You need to be logged in to your Sky Poker account above to post discussions and comments.

You might need to refresh your page afterwards.

Trump to be nominated for Nobel Peace Prize......NOT!

1235

Comments

  • goldongoldon Member Posts: 9,061
    You just killed a person how would you feel ........
  • madprofmadprof Member Posts: 3,458
    goldon said:

    You just killed a person how would you feel ........

    Probably not as bad as the parents whose child died in an avoidable accident...If you drive on the right side of the road, you don't crash into this poor boy
  • madprofmadprof Member Posts: 3,458
    Essexphil said:

    tomgoodun said:

    chilling said:

    If she served time, who would that benefit?
    If she got four years, would the bereaved family feel that’s just desert for what they know was a complete accident?
    Sometimes you need to do what is morally correct,some sort of compensation is in order.

    Why does it have to benefit anyone?
    We live in a mostly democratic Country, with laws which most of us have to abide to .
    If I did the same thing , would a good defence be “ Don’t jail me judge, it won’t benefit anyone “

    For me, the alleged ‘crime’ and scale of crime isn’t the issue
    Neither is how it affects either party
    It’s about a level playing field.

    “ Morally Correct” should not be in the same sentence as monetary gain.
    We agree on lots of things, Tom.

    I know we are never going to agree on this one. nonetheless, I'll try and set out why i disagree.

    1. I'm not saying it is "fair" that diplomatic immunity means there is no criminal prosecution here, merely that there would be GREATER injustices if it did not apply. Consensual relationship with same sex partner can mean death in various countries. A cheating wife can face severe penalties in many countries. Diplomats need to be able to do their jobs in times of war without fear of prosecution.

    2. There never has been a level playing field. Take, for example, Careless Driving. When i used to deal with such matters, many years ago, it was 3-9 points or a ban, and a fine. But foreign drivers could only get a fine if not on a UK driving license. Same applies abroad

    3. Always been ways round things. I recall a famous sportsman being done for Drink Driving, and being banned. He promptly moved to Jersey and carried on driving there.

    4. Death by Dangerous Driving is as rare as rocking horse poo. The reason is simple-juries (unlike Magistrates on lesser charges) are extremely reluctant to find people guilty. Easy on social media-much harder when on a jury.

    People have been judging everyone in this unfairly. The parents may be acting irrationally, but @goldon is spot on above. After 3 weeks, this person didn't "flee"-this was a diplomatic decision. The police didn't do anything because there was nothing they could do.
    Phil

    You are much more knowledgable on these matters than me, so just for my clarification?

    If I had driven on the wrong side of the road, there was an accident resulting in a death and there was (allegedly)CCTV footage which proved my wrong doing, in all likelihood after a thorough police investigation where I owned up to my driving misdemeanour, I wouldn't get a custodial sentence...

    What I post below I've done, fortunately for the passengers in the car I hit no-one was hurt....and fortunately for me i wasn't subject to the outcome of the case below...Driver convicted of causing death by dangerous driving

    Source CPS.GOV.UK

    Driver convicted of causing death by dangerous driving
    08 June 2018|News, Driving offences
    A man who crashed into another vehicle on the M4 killing a pregnant woman and her unborn child has been convicted at Swansea Crown Court.

    Craig Scott, 51, was driving to work on the M4 near Port Talbot when the traffic in front of him came to a standstill. He failed to notice the stationary vehicles and drove into the back of the Peugeot 407 motor vehicle in front of him. The collision killed the passenger of the Peugeot, Rebecca Evans, and her unborn child, and injured the driver and another child sat in the rear of the Peugeot.

    Jenni Harris from the CPS said: “The defendant accepted he caused death by careless driving, but the CPS did not believe this accurately reflected the manner of his driving that day, taking Scott to trial on the more serious offence of causing death by dangerous driving.

    “The circumstances of this case are tragic and it is a stark reminder of how lives are affected by poor driving.

    “We thank all those who came forward to give evidence in this case, and also the family and friends of Rebecca for their support and understanding through the court process. Our sympathies remain with them for their loss.”

    Craig Scott was sentenced to three years’ imprisonment and disqualified from driving for five years, which was extended to a six-and-a-half-year ban.

    Notes to editors
    Jenni Harris is a Senior Crown Prosecutor in CPS Cymru-Wales
    Craig John SCOTT (DOB: 26/11/66) was convicted of causing death by dangerous driving and causing serious injury by dangerous driving
    The collision occurred near J38 of the M4 on 29 November 2016.


    I'm trying not to 'judge' and there will be examples that can be posted which will show lesser sentences for similar outcomes...but really, doesn't the American lady's case-if the investigation as Goldfinger said is conclusive- merit being considered in a similar sentencing regime?
  • madprofmadprof Member Posts: 3,458
    Just a point..the original post was about how the Donald had tried to facilitate a situation for his own gain, with no real forethought for the parents AND in all likelihood he would interfere and block to any extradition request...I was reliably informed that the US block all extradition requests for 'incidents' that have happened in eg UK...If wikipedia is to be believed and up todate..not true..7

    US cases where the treaty has been applied
    From January 2004 to the end of December 2011, 7 known US citizens were extradited from the US to the UK.[19] No US citizen was extradited for an alleged crime while the person was based in the US.[14] The U.S. embassy in London reports that, as of April 2013, 38 individuals have been extradited from the US to the UK.[20]
  • chillingchilling Member Posts: 3,774
    From the bits I’ve read, I’m coming away with Boris being pressured into trying to make it look as if he’s making an effort to get things sorted.He needs to look good at this time, every little helps.
    It looks obv to me that certain ministers have tried to make it difficult for the police.
    This looks like a cover up, and is fanning the flames.
  • EssexphilEssexphil Member Posts: 8,780
    madprof said:

    Essexphil said:

    tomgoodun said:

    chilling said:

    If she served time, who would that benefit?
    If she got four years, would the bereaved family feel that’s just desert for what they know was a complete accident?
    Sometimes you need to do what is morally correct,some sort of compensation is in order.

    Why does it have to benefit anyone?
    We live in a mostly democratic Country, with laws which most of us have to abide to .
    If I did the same thing , would a good defence be “ Don’t jail me judge, it won’t benefit anyone “

    For me, the alleged ‘crime’ and scale of crime isn’t the issue
    Neither is how it affects either party
    It’s about a level playing field.

    “ Morally Correct” should not be in the same sentence as monetary gain.
    We agree on lots of things, Tom.

    I know we are never going to agree on this one. nonetheless, I'll try and set out why i disagree.

    1. I'm not saying it is "fair" that diplomatic immunity means there is no criminal prosecution here, merely that there would be GREATER injustices if it did not apply. Consensual relationship with same sex partner can mean death in various countries. A cheating wife can face severe penalties in many countries. Diplomats need to be able to do their jobs in times of war without fear of prosecution.

    2. There never has been a level playing field. Take, for example, Careless Driving. When i used to deal with such matters, many years ago, it was 3-9 points or a ban, and a fine. But foreign drivers could only get a fine if not on a UK driving license. Same applies abroad

    3. Always been ways round things. I recall a famous sportsman being done for Drink Driving, and being banned. He promptly moved to Jersey and carried on driving there.

    4. Death by Dangerous Driving is as rare as rocking horse poo. The reason is simple-juries (unlike Magistrates on lesser charges) are extremely reluctant to find people guilty. Easy on social media-much harder when on a jury.

    People have been judging everyone in this unfairly. The parents may be acting irrationally, but @goldon is spot on above. After 3 weeks, this person didn't "flee"-this was a diplomatic decision. The police didn't do anything because there was nothing they could do.
    Phil

    You are much more knowledgable on these matters than me, so just for my clarification?

    If I had driven on the wrong side of the road, there was an accident resulting in a death and there was (allegedly)CCTV footage which proved my wrong doing, in all likelihood after a thorough police investigation where I owned up to my driving misdemeanour, I wouldn't get a custodial sentence...

    What I post below I've done, fortunately for the passengers in the car I hit no-one was hurt....and fortunately for me i wasn't subject to the outcome of the case below...Driver convicted of causing death by dangerous driving

    Source CPS.GOV.UK

    Driver convicted of causing death by dangerous driving
    08 June 2018|News, Driving offences
    A man who crashed into another vehicle on the M4 killing a pregnant woman and her unborn child has been convicted at Swansea Crown Court.

    Craig Scott, 51, was driving to work on the M4 near Port Talbot when the traffic in front of him came to a standstill. He failed to notice the stationary vehicles and drove into the back of the Peugeot 407 motor vehicle in front of him. The collision killed the passenger of the Peugeot, Rebecca Evans, and her unborn child, and injured the driver and another child sat in the rear of the Peugeot.

    Jenni Harris from the CPS said: “The defendant accepted he caused death by careless driving, but the CPS did not believe this accurately reflected the manner of his driving that day, taking Scott to trial on the more serious offence of causing death by dangerous driving.

    “The circumstances of this case are tragic and it is a stark reminder of how lives are affected by poor driving.

    “We thank all those who came forward to give evidence in this case, and also the family and friends of Rebecca for their support and understanding through the court process. Our sympathies remain with them for their loss.”

    Craig Scott was sentenced to three years’ imprisonment and disqualified from driving for five years, which was extended to a six-and-a-half-year ban.

    Notes to editors
    Jenni Harris is a Senior Crown Prosecutor in CPS Cymru-Wales
    Craig John SCOTT (DOB: 26/11/66) was convicted of causing death by dangerous driving and causing serious injury by dangerous driving
    The collision occurred near J38 of the M4 on 29 November 2016.


    I'm trying not to 'judge' and there will be examples that can be posted which will show lesser sentences for similar outcomes...but really, doesn't the American lady's case-if the investigation as Goldfinger said is conclusive- merit being considered in a similar sentencing regime?
    In short, no.

    The key consideration in the case you quoted above was whether the lapse was momentary or longer lasting. There was lots of evidence to show that man had been making phone calls prior, had not braked at all etc
  • EssexphilEssexphil Member Posts: 8,780
    madprof said:

    Just a point..the original post was about how the Donald had tried to facilitate a situation for his own gain, with no real forethought for the parents AND in all likelihood he would interfere and block to any extradition request...I was reliably informed that the US block all extradition requests for 'incidents' that have happened in eg UK...If wikipedia is to be believed and up todate..not true..7

    US cases where the treaty has been applied
    From January 2004 to the end of December 2011, 7 known US citizens were extradited from the US to the UK.[19] No US citizen was extradited for an alleged crime while the person was based in the US.[14] The U.S. embassy in London reports that, as of April 2013, 38 individuals have been extradited from the US to the UK.[20]

    You are talking about a totally different treaty there. That is not the diplomatic immunity one.

    I can't stand Trump. But every single US President (and UK PM) would have done exactly the same.
    Similarly, every PM would have made the noises Johnson did. While knowing fine well that nothing was going to change.
  • EssexphilEssexphil Member Posts: 8,780
    chilling said:

    From the bits I’ve read, I’m coming away with Boris being pressured into trying to make it look as if he’s making an effort to get things sorted.He needs to look good at this time, every little helps.
    It looks obv to me that certain ministers have tried to make it difficult for the police.
    This looks like a cover up, and is fanning the flames.

    It's not a cover up. It's just the way these things work.

    The rest is just newspapers selling newspapers. You know, secretive billionaire newspaper owners demanding the right to sensationalise others' grief.
  • madprofmadprof Member Posts: 3,458
    Essexphil said:

    madprof said:

    Just a point..the original post was about how the Donald had tried to facilitate a situation for his own gain, with no real forethought for the parents AND in all likelihood he would interfere and block to any extradition request...I was reliably informed that the US block all extradition requests for 'incidents' that have happened in eg UK...If wikipedia is to be believed and up todate..not true..7

    US cases where the treaty has been applied
    From January 2004 to the end of December 2011, 7 known US citizens were extradited from the US to the UK.[19] No US citizen was extradited for an alleged crime while the person was based in the US.[14] The U.S. embassy in London reports that, as of April 2013, 38 individuals have been extradited from the US to the UK.[20]

    You are talking about a totally different treaty there. That is not the diplomatic immunity one.

    I can't stand Trump. But every single US President (and UK PM) would have done exactly the same.
    Similarly, every PM would have made the noises Johnson did. While knowing fine well that nothing was going to change.
    Sorry, yes I know...that's why I posted it...If Dominic Raab can confirm she didnt have diplomatic status, then she surely must be covered by this agreement.

    Notwithstanding the cynical, distasteful use of the diplomatic ' get out of jail card', time should now dictate that she should be treated like i would be, after the police have completed their investigations? we'll see..
  • madprofmadprof Member Posts: 3,458
    Essexphil said:

    madprof said:

    Essexphil said:

    tomgoodun said:

    chilling said:

    If she served time, who would that benefit?
    If she got four years, would the bereaved family feel that’s just desert for what they know was a complete accident?
    Sometimes you need to do what is morally correct,some sort of compensation is in order.

    Why does it have to benefit anyone?
    We live in a mostly democratic Country, with laws which most of us have to abide to .
    If I did the same thing , would a good defence be “ Don’t jail me judge, it won’t benefit anyone “

    For me, the alleged ‘crime’ and scale of crime isn’t the issue
    Neither is how it affects either party
    It’s about a level playing field.

    “ Morally Correct” should not be in the same sentence as monetary gain.
    We agree on lots of things, Tom.

    I know we are never going to agree on this one. nonetheless, I'll try and set out why i disagree.

    1. I'm not saying it is "fair" that diplomatic immunity means there is no criminal prosecution here, merely that there would be GREATER injustices if it did not apply. Consensual relationship with same sex partner can mean death in various countries. A cheating wife can face severe penalties in many countries. Diplomats need to be able to do their jobs in times of war without fear of prosecution.

    2. There never has been a level playing field. Take, for example, Careless Driving. When i used to deal with such matters, many years ago, it was 3-9 points or a ban, and a fine. But foreign drivers could only get a fine if not on a UK driving license. Same applies abroad

    3. Always been ways round things. I recall a famous sportsman being done for Drink Driving, and being banned. He promptly moved to Jersey and carried on driving there.

    4. Death by Dangerous Driving is as rare as rocking horse poo. The reason is simple-juries (unlike Magistrates on lesser charges) are extremely reluctant to find people guilty. Easy on social media-much harder when on a jury.

    People have been judging everyone in this unfairly. The parents may be acting irrationally, but @goldon is spot on above. After 3 weeks, this person didn't "flee"-this was a diplomatic decision. The police didn't do anything because there was nothing they could do.
    Phil

    You are much more knowledgable on these matters than me, so just for my clarification?

    If I had driven on the wrong side of the road, there was an accident resulting in a death and there was (allegedly)CCTV footage which proved my wrong doing, in all likelihood after a thorough police investigation where I owned up to my driving misdemeanour, I wouldn't get a custodial sentence...

    What I post below I've done, fortunately for the passengers in the car I hit no-one was hurt....and fortunately for me i wasn't subject to the outcome of the case below...Driver convicted of causing death by dangerous driving

    Source CPS.GOV.UK

    Driver convicted of causing death by dangerous driving
    08 June 2018|News, Driving offences
    A man who crashed into another vehicle on the M4 killing a pregnant woman and her unborn child has been convicted at Swansea Crown Court.

    Craig Scott, 51, was driving to work on the M4 near Port Talbot when the traffic in front of him came to a standstill. He failed to notice the stationary vehicles and drove into the back of the Peugeot 407 motor vehicle in front of him. The collision killed the passenger of the Peugeot, Rebecca Evans, and her unborn child, and injured the driver and another child sat in the rear of the Peugeot.

    Jenni Harris from the CPS said: “The defendant accepted he caused death by careless driving, but the CPS did not believe this accurately reflected the manner of his driving that day, taking Scott to trial on the more serious offence of causing death by dangerous driving.

    “The circumstances of this case are tragic and it is a stark reminder of how lives are affected by poor driving.

    “We thank all those who came forward to give evidence in this case, and also the family and friends of Rebecca for their support and understanding through the court process. Our sympathies remain with them for their loss.”

    Craig Scott was sentenced to three years’ imprisonment and disqualified from driving for five years, which was extended to a six-and-a-half-year ban.

    Notes to editors
    Jenni Harris is a Senior Crown Prosecutor in CPS Cymru-Wales
    Craig John SCOTT (DOB: 26/11/66) was convicted of causing death by dangerous driving and causing serious injury by dangerous driving
    The collision occurred near J38 of the M4 on 29 November 2016.


    I'm trying not to 'judge' and there will be examples that can be posted which will show lesser sentences for similar outcomes...but really, doesn't the American lady's case-if the investigation as Goldfinger said is conclusive- merit being considered in a similar sentencing regime?
    In short, no.

    The key consideration in the case you quoted above was whether the lapse was momentary or longer lasting. There was lots of evidence to show that man had been making phone calls prior, had not braked at all etc
    Cheers, a better in depth researcher than me!
  • HAYSIEHAYSIE Member Posts: 35,862
    I am probably risking getting sued for posting this.



    Harry Dunn: Family to sue Trump administration for ‘cover up’ in teenage son’s death

    The family of a teenager who was killed in a car crash with the wife of an American diplomat have said they are planning to sue the Trump administration for lawless misconduct and a cover-up.

    Earlier this month, the family also made it clear that they would be seeking legal action against the Foreign Office for their handling of the incident.

    Radd Seiger, a spokesman for the Dunn family, said they have found lawyers willing to work with them to pursue a “civil claim for damages” against Ms Sacoolas, as well as a claim against the Trump White House.

    He added “We are bringing claims against both Ms Sacoolas in the USA for civil damages as well as the Trump administration for their lawless misconduct and attempt to cover that up.


    https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/harry-dunn-family-to-sue-trump-administration-for-cover-up-in-teenage-sons-death/ar-AAJyxoV?ocid=spartanntp
  • EssexphilEssexphil Member Posts: 8,780
    HAYSIE said:

    I am probably risking getting sued for posting this.



    Harry Dunn: Family to sue Trump administration for ‘cover up’ in teenage son’s death

    The family of a teenager who was killed in a car crash with the wife of an American diplomat have said they are planning to sue the Trump administration for lawless misconduct and a cover-up.

    Earlier this month, the family also made it clear that they would be seeking legal action against the Foreign Office for their handling of the incident.

    Radd Seiger, a spokesman for the Dunn family, said they have found lawyers willing to work with them to pursue a “civil claim for damages” against Ms Sacoolas, as well as a claim against the Trump White House.

    He added “We are bringing claims against both Ms Sacoolas in the USA for civil damages as well as the Trump administration for their lawless misconduct and attempt to cover that up.


    https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/harry-dunn-family-to-sue-trump-administration-for-cover-up-in-teenage-sons-death/ar-AAJyxoV?ocid=spartanntp

    Just want to amend your post slightly.

    Family of teenager tragically killed in car crash are planning to sue someone who was in no way connected with his death. They don't care who that is, Trump, FO, anyone. They have a really easy case against the driver, but have discovered that awards for death are lower in the UK Courts than other types of serious injury.

    Radd Seiger is aware that the majority of UK Solicitors could deal with this (like me, he used to work in Law), but they have found US Lawyers who believe they could get loads of free publicity.

    US Law never ceases to surprise me. I wouldn't rule anything out. But (lest we forget) this is an injury on UK soil, resulting from negligent UK driving, causing loss in the UK to a UK citizen and (probably, in legal terms) his family.

    Which would you prefer? A simple UK case, where liability is unlikely to be in issue, with legal costs pretty much guaranteed to be paid by an Insurer. Or years of political posturing, soundbites, and an uncertain outcome.

    I no longer give legal advice. And I try and avoid Latin. So I am not going to say these 3 words:-

    Forum non conveniens
  • HAYSIEHAYSIE Member Posts: 35,862
    Harry Dunn: Government tell grieving family their claims of misuse of power ‘entirely without foundation’, after teenage kill in crash involving US diplomat
    Letter also denies foreign secretary ‘committed misfeasance’


    “It is not therefore accepted that you have identified any arguable basis on which to suggest that the FCO ought now either ‘to withdraw the advice provided to the police’, or to pay ‘substantive damages for the breach of Articles 2 and 6, ECHR’.

    https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/harry-dunn-death-family-judicial-review-dominic-raab-anne-sacoolas-a9197496.html
  • chillingchilling Member Posts: 3,774
    edited November 2019
    With the possibility of a court case ahead, there’s going to no chance of seeing the accident report in detail.
    I had a look on streetview, but it ends short of the airbase as it’s a sensitive area I suppose.
    It must have happened close to that tight bend.
    That bend looks like it’s in a 60mph, which then drops to 40mph closer to the base.
    Apparently their lights were on.
    I haven’t seen if the car was right hand drive or left.
    If it was right hand, then it should have been obvious something was not right, as you’re sitting away from the Centre lines on the road.
    I think bikers are more attentive than drivers,less distractions.
  • madprofmadprof Member Posts: 3,458
    chilling said:

    With the possibility of a court case ahead, there’s going to no chance of seeing the accident report in detail.
    I had a look on streetview, but it ends short of the airbase as it’s a sensitive area I suppose.
    It must have happened close to that tight bend.
    That bend looks like it’s in a 60mph, which then drops to 40mph closer to the base.
    Apparently their lights were on.
    I haven’t seen if the car was right hand drive or left.
    If it was right hand, then it should have been obvious something was not right, as you’re sitting away from the Centre lines on the road.
    I think bikers are more attentive than drivers,less distractions.

    I agree: I’m a biker and partly due to the higher riding position with the obvious need to stay aware( otherwise you fall over) it means your positions on the roads and what cars are doing much more Obvious. And yes, not concentrating on phones, Satnavs, radios, passengers etc means bikers focus in on riding

    In terms of being on the wrong side of the road, when I was 18 (I’m 62 now) in France, we were looking for our destination on country roads and as we went down a lane, a French driver came towards me smiling, flashing his lights as I went down the road, uk style!

    So I know it can happen, subconsciously, but my lack of ‘ driving without due care and attention’ didn’t result in the loss of life so I’m staggered she can’t be brought to justice, even at a lesser charge. If I had caused any injury , I’m sure the French would have brought me to court...again if she wasn’t covered by diplomatic immunity, why can’t she?
  • HAYSIEHAYSIE Member Posts: 35,862
    The last time I saw the police commenting on this, they were saying that the average time for an investigation of a similar offence is 16 weeks.
    This may be more complex than the average, but we haven't even got to the 16 weeks yet.
    The family seem to be focused on media coverage, and suing all and sundry for damages.
    It would seem that a criminal prosecution is unlikely as the woman is clearly not returning to the UK, and the US Government are unlikely to agree to extradition.
    Unfortunately, people die every day in road accidents, and no amount of suing will bring them back.
    Any damages awarded could not possibly compensate for the loss of a child.
  • chillingchilling Member Posts: 3,774
  • HAYSIEHAYSIE Member Posts: 35,862
    chilling said:


    The accident apparently took place near the brow of the hill, where they were unable to see each other.
  • chillingchilling Member Posts: 3,774
    edited November 2019
    From the satellite view of the road,it looks as if the car was three quarters the way around a bend. It is on a rise.
    There are accident marks on the road,I’ve just made a poor effort uploading it.
  • chillingchilling Member Posts: 3,774
Sign In or Register to comment.