclist today..."

As though the above is OK, and something to laugh about. At its worst it suggests that 'cyclist' doesn't mean person, with loved ones, dependents etc. She completely ignores the value of that person's life all because he is a cyclist.

Had she hit a pedestrian would she have stopped? The answer one can assume is probably yes, and it makes me annoyed that my mind immediately follows with "well why didn't you stop for the cyclist".

I hope the punnishment is as severe as possible.

sketchley

markhewitt1978 wrote:

You're forgetting that a cyclist is involved. The way the law seems to work in this country, we have reverse presumed liability, so that the cyclist is always to blame in some way...

Well the cyclist might be blamed for the accident but even if they are it does not make her any less guilty of failing to stop or failing to report.

dilemna

DonDaddyD wrote:

Her twitter post is a prime example of the disassociative attitude some drivers have of cyclists.

"Definitely hit a cyclist today..."

As though the above is OK, and something to laugh about. At its worst it suggests that 'cyclist' doesn't mean person, with loved ones, dependents etc. She completely ignores the value of that person's life all because he is a cyclist.

Had she hit a pedestrian would she have stopped? The answer one can assume is probably yes, and it makes me annoyed that my mind immediately follows with "well why didn't you stop for the cyclist".

I hope the punnishment is as severe as possible.

And all the other occasions on other days where she has attempted, been unable or failed, for what ever reason, to hit cyclists?

Definately premeditated and dangerous. She should go to prison.

DonDaddyD

dilemna wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

Her twitter post is a prime example of the disassociative attitude some drivers have of cyclists.

"Definitely hit a cyclist today..."

As though the above is OK, and something to laugh about. At its worst it suggests that 'cyclist' doesn't mean person, with loved ones, dependents etc. She completely ignores the value of that person's life all because he is a cyclist.

Had she hit a pedestrian would she have stopped? The answer one can assume is probably yes, and it makes me annoyed that my mind immediately follows with "well why didn't you stop for the cyclist".

I hope the punnishment is as severe as possible.

And all the other occasions on other days where she has attempted, been unable or failed, for what ever reason, to hit cyclists?

definitely premeditated and dangerous. She should go to prison.

Where is the evidence that she has continually attempted to hit cyclists? I'm genuinely asking.

markhewitt1978

Perhaps it's the assumption that "definitely hit a cyclist" implies there are other times when she thought she'd hit a cyclist but wasn't sure!

DonDaddyD

markhewitt1978 wrote:

Perhaps it's the assumption that "definitely hit a cyclist" implies there are other times when she thought she'd hit a cyclist but wasn't sure!

I'm not sure a person can be convicted (or even have a case brought against them) based on an assumption. She can only be guilty of what she did. In this case the stronger case is the fact that she didn't stop or report the accident.

veronese68

Whilst I think that she is without doubt a liability and I hope they throw the book at the callous little tart, I cannot see at any point anything to indicate it was premeditated. What a very strange way of looking at things.

Mr.Duck

she regretted her "stupid, immature, spur-of-the-moment" tweet

So she regrets the tweet. She doesn't regret driving at speed into a cyclist, then?

Mr.Duck

DonDaddyD wrote:

"well why didn't you stop for the cyclist".

Because they don't even pay any tax whatsoever!!! *rage* *rage* *rage* It's the cyclist's fault for not leaping into the hedge to get out of the way of the car in the first place!!!

kelsen

Veronese68 wrote:

Whilst I think that she is without doubt a liability and I hope they throw the book at the callous little tart, I cannot see at any point anything to indicate it was premeditated. What a very strange way of looking at things.

This is an internet forum remember, so our capacity to misread, misinterpret and embellish is boundless; coupled with the fact that we're wrong about nearly everything means we are allowed to go to town on anything we damn well please!

veronese68

kelsen wrote:

Veronese68 wrote:

Whilst I think that she is without doubt a liability and I hope they throw the book at the callous little tart, I cannot see at any point anything to indicate it was premeditated. What a very strange way of looking at things.

This is an internet forum remember, so our capacity to misread, misinterpret and embellish is boundless; coupled with the fact that we're wrong about nearly everything means we are allowed to go to town on anything we damn well please!

Not forgetting the old adage "never let the truth get in the way of a good story".

dilemna

DonDaddyD wrote:

dilemna wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

Her twitter post is a prime example of the disassociative attitude some drivers have of cyclists.

"Definitely hit a cyclist today..."

As though the above is OK, and something to laugh about. At its worst it suggests that 'cyclist' doesn't mean person, with loved ones, dependents etc. She completely ignores the value of that person's life all because he is a cyclist.

Had she hit a pedestrian would she have stopped? The answer one can assume is probably yes, and it makes me annoyed that my mind immediately follows with "well why didn't you stop for the cyclist".

I hope the punnishment is as severe as possible.

And all the other occasions on other days where she has attempted, been unable or failed, for what ever reason, to hit cyclists?

definitely premeditated and dangerous. She should go to prison.

Where is the evidence that she has continually attempted to hit cyclists? I'm genuinely asking.

Your words not mine. I am reading what she is alleged to have tweeted "definatley hit a cyclist today".

Stating "definately" emphasizes that she knew she had done so then makes her statement truly emphatic with "today" which to me suggests that she may have attempted her nasty stunts at other times ie previously which would suggest a degree of premeditation ie that her pattern of behaviour toward cyclists when driving is agressive likely to cause injury. Guilty of dangerous driving and all the rest that followed, lack of remorse and she should now go to prison. Period.

Gallywomack

Dilemna,

I think you're drawing quite a long bow there. She could also simply mean 'definitely' in the sense that she knows she did it, and 'today' in the sense that it happened within the same 24-hour period as she sent/posted/whatever-it-is-you-do the tweet. I don't see that there's much basis for reading any more into it than that, tbh.

rick_chasey

People say all sorts of sh!t on the internet.

I say a lot of stuff that I regret, not because of the furor it creates but because it's usually sh!t.

The tweet shouldn't feature too heavily in the prosecution IMO. The proper issue is she knocked a cyclist off in her car and didn't stop.

The manner of her driving (i.e. was it reckless or not?) and how obvious it was to her (perhaps where the tweet can count for something) is what matters.

PBo

she will be tried in the courts of law for her driving...
.....but in the courts of the internet for her tweet!!! (DEITY$ have mercy on her soul!)

First.Aspect

She's already had a scare.

MY guess is that she knows there was a collision and could see a cyclist on his bike and looking a bit miffed, afterwards. Lots of people don't stop under those circumstances.

The Rookie

I can't see her sentance being anything other than in line with the guidelines which will very much depend on what she is found guilty of and what her income is! The failing to stop/report is slamm dunked and lack of remorse won't help, whether she was DWDCA none of us know, but it carries the likely harsher penalty as there are 2 aggravating factors in that the DWDCA caused an accident and she injured someone.

markhewitt1978

Which court is the hearing at?

I'm going to need to buy a pitchfork and a flaming torch I think, any advice on good brands?

DonDaddyD

dilemna wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

dilemna wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

Her twitter post is a prime example of the disassociative attitude some drivers have of cyclists.

"Definitely hit a cyclist today..."

As though the above is OK, and something to laugh about. At its worst it suggests that 'cyclist' doesn't mean person, with loved ones, dependents etc. She completely ignores the value of that person's life all because he is a cyclist.

Had she hit a pedestrian would she have stopped? The answer one can assume is probably yes, and it makes me annoyed that my mind immediately follows with "well why didn't you stop for the cyclist".

I hope the punnishment is as severe as possible.

And all the other occasions on other days where she has attempted, been unable or failed, for what ever reason, to hit cyclists?

definitely premeditated and dangerous. She should go to prison.

Where is the evidence that she has continually attempted to hit cyclists? I'm genuinely asking.

Your words not mine. I am reading what she is alleged to have tweeted "definatley hit a cyclist today".

Dilemna, you wrote this:

"And all the other occasions on other days where she has attempted, been unable or failed, for what ever reason, to hit cyclists?"

Where is the actual evidence that there were other occasions on other days where she has attempted, been unable or failed, for what ever reason, to hit cyclists?

Those being your actual words.

Stating "definitely" emphasizes that she knew she had done so then makes her statement truly emphatic with "today" which to me suggests that she may have attempted her nasty stunts at other times ie previously which would suggest a degree of premeditation ie that her pattern of behaviour toward cyclists when driving is agressive likely to cause injury.

So you're leaping from one conclusion to another. OK then, carry on...

patrickf

Love it!

Miss Way's post on Twitter read: "Definitely knocked a cyclist off his bike earlier. I have right of way - he doesn't even pay road tax!"

And

a tearful Miss Way described as the public "judging me on one man's side of the story"

Ignoring allegations of bad driving or driving "at speed", the dippy girl admitted publicly to causing an accident, failing to stop and failing to report said accident. Ignoring the cyclist's testimony, I'll still be judging her not on his words, but on her own admissions!

I part agree with Rick that unless there is further evidence of poor driving, the prosecution should concentrate on the facts. That said, her tweet is her own admission to failing to stop and failing to report.

Paul E

There are multiple photos and tweets of her speeding, taking photos of the speedo while doing said speeding and moaning about people being in her way, she sounds like a serial driving douche bag and should be banged up to provide an example

patrickf

Paul E wrote:

There are multiple photos and tweets of her speeding, taking photos of the speedo while doing said speeding and moaning about people being in her way, she sounds like a serial driving douche bag and should be banged up to provide an example

In which case if the prosecution can provide the above evidence then she really does deserve all she gets.

I know plenty of people do, but why would you take/keep/share evidence of you breaking the law?

nicklouse

patrickf wrote:

, but why would you take/keep/share evidence of you breaking the law?

because they are thick and just dont realise that others can see it and it could be used against them.

been going on for years. nothing new.

The Rookie

patrickf wrote:

the dippy girl admitted publicly to causing an accident

Did she, I mean really.....no, she admitted being involved in the accident which is far from being the same thing!

Given the amount of youtube vids from in car camera's that show dreadful driving by the camera's owner, I have long since given up on trying to understand peoples stupidity when it comes to such things!

daviesee

The Rookie wrote:

patrickf wrote:

the dippy girl admitted publicly to causing an accident

Did she, I mean really.....no, she admitted being involved in the accident which is far from being the same thing!

Given the amount of youtube vids from in car camera's that show dreadful driving by the camera's owner, I have long since given up on trying to understand peoples stupidity when it comes to such things!

IMHO, yes she did.
She said she hit a cyclist, not that a cyclist hit her which she would have done if it was an "accident". She also has made other admissions on media that point to her attitude to driving.
What is undeniable is that she left the scene of the "accident".

Her only defence is that if the cyclist never reported it before the media circus is that he also left the scene.

The Rookie

If the cyclist was on her side of the road she still would have hit him...so no, I think saying that was admitting the accident is like making 2+2= about 250!

I agree that her general attitude to driving and the reponsibility that comes with it is totally unacceptable!