kwik fit fitter gets 6 1/2 years.
03-22-2012, 01:34 AM
#11
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: OLD SOUTH WALES
Posts: 10,680
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Penelope Ptistop' timestamp='1332371191' post='21531442
I always leave a note on the dash with the current mileage on it, or ask them to call me if they need to move it, as it has a tracker fitted...in an attempt to stop idiots like this.
RIP the poor child.
03-22-2012, 01:55 PM
#12
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: There's no i in toast!
Posts: 9,022
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
...Something doesn't add up though and whilst they should most certainly have not been in the car, it looks like the little lad didn't look what was coming before bolting out into the road. You can tell this by the fact that the nearside corner of the car is the point of impact.
Eyewitness reports will always say a sportscar was speeding even if it was parked and there was no one in it.
Eyewitness reports will always say a sportscar was speeding even if it was parked and there was no one in it.
Got to feel for the parents. It must destroy you to be told your child has been killed
03-22-2012, 02:11 PM
#13
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: OLD SOUTH WALES
Posts: 10,680
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
does it matter.
they stole a car and killed somebody.end of story.
or are you saying it was the childs fault for jumping in front of a speeding stolen car ?
the only reason it was picked up by the press that it was a porsche, was because even a retarded tyre monkey wouldnt twoc a fiesta.
but if it had been a fiesta it would have been reported the same just less emphasis on the car.
they stole a car and killed somebody.end of story.
or are you saying it was the childs fault for jumping in front of a speeding stolen car ?
the only reason it was picked up by the press that it was a porsche, was because even a retarded tyre monkey wouldnt twoc a fiesta.
but if it had been a fiesta it would have been reported the same just less emphasis on the car.
03-22-2012, 02:38 PM
#14
Registered User
Originally Posted by Ultra_Nexus' timestamp='1332376609' post='21531745
I guarantee you if he'd have done the same thing in a Kia Sedona, he'd have only got a couple of years.
Something doesn't add up though and whilst they should most certainly have not been in the car, it looks like the little lad didn't look what was coming before bolting out into the road. You can tell this by the fact that the nearside corner of the car is the point of impact.
Eyewitness reports will always say a sportscar was speeding even if it was parked and there was no one in it.
Something doesn't add up though and whilst they should most certainly have not been in the car, it looks like the little lad didn't look what was coming before bolting out into the road. You can tell this by the fact that the nearside corner of the car is the point of impact.
Eyewitness reports will always say a sportscar was speeding even if it was parked and there was no one in it.
It goes without saying that the eyewitnesses exaggerated the cars speed,why would they steal a Porsche to drive fast?
You really need to think before you post such rubbish.
Eyewitnesses will hear a car going fast. I shouldn't have to tell you that eyewitnesses hardly ever use their eyes and see what they want to see. What they saw was a Porsche making noise. I know, you know, most on this board know that if something is making noise, it's speeding. I once had a woman on my estate tell me that she heard me speeding when I was the only one on that estate who didn't speed, just that everyone else drove an X5, mini or 3 series that didn't make much noise.
Now, these guys were obviously not supposed to have been in the car and that is something that is actually irrelevant in the case of Death by Dangerous driving. What that is is theft of a motor vehicle.
So when we actually look at the incident, the factors we are after are:
Was he speeding at the time of impact?
Did he mount the kerb?
Was he sliding/not in control of the car at the time of impact?
The nearside wheel looks in good nick, so it's unlikely he mounted the kerb.
The roads would have given away if he was sliding.
So the only thing we know of if he was speeding was the damage to the car (the report/article on BBC says at speeds upto 80mph. Great, how do we actually know unless there was data logging on the car or it was caught by a speed camera. Most probably, eyewitnesses would have been asked how fast the car was going and then given the following answer - Actual speed + noise + type of car factor = 80mph. He was probably doing 60-65 if the speed was based on eyewitness accounts.
Oh, one more thing about eyewitnesses! Mate of mine was on his new Motorbike. He now openly admits he was being a bit silly and had an accident with a car. An eyewitness in another car stops, runs over to him and checks he is alright (he is on the whole). Then says to him 'I didn't see what happened, but i'm a biker, so what happened. They got their story straight and my mate got a tasty payout
So yes, if you believe the sensationalism, it is going to look like I am talking rubbish.
Or, you have experience in these matters and see right through it to a point of unbiased objectivity.
03-22-2012, 02:40 PM
#15
Originally Posted by Ultra_Nexus' timestamp='1332376609' post='21531745
I guarantee you if he'd have done the same thing in a Kia Sedona, he'd have only got a couple of years.
Something doesn't add up though and whilst they should most certainly have not been in the car, it looks like the little lad didn't look what was coming before bolting out into the road. You can tell this by the fact that the nearside corner of the car is the point of impact.
Eyewitness reports will always say a sportscar was speeding even if it was parked and there was no one in it.
Something doesn't add up though and whilst they should most certainly have not been in the car, it looks like the little lad didn't look what was coming before bolting out into the road. You can tell this by the fact that the nearside corner of the car is the point of impact.
Eyewitness reports will always say a sportscar was speeding even if it was parked and there was no one in it.
It goes without saying that the eyewitnesses exaggerated the cars speed,why would they steal a Porsche to drive fast?
You really need to think before you post such rubbish.
03-22-2012, 03:04 PM
#17
Registered User
Of course what I put isn't worth reading, it doesn't have a V8 in it and requires thought
03-22-2012, 03:06 PM
#18
[/quote]
03-22-2012, 11:11 PM
#19
Member
Porsche ECU data logs everything. The simple fact is that they shouldn't have been driving it, were probably speeding (can be verified by data log) and have killed a child. I don't see there's much to debate.
I mean, come on, 2 young lads out in a Porker and managaing to wreck it? Must have been the kids fault.
I would be interested to know the legality of using ECU data. It would clearly show speed upto the last time the engine was switched off.
I mean, come on, 2 young lads out in a Porker and managaing to wreck it? Must have been the kids fault.
I would be interested to know the legality of using ECU data. It would clearly show speed upto the last time the engine was switched off.
03-22-2012, 11:28 PM
#20
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Herts
Posts: 2,627
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quite frankly he could have been doing 25mph in a 40. If that had been my Porsche that had been twoc'd, crashed and killed a child, I'd want the guy stitching up as far as possible.
In this instance, I'm all for eye witnesses saying he was doing 3 figures and the child was dressed as a fully illuminated Christmas tree.
In this instance, I'm all for eye witnesses saying he was doing 3 figures and the child was dressed as a fully illuminated Christmas tree.