http://www.lancerregister.com/showth...threadid=63454

If its true.

IIRC the guy in question posts (or posted on here)

D

 

It does sound unbelievably harsh if he was just racing alongside the bike for a bit of fun etc...
But as we know nothing about the evidence and havent seen the crash report its hard for anyone to comment...
The poster on the originals forum doesnt help us understand the case as the thread/post if worded crap too...

 

Ive only scanned through the TLR thread but its extremely worrying isnt it?

 

If this is a complete account of the Crown's evidence then it is truly frightening.

http://www.mansfieldtoday.co.uk/view...&Search=darren

Simon

 

 

Very scary, how can he be held responsible for the bikers actions ?????. I don't condone any form of racing on public roads, but he didn't have a gun to the bikers head, if it was a pedestrian or bye stander killed I could understand it.
I'd bet if it was a TWOCA caught and convicted he'd only be doing community service.

Deano.

 

Burgulars dont even get that, even drink drivers who kill people only seem to get 18 months damn i doubt armed robbery gets that! and you get less for manslaughter
Im not saying that anyone is to blame, and we dont know the full story just yet (so ill hold out for that) but thats very harsh.

Tony

 

Very strange that one. I can't understand how he is responsable for the biker's actions, makes you wonder.

 

See here as well.

http://bbs.scoobynet.co.uk/showthrea...93#post4080293 .

Lee

 

The chaps mate is said he wasn't there at the time. I wondered if they could track what cell the guy's phone was logged onto, to prove where he was (or wasn't)

MB

 

Thats feasible actually as the cellular phone companies keep this information for years. The real issue is whether he WAS INVOLVED; no whether he is responsible for the motorcyclists actions because if they were racing then he will be deemed partially responsible. The suggestion is that the witness evidence is unreliable or even false.

Simon

 

Theres more background on this later thread:

http://bbs.scoobynet.co.uk/showthrea...16#post4080416

 

No good!!! There's no way he could prove he had the phone with him

 

That doesn't matter. In the Damilola Taylor case a guy was cleared because his phone was registered at another cell which was far away from the scene of the crime. There was no proof he had it on him, IMHO.

But of course DC only lives 1/2 mile from the scene, so if he was at home (for example) his phone would probably be in the coverage of the same cell as at the scene of the accident.

 

Didn't they get Huntley with that too? ie matched the position of the bodies...

MB