3 ms·

Vulnerable road user murdered by driver. Always those softening words when a driver murders an innocent.

Y_Y 2y ago
If driving were as dangerous as that we'd have no commerce! Imagine being fully liable for injuries you cause while mindlessly travelling at high speeds across populated areas. Nobody could afford to do it! The spice must flow!
- popcalc 2y ago
  Isn't it like that in mainland CN?
  - Y_Y 2y ago
    I guess you're referring to this: https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/chinese-drivers-kill-pedestrians/ https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/chinese-drivers-kill-pedes...
CalRobert 2y ago
It’s always the dead ones that suddenly “darted in to traffic “. Especially those damn kids!
- tome 2y ago
  I can't recall ever witnessing a pedestrian being hit by a car, nor a near miss, except two days ago when someone darted into traffic, and indeed it was a kid. Luckily it was fairly pedestrianised area (which may have given the kid the impression it was safe to dart) so the traffic was quite slow and able to stop in time, so no major harm was done but the poor parents must have had a minor heart attack.
  - dllthomas 2y ago
    I had a near miss a couple weeks ago in SF, when a woman in a car behind the car waiting for me to cross decided she didn't want to wait.
jdietrich 2y ago
Words mean things. Murder requires the intent to kill. Occasionally people are murdered by someone with a car, but an accident - even an entirely avoidable accident caused by gross recklessness - is not murder.
- hi-v-rocknroll 2y ago
  Proving intention is very hard without evidence. There are no "accidents", only collisions.
  - naikrovek 2y ago
    Ah-ah-ah, there are also allisions.
  - ryandrake 2y ago
    How does the saying go? "If you want to kill someone and get away with it, kill them with your car!" We are so lenient on traffic violence, at least in the USA.
- card_zero 2y ago
  Some jurisdictions have the felony murder rule (abolished in the UK in 1957). That means it could be murder if you kill somebody while committing a felony, which includes drunk driving and fleeing in a police chase (and things like forgery and cybercrime, less relevantly).
- SammyStacks 2y ago
  In the US, depending on the state, murder need not require intent to kill or cause death. For example, 3rd degree murder in Minnesota explicitly states that the perpetrator acted without intent to cause death [1]. The theory behind murder requiring intent is very reasonable but, at least by statute, isn't actual legal practice. [1]: https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/609.195 https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/609.195
helsinkiandrew 2y ago
Not defending the driver, but there's no pavement/sidewalk on the piece of most of that road, although the visibility is good and it was 10am on a Saturday https://www.google.com/maps/@52.3423362,0.2274592,3a,75y,335.19h,76.32t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s0ai6aib-j3GzBgbmILSTZw!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fcb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile%26w%3D900%26h%3D600%26pitch%3D13.68327309847956%26panoid%3D0ai6aib-j3GzBgbmILSTZw%26yaw%3D335.1873488356777!7i16384!8i8192?coh=205410&entry=ttu https://www.google.com/maps/@52.3423362,0.2274592,3a,75y,335... https://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news/local-news/family-stephen-chamberlain-pay-tribute-29772569 https://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news/local-news/family-step...
- rich_sasha 2y ago
  Is it clear it happened out of town? I googled, and articles, including the one you linked, say "Newmarket Road" in Stretham. And within that town, there seem to be pavements. Just curious, as you say doesn't make it any less bad for the driver. Though it would be that little bit more mysterious if the Autonomy codefendant was struck on the pavement.
  - CalRobert 2y ago
    For any Americans- pavement is the British term for sidewalk
  - bartread 2y ago
    Yes, it's clear it happened out of town. His Strava route is shown on this article: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/son-of-mike-lynchs-tragic-co-defendant-vows-to-complete-his-run-after-jogging-death/ar-AA1p7TFV https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/son-of-mike-lynchs-trag.... He was most likely trying to cross the road to continue his running route along the footpath where it continued to follow the river on the other side.
- bartread 2y ago
  If you look at his Strava route he was running along the riverside footpath. His route ends where it meets the road to the south east of Stretham: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/son-of-mike-lynchs-tragic-co-defendant-vows-to-complete-his-run-after-jogging-death/ar-AA1p7TFV https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/son-of-mike-lynchs-trag... He would most likely have been trying to cross the road to continue his run on the path on the other side. I've run this route along the river myself. This area is part of the Fenland, so the land is very flat. As a result the road bridge over the river is raised up above the level of the surrounding area. This means that as he was crossing the road he would have been invisible to any car approaching from the other side of the bridge until it crested the bridge. It's entirely possible that a car travelling fast - the speed limit on that road is 60mph but plenty of people exceed it - could have come over the bridge and the driver would have seen him too late to stop in time. The placement of the footpath crossing, unsighted from one direction, is - as you can tell - far from ideal. When I'm driving on that road I ease off approaching the bridge: in part this is because I know there's that footpath crossing the road on the other side. But it's also - and whilst I don't want to be too harsh to the driver involved here there's really no excuse for this having happened - because I'm not a complete moron and know that, regardless of how well I think I know the road, it's unwise to go over a blind crest at speed, and especially in a heavily agricultural area where large, slow moving farm machinery is a commonplace site on local roads.

Y_Y 2y ago

If driving were as dangerous as that we'd have no commerce! Imagine being fully liable for injuries you cause while mindlessly travelling at high speeds across populated areas. Nobody could afford to do it! The spice must flow!

popcalc 2y ago
Isn't it like that in mainland CN?
- Y_Y 2y ago
  I guess you're referring to this: https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/chinese-drivers-kill-pedestrians/ https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/chinese-drivers-kill-pedes...

CalRobert 2y ago

It’s always the dead ones that suddenly “darted in to traffic “. Especially those damn kids!

tome 2y ago
I can't recall ever witnessing a pedestrian being hit by a car, nor a near miss, except two days ago when someone darted into traffic, and indeed it was a kid. Luckily it was fairly pedestrianised area (which may have given the kid the impression it was safe to dart) so the traffic was quite slow and able to stop in time, so no major harm was done but the poor parents must have had a minor heart attack.
- dllthomas 2y ago
  I had a near miss a couple weeks ago in SF, when a woman in a car behind the car waiting for me to cross decided she didn't want to wait.

jdietrich 2y ago

Words mean things. Murder requires the intent to kill. Occasionally people are murdered by someone with a car, but an accident - even an entirely avoidable accident caused by gross recklessness - is not murder.

hi-v-rocknroll 2y ago
Proving intention is very hard without evidence. There are no "accidents", only collisions.
- naikrovek 2y ago
  Ah-ah-ah, there are also allisions.
- ryandrake 2y ago
  How does the saying go? "If you want to kill someone and get away with it, kill them with your car!" We are so lenient on traffic violence, at least in the USA.
card_zero 2y ago
Some jurisdictions have the felony murder rule (abolished in the UK in 1957). That means it could be murder if you kill somebody while committing a felony, which includes drunk driving and fleeing in a police chase (and things like forgery and cybercrime, less relevantly).
SammyStacks 2y ago
In the US, depending on the state, murder need not require intent to kill or cause death. For example, 3rd degree murder in Minnesota explicitly states that the perpetrator acted without intent to cause death [1]. The theory behind murder requiring intent is very reasonable but, at least by statute, isn't actual legal practice. [1]: https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/609.195 https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/609.195

helsinkiandrew 2y ago

Not defending the driver, but there's no pavement/sidewalk on the piece of most of that road, although the visibility is good and it was 10am on a Saturday https://www.google.com/maps/@52.3423362,0.2274592,3a,75y,335.19h,76.32t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s0ai6aib-j3GzBgbmILSTZw!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fcb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile%26w%3D900%26h%3D600%26pitch%3D13.68327309847956%26panoid%3D0ai6aib-j3GzBgbmILSTZw%26yaw%3D335.1873488356777!7i16384!8i8192?coh=205410&entry=ttu https://www.google.com/maps/@52.3423362,0.2274592,3a,75y,335... https://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news/local-news/family-stephen-chamberlain-pay-tribute-29772569 https://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news/local-news/family-step...

rich_sasha 2y ago
Is it clear it happened out of town? I googled, and articles, including the one you linked, say "Newmarket Road" in Stretham. And within that town, there seem to be pavements. Just curious, as you say doesn't make it any less bad for the driver. Though it would be that little bit more mysterious if the Autonomy codefendant was struck on the pavement.
- CalRobert 2y ago
  For any Americans- pavement is the British term for sidewalk
- bartread 2y ago
  Yes, it's clear it happened out of town. His Strava route is shown on this article: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/son-of-mike-lynchs-tragic-co-defendant-vows-to-complete-his-run-after-jogging-death/ar-AA1p7TFV https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/son-of-mike-lynchs-trag.... He was most likely trying to cross the road to continue his running route along the footpath where it continued to follow the river on the other side.
bartread 2y ago
If you look at his Strava route he was running along the riverside footpath. His route ends where it meets the road to the south east of Stretham: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/son-of-mike-lynchs-tragic-co-defendant-vows-to-complete-his-run-after-jogging-death/ar-AA1p7TFV https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/son-of-mike-lynchs-trag... He would most likely have been trying to cross the road to continue his run on the path on the other side. I've run this route along the river myself. This area is part of the Fenland, so the land is very flat. As a result the road bridge over the river is raised up above the level of the surrounding area. This means that as he was crossing the road he would have been invisible to any car approaching from the other side of the bridge until it crested the bridge. It's entirely possible that a car travelling fast - the speed limit on that road is 60mph but plenty of people exceed it - could have come over the bridge and the driver would have seen him too late to stop in time. The placement of the footpath crossing, unsighted from one direction, is - as you can tell - far from ideal. When I'm driving on that road I ease off approaching the bridge: in part this is because I know there's that footpath crossing the road on the other side. But it's also - and whilst I don't want to be too harsh to the driver involved here there's really no excuse for this having happened - because I'm not a complete moron and know that, regardless of how well I think I know the road, it's unwise to go over a blind crest at speed, and especially in a heavily agricultural area where large, slow moving farm machinery is a commonplace site on local roads.