Driver told to expect at least six years jail
 

QUOTE:
"A former soldier has been warned he will be going to prison for "a significant period" after he today admitted causing the death of cyclist John Radford by dangerous driving.

Michael Gledhill stood trial and was convicted in October last year of causing serious injury to Mr Radford on July 31 the previous year 2013, when he was alleged to have knocked him off his bike in Huddersfield Road between New Mill and Brockholes in a road rage incident.

But before he could be sentenced on that charge Mr Radford died on November 5 last year. A decision was then made to charge Gledhill with the more serious charge of causing his death."

http://www.examiner.co.uk/news/west-...dmits-10433526

Driver told to expect at least six years jail
 

Alycidon wrote:

"A former soldier has been warned he will be going to prison for "a
significant period" after he today admitted causing the death of cyclist
John Radford by dangerous driving.

Killed a cyclist and the CPS didn't 'sweeten the pill' by going for
careless driving?

Bloody hell. Was the cyclist a copper? An MP? A retired judge?

--
john smith
'_The Guardian_. Wrong about everything. All the time'
(Anon)

Driver told to expect at least six years jail
 

On Thursday, 12 November 2015 13:28:03 UTC, John Smith wrote:
Alycidon wrote:

"A former soldier has been warned he will be going to prison for "a
significant period" after he today admitted causing the death of cyclist
John Radford by dangerous driving.

Killed a cyclist and the CPS didn't 'sweeten the pill' by going for
careless driving?

Bloody hell. Was the cyclist a copper? An MP? A retired judge?

Road rage is not careless, it is deliberate.

Driver told to expect at least six years jail
 

Alycidon wrote:
On Thursday, 12 November 2015 13:28:03 UTC, John Smith wrote:
Alycidon wrote:

"A former soldier has been warned he will be going to prison for "a
significant period" after he today admitted causing the death of
cyclist John Radford by dangerous driving.

Killed a cyclist and the CPS didn't 'sweeten the pill' by going for
careless driving?

Bloody hell. Was the cyclist a copper? An MP? A retired judge?

Road rage is not careless, it is deliberate.

Oh, I know. I also believe that at least 70% of so-called 'accidents'
where some phony excuse is coughed up, like 'eww, the sun was too low!' or
'eww, he came out of nowhere!', or 'ewww, I was distracted by a unicorn
running across the road!' are 'punishment passes' that have gone wrong - so
murder. Or at the very least, manslaughter (as defined _inter alia_ [1] in
_R v. Bateman_ (1925) 19 Cr App R 8, _Andrews_ _v. DPP_ [1937] AC 576 and
_R v. Adomako_ [1995] 1 AC 171).

Damn, legal training is really ****ing useful. ;-)

[1] note for Nugent: that's Latin, by the way...
--
john smith
'_The Guardian_. Wrong about everything. All the time'
(Anon)

Driver told to expect at least six years jail
 

On Thursday, 12 November 2015 14:38:04 UTC, John Smith wrote:
Alycidon wrote:
On Thursday, 12 November 2015 13:28:03 UTC, John Smith wrote:
Alycidon wrote:

"A former soldier has been warned he will be going to prison for "a
significant period" after he today admitted causing the death of
cyclist John Radford by dangerous driving.

Killed a cyclist and the CPS didn't 'sweeten the pill' by going for
careless driving?

Bloody hell. Was the cyclist a copper? An MP? A retired judge?

Road rage is not careless, it is deliberate.

Oh, I know. I also believe that at least 70% of so-called 'accidents'
where some phony excuse is coughed up, like 'eww, the sun was too low!' or
'eww, he came out of nowhere!', or 'ewww, I was distracted by a unicorn
running across the road!' are 'punishment passes' that have gone wrong - so
murder.

Have a coughing fit, kill and walk away a free man.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ared-jail.html

Driver told to expect at least six years jail
 

Alycidon wrote:
On Thursday, 12 November 2015 14:38:04 UTC, John Smith wrote:
Alycidon wrote:
On Thursday, 12 November 2015 13:28:03 UTC, John Smith wrote:
Alycidon wrote:

"A former soldier has been warned he will be going to prison for "a
significant period" after he today admitted causing the death of
cyclist John Radford by dangerous driving.

Killed a cyclist and the CPS didn't 'sweeten the pill' by going for
careless driving?

Bloody hell. Was the cyclist a copper? An MP? A retired judge?

Road rage is not careless, it is deliberate.

Oh, I know. I also believe that at least 70% of so-called 'accidents'
where some phony excuse is coughed up, like 'eww, the sun was too low!'
or 'eww, he came out of nowhere!', or 'ewww, I was distracted by a
unicorn running across the road!' are 'punishment passes' that have gone
wrong - so murder.

Have a coughing fit, kill and walk away a free man.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ared-jail.html

For example.

--
john smith
'_The Guardian_. Wrong about everything. All the time'
(Anon)

Driver told to expect at least six years jail
 

On 12/11/2015 14:36, John Smith wrote:
Alycidon wrote:
On Thursday, 12 November 2015 13:28:03 UTC, John Smith wrote:
Alycidon wrote:

"A former soldier has been warned he will be going to prison for "a
significant period" after he today admitted causing the death of
cyclist John Radford by dangerous driving.

Killed a cyclist and the CPS didn't 'sweeten the pill' by going for
careless driving?

Bloody hell. Was the cyclist a copper? An MP? A retired judge?

Road rage is not careless, it is deliberate.

Oh, I know. I also believe that at least 70% of so-called 'accidents'
where some phony excuse is coughed up, like 'eww, the sun was too low!' or
'eww, he came out of nowhere!', or 'ewww, I was distracted by a unicorn
running across the road!' are 'punishment passes' that have gone wrong - so
murder. Or at the very least, manslaughter (as defined _inter alia_ [1] in
_R v. Bateman_ (1925) 19 Cr App R 8, _Andrews_ _v. DPP_ [1937] AC 576 and
_R v. Adomako_ [1995] 1 AC 171).

Damn, legal training is really ****ing useful. ;-)

You should get some, instead of talking bollox.

Have you written to Cleveland Police, Middlesbrough and Stockton
councils & Highways England yet?

Driver told to expect at least six years jail
 

On 12/11/2015 14:36, John Smith wrote:
Alycidon wrote:
On Thursday, 12 November 2015 13:28:03 UTC, John Smith wrote:
Alycidon wrote:

"A former soldier has been warned he will be going to prison for "a
significant period" after he today admitted causing the death of
cyclist John Radford by dangerous driving.

Killed a cyclist and the CPS didn't 'sweeten the pill' by going for
careless driving?

Bloody hell. Was the cyclist a copper? An MP? A retired judge?

Road rage is not careless, it is deliberate.

Oh, I know. I also believe that at least 70% of so-called 'accidents'
where some phony excuse is coughed up, like 'eww, the sun was too low!' or
'eww, he came out of nowhere!', or 'ewww, I was distracted by a unicorn
running across the road!' are 'punishment passes' that have gone wrong - so
murder. Or at the very least, manslaughter (as defined _inter alia_ [1] in
_R v. Bateman_ (1925) 19 Cr App R 8, _Andrews_ _v. DPP_ [1937] AC 576 and
_R v. Adomako_ [1995] 1 AC 171).

Damn, legal training is really ****ing useful. ;-)

[1] note for Nugent: that's Latin, by the way...

He is well aware of that. Unlike you, he also knows what it means and
what either word means. You proved that you do not.

Driver told to expect at least six years jail
 

On Thu, 12 Nov 2015 05:21:47 -0800 (PST), Alycidon wrote:

QUOTE:
"A former soldier has been warned he will be going to prison for "a significant period" after he today admitted causing the death of cyclist John Radford by dangerous driving.

Michael Gledhill stood trial and was convicted in October last year of causing serious injury to Mr Radford on July 31 the previous year 2013, when he was alleged to have knocked him off his bike in Huddersfield Road between New Mill and Brockholes in a road rage incident.

But before he could be sentenced on that charge Mr Radford died on November 5 last year. A decision was then made to charge Gledhill with the more serious charge of causing his death."

http://www.examiner.co.uk/news/west-...dmits-10433526


He said Mr Radford was a keen cyclist who had sustained catastrophic injuries.
- He cycled for much of his life and it was his usual practice not to wear a
helmet. He was not wearing one on this day. As a result he was seriously
injured which has had a profound effect on his life.


According to researchers from the University of Arizona, helmeted cyclists have
a 58 per cent reduced likelihood of suffering severe traumatic brain injury
following a crash. If only he had heeded the warnings

Driver told to expect at least six years jail
 

JNugent wrote:
On 12/11/2015 14:36, John Smith wrote:
Alycidon wrote:
On Thursday, 12 November 2015 13:28:03 UTC, John Smith wrote:
Alycidon wrote:

"A former soldier has been warned he will be going to prison for
"a significant period" after he today admitted causing the death
of cyclist John Radford by dangerous driving.

Killed a cyclist and the CPS didn't 'sweeten the pill' by going for
careless driving?

Bloody hell. Was the cyclist a copper? An MP? A retired judge?

Road rage is not careless, it is deliberate.

Oh, I know. I also believe that at least 70% of so-called
'accidents' where some phony excuse is coughed up, like 'eww, the
sun was too low!' or 'eww, he came out of nowhere!', or 'ewww, I was
distracted by a unicorn running across the road!' are 'punishment
passes' that have gone wrong - so murder. Or at the very least,
manslaughter (as defined _inter alia_ [1] in _R v. Bateman_ (1925)
19 Cr App R 8, _Andrews_ _v. DPP_ [1937] AC 576 and _R v. Adomako_
[1995] 1 AC 171). Damn, legal training is really ****ing useful. ;-)

[1] note for Nugent: that's Latin, by the way...

He is well aware of that. Unlike you, he also knows what it means and
what either word means. You proved that you do not.

Simon is going nuts.
He spends all day Goggling for naughty motorists.
Same with that Smith pillock.
So very sad.