Emma Way, the motorist who tweeted about having knocked a cyclist from his bike, has been found guilty of failing to stop after an accident and failure to report an accident. However, she has been cleared of a third count relating to careless driving.
Way was fined £300, will have her driving licence endorsed with 7 penalty points and also has to pay £337 in costs.
The BBC reported that earlier today, she had told Norwich Magistrates' Court: "The tweet was spur of the moment. It was ridiculous and stupid and I apologise to all cyclists."
She added that posting that message on Twitter is “the biggest regret of my life so far.”
Shortly after the incident in Rockland, Norfolk on Sunday 19 May which left cyclist Toby Hockley with minor injuries, Way posted a tweet on the social network that read: “Definitely knocked a cyclist off his bike earlier – I have right of way he doesn't even pay road tax!" together with the hashtag, #bloodycyclists.
The 21-year-old was charged with careless driving, failing to stop after an accident and failing to report an accident.
Way told Norwich Magistrates’ Court tday that as a result of her tweet, and the media storm that followed, she had lost her job as a trainee accountant.
ITV reports that her solicitor asked her to rate, on a scale of 1 to 10, how stupid it was to tweet about the incident. She replied, “11.”
Way, who denied the charges, claimed that the handlebars of Mr Hockley’s bike had clipped her vehicle and that she saw him wobble slightly as she looked into her rear-view mirror, leading her to assume he was okay. She added that she was unable to stop due to a blind corner.
The cyclist, riding a sportive with a friend, told the court that although he did not come off his bike, he did end up in a hedge.
"A car came around the corner, narrowly missing Jay," he recalled.
"The car was heading over to my side of the road.
"I was hit on the leg by the wing and on the arm by the wing mirror and tried to slam on my brakes to regain control."
That infamous #bloodycyclists hashtag was reappropriated by cyclists in the wake of May's incident, with Mr Hockley himself helping set up the bloodycyclist.com website which aims to "raise some awareness and money for some of the dangers that face cyclists on a daily occurrence."
Merchandise including a #bloodycyclist jersey can be bought through the site.
-1024x680.jpg "“Clear anti-cyclist bias”: Lawsuit filed against Toronto police after cop doored cyclist… before ticketing rider over incident")
103 thoughts on “Emma Way found guilty on 2 of 3 counts in #bloodycyclists case”
So it’s still the tweet she
So it’s still the tweet she regrets rather than hitting the guy on the bike 8|
Indeed … and worse than
Indeed … and worse than than – she only regrets getting pulled up in public about the tweet – not about the tweet itself.
What a load of crap. She
What a load of crap. She should have at least been given a ban.
I reversed out of a parking space in 2003, I managed to scrape a plastic bumper of another car. Left all my details, but because I didn’t contact the police, I got failing to stop and failing to report. 18 month ban and £450 fine….
She gets away with still being on the road after an incident with a human, who to my mind is my fragile than a plastic bumper….
Gkam84 wrote:
I reversed out
That seems unbelievably harsh. Surely it isn’t in the public interest to prosecute something like that?
benb wrote:Gkam84 wrote:
I
Yes, that does seem harsh. I was given 8 points (to bring me to an attention grabbing 11) and £660 fine for an “accident” (no damage, no injury) with a car on the motorway that I failed to report. I was convicted of driving without due care. So, how does someone who doesn’t take due care and actually hurts a human being not get convicted of that?
BTW, I’m not defending or complaining about my conviction, I was driving badly! 🙁 Actually, like a twat!
So what does constitute
So what does constitute careless driving ?
At best she is not capable of giving driving full care and attention but she is still permitted to drive. The law is an ass.
arfa wrote:So what does
“A person is to be regarded as driving without due care and attention if (and only if) the way he drives falls below what would be expected of a competent and careful driver.”
dp24 wrote:arfa wrote:So what
More proof if any was needed that knocking cyclists off their bikes is seen as acceptable behavior by the courts
alronald wrote:dp24
More proof if any was needed that knocking cyclists off their bikes is seen as acceptable behavior by the courts— arfa
Not at all. Just that proving that she was any more careless than him is not easy. It is more a point of proof and law, rather than it being acceptable ‘to knock cyclists off their bikes’.
People seem to think that it ‘us versus them’. But really it is the burden of proof which is the thing which makes most traffic incidences hard to prove fault on.
Once you remove the two main protagonists evidence (that will be a matter of ‘he said, she said’) you need reliable witnesses who can provide impartial evidence. In this case only the cyclist’s friend was privvy to it, and his friend may never have seen the point of impact. The fact that they tried to prosecute means that they took the collision seriously, they just couldn’t prove it to a sufficient level required (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_burden_of_proof#Beyond_reasonable_doubt).
Outrageous
Outrageous X(
It’s a shame the law could
It’s a shame the law could not make her cycle a minimum mlage over the next year.
It would have really taught her what the roads are like for non-drivers
Handlebars clipped her
Handlebars clipped her vehicle as she drove around a “blind bend”? That’s a ludicrous viewpoint and I’m sorry but I fail to see how she got away with the driving without due care and attention charge.
well if we all keep posting
well if we all keep posting her name, Emma Way, then it will keep showing up on searches and as employers more and more use the web to research people whos CV’s they receive then its going to be bloody hard for her to get a job 🙂
Emma Way
oh did i mention
Emma Way
Should be 12 month ban and a
Should be 12 month ban and a month working in a morgue to make the point sink in
On the plus side, 7 points
On the plus side, 7 points and 21 years old will mean that insurance will cost her a fuckload of money, but I agree that a ban would have been appropriate.
My licence got a 40 day holiday for a single occurrence of speeding. I neither hurt nor inconvenienced anyone.
Private prosecution for physical and psychological injury in the offing? The CTC or some other cycling body could fund it.
allez neg wrote:On the plus
Don’t forget, she lost her job too, a conviction in court also, not something that she will easily move on from. I know they don’t always say, but I’m sure that the judge included this when considering her punishment.
Quote:”A person is to be
Yes the standard of drunk, deaf blind, later middle aged magistrate after a couple of bottles of gin to steady their nerves!!!!!!
I’m getting to be of the
I’m getting to be of the opinion that some form of helmet cam is a very wise investment. I got one a couple of years ago for about £90 from dogcam, initially for motorbike use but on reflection, I reckon I’ll be attaching it to my roadie helmet from now on.
What better way of establishing what happened in an accident and its aftermath than having it recorded?
allez neg wrote:What better
You are assuming the police don’t loose it, or the judge accepts that all footage has been edited to look worse than it was!
She has signed a TV deal with
She has signed a TV deal with ITV’s Daybreak. She’s gonna be profiting from all this. I kid you not.
http://ipayroadtax.com/no-such-thing-as-road-tax/i-knocked-a-cyclist-off-his-bike-i-have-right-of-way-he-doesnt-even-pay-road-tax/
Carlton Reid wrote:She has
I thought it was illegal to make money from crime!
“the biggest regret of my
“the biggest regret of my life so far.” She thinks there’s going to be bigger regrets to come?
I bet her previous
I bet her previous accountancy firm employer is pleased they didn’t hire her, she doesn’t even know that 11 is not on the scale of 1-10!
She’s not sorry she knocked him off, she’s sorry she got caught – outrageous that she wasn’t banned!
Cheers dp24.
So on the basis
Cheers dp24.
So on the basis of this magistrate’s reasoning, competent drivers can collide with other road users forcing them off the road.
I stand by my earlier conclusion.
how do you complain to ITV
how do you complain to ITV for paying convicted criminals for their story? I guess the autobiography is next.
Proving the careless driving
Proving the careless driving was probably the hardest bit, her word against the cyclists I suppose. I’m actually suprised and delighted that it got this far, I expected the usual can’t be bothered approach from the CPS.
She might make a few quid from ITV (who we should all email / tweet I’d say) but her career as an accountant is pretty screwed. Getting a trainee position as an accountant is very difficult so hopefully this incident will make it even harder for her. I don’t normally gloat in people misfortune but not ashamed to say I am here
colinth wrote:Proving the
She hit a cyclist. How is that not driving without due care and attention? She didn’t give enough room. It’s not someone’s word against the other’s. In fact, she even said “I hit a cyclist today”!!!!
I agree, though, that it is pleasantly surprising to see it get taken this far. Even if the conviction is disproportionately low.
Jimbonic wrote:colinth
Colinth is right. Proving the careless driving is not easy. Her word against his. He has nothing to indicate how fast she was going, and had not made an effort to report the incident himself from what I remember. It was also not a head-on collision which suggests that she at least left some room for someone to move passed her (even if it was an inch). I’m not saying she wasn’t careless or anything else – but that proving it is not possible. Who is to say he was not cycling without due care and attention down a hill? I’m sure that is the defence.
Ultimately, she has seen British justice and will likely have learned something from all of this.
Gkam – sorry to hear of your incident. That seems a little unfair.
Colin Peyresourde
Colinth is right. Proving the careless driving is not easy. Her word against his. He has nothing to indicate how fast she was going, and had not made an effort to report the incident himself from what I remember. It was also not a head-on collision which suggests that she at least left some room for someone to move passed her (even if it was an inch). I’m not saying she wasn’t careless or anything else – but that proving it is not possible. Who is to say he was not cycling without due care and attention down a hill? I’m sure that is the defence.
Ultimately, she has seen British justice and will likely have learned something from all of this.
Gkam – sorry to hear of your incident. That seems a little unfair.— colinth
Unless he was riding on the right hand carriage way, I don’t see your point. The cyclist is entitled to use the road. What does her speed have to do with it? She passed unsafely, if she hit the cyclist. The Highway Code quite clearly states that you have to give at least the same room as you would a motor vehicle when passing a cyclist. Of course, we rarely see that. Your example of “an inch” is closer! I would hardly say that is safe or driving with due care.
What does his not reporting it have to do with it? I’m sure there many people on this very forum (even the most militant) who have been the victim of some sort of accident (or worse) and haven’t reported it. It doesn’t make the driving any safer. It doesn’t absolve her of her duty to report the accident, or absolve her of driving without due care and attention.
Jimbonic wrote:Colin
Colinth is right. Proving the careless driving is not easy. Her word against his. He has nothing to indicate how fast she was going, and had not made an effort to report the incident himself from what I remember. It was also not a head-on collision which suggests that she at least left some room for someone to move passed her (even if it was an inch). I’m not saying she wasn’t careless or anything else – but that proving it is not possible. Who is to say he was not cycling without due care and attention down a hill? I’m sure that is the defence.
Ultimately, she has seen British justice and will likely have learned something from all of this.
Gkam – sorry to hear of your incident. That seems a little unfair.— Jimbonic
Unless he was riding on the right hand carriage way, I don’t see your point. The cyclist is entitled to use the road. What does her speed have to do with it? She passed unsafely, if she hit the cyclist. The Highway Code quite clearly states that you have to give at least the same room as you would a motor vehicle when passing a cyclist. Of course, we rarely see that. Your example of “an inch” is closer! I would hardly say that is safe or driving with due care.
.— colinth
I think they were travelling in opposite directions weren’t they ? Even if they were heading in the same direction, she could have said she was passing safely and the bike moved out suddenly without warning across the lane etc. Not saying that’s what happened, it’s just very difficult to prove in court without multiple witnesses or cctv
“Her word against his. He has
“Her word against his. He has nothing to indicate how fast she was going, and had not made an effort to report the incident himself from what I remember.”
That remark annoyed me no end. I bet loads of cyclists don’t report stuff like this because they know it’s a waste of time even if they did have the number plate and a description of the driver. If it was a head on (as the article describes) and she merely drove on then he’s unlikely to have had either.
I wouldn’t have reported it either because I’d be wasting the time of the police. I’d have had no licence plate, no description. Unless you knew an exact model about all you could say was that a (insert colour) car clipped you and drove off.
What the hell could they do with that! Even if you had a number plate it would still be her word against his and she could even deny being the driver or be confused as to who was.
Not reporting it doesn’t mean it wasn’t serious or potentially fatal. It’s merely a recognition that there was not much factual / identity stuff to report.
However, if someone subsequently admits the offence albeit inadvertantly that’s a different matter.
Jimbonic wrote:colinth
Because I’m sure her defence was “he was on the wrong side of the road”. “no I wasn’t you were”, “I wasn’t you were” etc
colinth wrote:Jimbonic
Because I’m sure her defence was “he was on the wrong side of the road”. “no I wasn’t you were”, “I wasn’t you were” etc— colinth
Was it a head on, then? I thought she was passing in the same direction.
Not sure to be honest, same
Not sure to be honest, same direction would have been a bit easier to prove but any decent lawyer would be able to create enough doubt I’d say
Jimbonic wrote:
Was it a head
I’ve found the quote from Road.cc for people:
“I was riding on a country B-road with a friend, and descending a hill on a blind right hand corner”, Toby told us. “I was sticking to the left as the corner was blind. A car came round in the opposite direction going much too quickly to make the corner safely. It missed the rider in front of me but hit me, my right leg caught the front right wing. I was thrown up onto the bonnet, I hit the side of windsrceen and the wing mirror. I bounced back off the car and went through a hedge for about 20 metres. I managed to keep control of the bike; the back brake had locked on but I managed to rejoin the road and stop in the middle of it”
Amazingly Toby made it through the incident with only minor damage to himself and the bike. “I have a sore elbow, a bruised knee, nettle stings from riding through the hedge, but nothing serious”, he told us. “The headset of the bike is loose from the collision, one of the levers got knocked round the bars and there’s bits of nettle in the chain, but I think the bike is intact.”
“Myself and my friend burst out laughing when we finally came to a stop, more out of shock than anything else”, he said. “You count your limbs and carry on”.
Colin Peyresourde
I’ve found the quote from Road.cc for people:— Jimbonic
Thanks, Colin.
Still room for doubt in the eyes of the Magistrate, I guess. But, I will stick with “he had a witness”.
He did very well for someone who “bounced over the bonnet”. Last time I did that I had a face that looked like prime steak!
We could always bombard
We could always bombard ITV..
http://www.itv.com/contactus/get-in-touch/
mikem22 wrote:We could always
I fear that will only encourage them
The only positive I am taking
The only positive I am taking from this is that she was found guilty on 2 of the 3 counts. OK, not the main one of importance, but its better than the normal outcomes reported here when the lesser charge is brought then people are found not guilty. Small steps i guess…
Colin, I note she had
Colin, I note she had suffered away from the judicial process but a key element of an effective criminal legal system is deterrence and there is absolutely nothing in her sentence to deter bad driving. And we wonder why HGV’S have been on a bit of a kill fest in the last couple of weeks.
arfa wrote:And we wonder why
That’s a bit steep don’t you think!? They couldn’t prove bad driving in the case which is why they haven’t removed her license. You can’t punish her arbitrarily. Lord knows why they did it to Gkam though.
Quite a lot of wide of the
Quite a lot of wide of the mark statements here. Failing to stop and/or report ARE the worst of the charges. The careless is a side show and was always going to be the difficult one to prove.
She’s been convicted of the ones which she herself brought down. There’s the karma here.
At least without work and 7
At least without work and 7 points I’d doubt she’ll be able to afford her next insurance renewal.
To be honest I never knew that failing to stop was taken so serious. Some arse ran into me and failed to stop. The police are taking action so I’m hopeful he’ll be buggered.
So her next conviction will
So her next conviction will driving without insurance!
gazzaputt wrote:At least
As he says, at her age, with this on her record, her chosen career is completely knackered and she won’t be able to afford to insure a car to drive, so she is effectively banned for the next 2-3 years at least anyway. Probably fair punishment for what she has done.
Yes I know she is a car driver and therefore has to take responsibility, but we’ve all done bloody stupid things when we were younger and mostly got away with them. She’s an idiot but we can hope she and others might learn from this.
CStar wrote:
As he says, at
It didn’t need to be that way. If she had held her hands up at the beginning and admitted she did it and apologised we would have probably all put it down to the mistakes that young people make and got on with life. But she didn’t. She denied it (in the face of her own evidence), tried and is still trying to blame others and generally trying to weasel her way out of responsibility.
As an employer I don’t mind people making mistakes that they recognise and learn from. I don’t want people who deny their mistakes and try to cover them up, especially if they are in professions like accountancy or law. That’s what happened with Nick Leeson and Bruno Iksil (the London Whale) who covered up and compounded their mistakes until they, and many around them, where overwhelmed with the consequences. Its that which did for her accountancy career and future, not the original incident.
gazzaputt wrote:…To be
A failing to stop offence is taken very seriously by the police, usually. It often conceals other offences – no insurance, drink/drugs driving, no Mot etc.
Likewise, a failing to stop conviction, which MUST be disclosed to an insurer at the relevant time, is taken very seriously by the insurance industry because it directly costs them a lot.
The dumb bitch will probably
The dumb bitch will probably be given a guest spot on that heinous flat slob demon Nick Ferrari show on Lbc(Lickspittle bent c*nts) between Latin spewing effluent blob Bozo the mayor and Tory arse bandit traitor clegg
The moral of these fucking slap on the wrists is that motorists are given carte blanche to kill us with impunity,intentional or not,end of story
=D>
I will agree that no one sets
I will agree that no one sets out to kill but on the roads I regularly see HGV’s driven far too fast/no margin of error in London. Back in the highway code the guidance tells drivers to adjust to conditions/surroundings and anticipate. It doesn’t happen enough.
Emma Way knocked off a cyclist overtaking and the only way this resulted was by not giving enough space (another recurring theme here) as dictated by the highway code. I therefore can’t see how it is not careless driving. Perhaps there was a plea bargain but no penalty = no deterrence= no change in driver behaviour. and so the cycle continues. The law remains an ass.
I cannot believe the leniency
I cannot believe the leniency of this sentence. Had she not tweeted she would have gotten away completely with a hit and run.
Can this be appealed as too lenient?
I think a custodial sentence even a short one and a ban would have been more appropriate in getting across the illegality of what she did. Points and fines are just not seen in the same light.
All this says to bad drivers is that you can bang into cyclists so long as you don’t tweet about it afterwards and get caught.
This sentence, means it’s a bad day for road safety.
oozaveared wrote:I cannot
It’s an excellent day for road safety. A stupid, silly girl got what she deserved. And this IS what she deserved. Let’s not get carried away at making her out to be Ted (or even Al) Bundy. She was involved in a minor accident. What she did later inflated it. Rightly so because tweeting about it was dull.
But, in terms of what she was convicted of she has been sentenced in a manner entirely proportionate with similar offences and the sentencing guidelines.
Perhaps others will think twice about using social media to glorify cycle hatred.
This is not a normal case my
This is not a normal case my friend. The tweet indicates a certain malice. She knocked a cyclist into a hedge (happens accident fair enough might not have even been her fault ??), didn’t stop or report it (bad stuff avoiding any insurance claims or taking responsibility, an implied admission of guilt and criminal 5- 10 points and up to £5000 fine just for that). Then bragged about it indicating that she thought she had the right to do that or that she was proud of it. (de facto admission of guilt on both the previous counts and indicating no remorse indeed jubilation). That’s what I’d make custodial.
She got off very lightly. Punished only in line with offence two and not taking into account her “mens rea” state of mind or attitude.
oozaveared wrote:This is not
Which of the offences she’s charged with require that mens rea?
oozaveared wrote:This is not
That is a good case for the prosecution. On the other hand ….
My client is guilty of nothing other than being an attention seeker who tweeted a regrettably immature, exaggerated comment after a minor incident, only intended for the amusement of her friends, while in a state of shock.
The reality is that she was pootling along the road cautiously, adopting an appropriate position on the road for the conditions, as evidenced by the fact that the first cyclist made it around the bend without incident. However Cyclist No. 2 was travelling far too quickly for the road conditions, positioned too far to the right of his lane, trying to cheat the bend, misjudged his line, clipped her door mirror and went off the road into a hedge.
The court should note that both cyclists were not normal cyclists using the road for personal transportation. They both admit that they were taking part in a so-called ‘Sportive’, a competitive road race held on public roads where the participants try to compete the course in the fastest time possible, despite the fact that the roads are not closed to other road users.
My client did stop after the incident but admits that she did leave the scene once she had established to her own satisfaction that the cyclist was not hurt. At the time, she thought it was a minor incident and regrets not reporting Cyclist No. 2 to the police for ‘wanton and furious’ riding. She understands that she didn’t do the right thing in terms of her statutory duties but she is 100% certain that the collision was the fault of Cyclist No. 2 going too fast for his talent on an unsuitable road for road racing.
A load of crap, I know, but lawyers are paid to come up with this sort of crap for their clients every day …. In any case, the burden of proof lies with the prosecution not the defence. No independent witnesses, no CCTV, how are you going to convict her for careless driving in good conscience?
This is the week where the
This is the week where the Media are reporting the 6th Death in a few days and the Norwich Judiciary are saying ” SO WHAT”!
Bragging that she hit a Cyclist , is not a crime recognised by the Law , is it ?
IT IS AN ADMISSION OF GUILT !
That the cyclist did not go to a Police Station , is understandable . Mr Plod , “WERE you Injured “? ” Did you go to Medical Resources “? ” Was any equipment damaged “? ” Piss OFF then , or i will charge yOU with WASTING POLICE TIME “! ” You are interupting my siesta “! ” CAusing me to fillout paperwork “!
THis petition needs YOUR HELP :
https://www.change.org/de/Petitionen/ioc-chairman-thomas-bach-create-an-international-umbrella-cycling-safety-organisation
Nearly EVERY English Speaking Country refuses to have ” Strict Liability & 1 1/2M Safe Passing Laws ! Nearly Every EU Country has these Laws !
Why does it not bother YOU ? Even in the EU , there are mugs who think playing Chicken is OK , until I show up at their Clients Premises , Their Employers Yard and their Front Door , IF , i haven’t stopped them at the side of the road , to remind them , that hitting me , puts them in the Dock/penitentiary , perhaps , EVEN their Employer also !
skippy wrote:This is the week
No, this week the Norwich judiciary are convicting silly young girls correctly. But don’t let that stop you getting carried away.
skippy wrote:
IT IS AN
It really isn’t. For what it’s worth, i’d be quite confident saying she was at fault (and, as an aside, a rather unpleasant individual), but proving a careless driving charge is a different matter. It was always going to be the most difficult of the three charges to prove, and i’m not overly surprised with the outcome.
As it is though, the offences she was found guilty of are actually the more serious ones. I’m not really sure why she went with a not guilty to them giving the established facts (including her own words) but I imagine her lawyer advised it on the chance she got a sympathetic magistrate.
The irony may well be that
The irony may well be that she’s priced so far out of the insurance market that she’s forced onto two wheels.
After comments I posted
After comments I posted elsewhere today here about helnet cams for evidence gathering, I got cut up by a taxi driver on the way to the station. Without one.
Didn’t manage to catch up with the driver and didn’t get the reg no or taxi company. Deffo going to use a cam in future on road rides.
Hardly her word against his –
Hardly her word against his – the tweet incriminated Ms Way. In a way I’m a bit sorry for her that she lost her job for it – however the arrogant way she spoke on TV didn’t help (turning up with your solicitor was quite stupid). Why not admit to both failing to stop and failing to report an accident on TV as well?
It reminds of the tennis player who made an apology – then blamed the ATP!
On a personal level – I had an employer use an apology against me, its staff be verbally abusive (including offering my job back for a joke) and assault me. Now that isn’t right.
hairyairey wrote:Hardly her
She twatted (not under oath) that she “Definitely knocked a cyclist off his bike earlier”. She did not tweet that the collision was her fault.
Overall, I think the result is fair given the obvious difficulty in proving careless driving in such circumstances.
But it is very annoying that she seems to be more upset by the repercussions of her tweet than the accident itself! X(
It seems to me that these days, so many people consider it to be totally unacceptable to be held accountable for their own speech and actions. ~X(
Either that or I am getting old. 🙁
She really is stupid – I mean
She really is stupid – I mean too still be seen to be saying “I wish I hadn’t tweeted it” (ie. if I hadn’t tweeted I wouldn’t be in this mess) rather than if only I could have turned back the clock and done the right thing by a more vulnerable road user.
Also I don’t buy the argument that she’s already suffered a loss (potentially her intended career cut short) and so should be exempt from further punishment. Following that logic if you have a crap job you could face bigger fines/prison terms to make up for your lack of punitive loss?
Puncheur-David wrote:She
No-one’s said that. But, by the same margin, tweeting about it doesn’t mean she should be punished more than other drivers guilty of the same offence.
Dumb summing up there as
Dumb summing up there as admitting she failed to report etc would lead to the guilty plea
bendertherobot wrote:Dumb
True. Though I have no idea why she pleaded Not Guilty to the failing to stop and report charge. She was never going to win that one.
Better than I was
Better than I was anticipating but ultimately no real deterrent to others. All we’ve learned is carry on as you wish, just ensure you don’t use a social site that can be tracked back to you to brag about it.
As for being unable to insure a car she has the option of just not insuring it, like 1 in 20 cars on the road (something like that I believe) and if she is pulled over for it she’ll still find herself protected by the courts.
And the vulnerable road user death count continues to climb…
The Daily Mirror reports that
The Daily Mirror reports that “Way refused to comment as she left court, saying she had signed an exclusive television deal.” So prepare yourself for more of the poor little picked on girl act. Pass the sick bag please. :&
spen wrote:The Daily Mirror
There you go, crime pays! Knock a cyclist over and get a TV deal.
Sick bag for me as well.
Carl wrote:spen wrote:The
Shouldn’t this (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proceeds_of_Crime_Act_2002) apply if she gets fees for the TV deal?
FatFreddie wrote:Carl
Shouldn’t this (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proceeds_of_Crime_Act_2002) apply if she gets fees for the TV deal?— spen
Apparently, she didn’t receive a fee.
Although, she did get to be on TV – again. Isn’t that the acme of personal achievement and a far greater reward than cold, hard cash?!
Toby Hockley 1 – Emma Way
Toby Hockley 1 – Emma Way 0
And that concludes the score draws this evening.
Lastly, ever noticed how
Lastly, ever noticed how ignorant cyclists are on the road YET on a forum etc…by god can they argue !
So, yes, there is some doubt
So, yes, there is some doubt (reading the article and I have no other information to sway me one way or the other) as to who was on which side of the road. However, since there was at least one witness (“A car came around the corner, narrowly missing Jay,”), I wouldn’t have thought it would have been that difficult to prove one way or the other. Would you ask a friend to perjure themselves?
I realise that it would more than likely be inadmissible. But, given her obvious attitude to road safety, I would have thought that the police would be quite keen to make sure that she was kept as far as possible from the road in future.
Yes, we’ve all done things we’re not proud of. But, most people have the sense not to publish the fact. Or, we suck it up and take the punishment.
I certainly wouldn’t Tweet any sort of misdemeanour. What on earth was she thinking. Then, I suppose that’s typical of today’s need to broadcast the minutiae of life to the world. I mean, amongst the countless tonnes of drivel, who’d notice the malicious drivelings of a young women who appears to hate cyclists. Or at least hates having to knock them off the road…
She deserves to be made an example, because she was stupid enough to tell the world. I abhor her lack of remorse. But, I’m going to give her the benefit of the doubt that she’s shit scared of a civil suit and doesn’t want to make any leanings toward guilt. Or, am I giving her too much credence?
I’m going away now to consider whether this will change my attitude to toward the everyday shit that I have to take from a minority of “other road users”. The rest of them, I shall continue to treat with courtesy and, even, a cheery wave, if I’m feeling particularly delirious with joy.
I have to say, I don’t find
I have to say, I don’t find his version terribly convincing. He hits the bonnet, goes over it, hits the windscreen, hits the wing mirror. No damage to her, superficial to him. And he stays on.
BITCH
BITCH
Yep, TV deal lined up for
Yep, TV deal lined up for Emma Way, oh dear… wonder if it’s going to be about rebuilding her image (maybe even launching her new television career) or about slagging off cyclists… either way her retardedness will land her with some cash.
eurotrash wrote:Yep, TV deal
It’s probably just an exclusive interview. Either way, I’m not sure I can be bothered to give her the time of day. It’ll either be trash or incendiary. I’m not interested in either.
Was rewatching the video on
Was rewatching the video on BBC.
The bottom line is not that it is bad to fail to stop at an accident scene, it is that people should be careful with social media! Says a lot.
I know nothing about the
I know nothing about the facts of this case but what I can say is that the Norwich Judiciary were not involved in this case. The case was heard in the Magistrates Court so the tribunal of fact was a Lay Bench or possibly a District Judge.
The test for driving without due care and attention (aka careless driving) is as set out above by other people contributing to this discussion. It is a pretty simple question that is, in my experience, easily understood by all juries and other tribunals of fact (e.g. Lay Benches and professional District Judges).
What I do find surprising is the disposal / sentence. Given that the cyclist sustained injuries (albeit minor) I cannot understand why the Court did not order compensation.
Her crass tweet was certainly relevant to the issue of her failing to stop / report but apart from that I am not sure added anything to the rest of the case.
JuiceQC wrote:I know nothing
I thought she was quite a pretty little thing … which is always excellent mitigation in legal matters. Works for me anyway.
Enough cash to be able to
Enough cash to be able to insure her car until for a few years?? The TV company (ITV Daybreak, I believe), need pressuring about this. It’s not going to be a challenging interview, is it??
.
.
More than anything, i would
More than anything, i would like to hear that because she lost her job and earned 7 points….she had to get a bike.
ITV reports that her
ITV reports that her solicitor asked her to rate, on a scale of 1 to 10, how stupid it was to tweet about the incident. She replied, “11.”
maybe it wasn’t just her driving that scuppered her prospects in accountancy then
Northernbike wrote:ITV
I just assumed she is a secret Spinal Tap fan 😉
It’s curious that there was
It’s curious that there was no decision to pursue the photographic evidence she herself posted on a social media site on a previous occasion.
She apparently photographed the speedo of her vehicle, boasting that she’d topped 100mph. Now exceeding the speed limit by 30mph is a banning offence, while the issue of distraction from using a camera while at the wheel should add further points to her licence.
Why was this not followed up?
OldRidgeback wrote:
Why was
It’d have to be charged as a separate offence. I would think that securing a conviction on the basis of a single photograph of a speedometer, at an unspecified time and location, would be tough.
dp24 wrote:OldRidgeback
We all may be fairly certain it happened.
but, was she on a runway, closed track, rolling road,a faulty speedo… prove it in a court of law…
mrmo wrote:dp24
We all may be fairly certain it happened.
but, was she on a runway, closed track, rolling road,a faulty speedo… prove it in a court of law…— OldRidgeback
Actually, if it’s on her iPhone you could. It maps to the place and time it was taken….but you would have to count on her still having it on her phone.
[[[[ How tough? she herself
[[[[ How tough? she herself tweeted “100mph”, I thought. Add that to the photo….
P.R.
I find her suggestion that
I find her suggestion that she was only driving at 15 mph at the time laughable!
gb901 wrote:I find her
Unfortunately lots of shitty people consider lying in court to be like speeding, it’s no problem if you can get away with it.
Why this aggressive hooligan wasn’t banned is beyond me… until I remembered that the courts do not consider this kind of behaviour worthy of removing the offender from the road, not even for a short time. The only lesson she has learnt is not to brag about your crimes on twitter.
I saw a these earlier:
Fine for hit & run on cyclist: £337
Fine for cycling on Eastbourne prom: £500
https://twitter.com/bengoldacre/status/402810363546468352
Cycle across square £50;
put cyclist on life support by driving w/ defective sight £95
https://twitter.com/beztweets/status/402816834761523201
This is (part of) what we’re up against 🙁
Simon E wrote:
Why this
If she’d have been found guilty of the careless offence, then I suspect she might have done. Given the circumstances, and presumably a previously clean record, the sentence seems about ‘right’.
Is it not a pointer of severe
Is it not a pointer of severe neglect of responsibility when she quotes that her tweet is her biggest regret, not hitting a human being with her vehicle?
She should be made to retake her test.
Just checked her comments on
Just checked her comments on BBC website, apparently it was the cyclists fault & we’ve all been mean to her. Poor misunderstood dear.
Gus T wrote:Just checked her
Yes, they are quite galling aren’t they.
OFCOM
😉 OFCOM 😉
Obviously no lesson learned
Obviously no lesson learned for most morons – except carry on but don’t tweet about it.
Hopefully she’ll be such a TV success we can vote her in for bush tucker trials…
Remorseless c*nt!
Remorseless c*nt!
I got an email reply from itv
I got an email reply from itv confirming no payment made.
No payment made at all or no
No payment made at all or no fee paid?
Was she able to claim “expenses”?
She’s not worth the
She’s not worth the paper…………
However, it’s clear that any number of people (including policians, etc) have stated how they have regreted Tweeting, posting, etc their misdemeanours on line. When will the judiciary realise that this is not a statement of regret for the initial action and consequences to the victims, but is a self pitying whinge at getting caught. This mindset should carry a further penalty until such times as they stop thinking about their own circumstances and realy understand that their actions effect others.
[[[[ And another thing! How
[[[[ And another thing! How does 7 points on your licence scupper your Accountancy training? Yet more TWADDLE!
P.R.