Today I'm neither Angry nor Happy about....

[Bruce Rioja]

running late for work and getting my lunch ready. gave it a little taste before i went. It was fecking putrid. Like, rotten. I was dry-heaving on the cycle to work.

It's not going to be long before I'm praying to the porcelain god, folks

And what exactly was it that you'd hoped you'd prepared?

[mrkint]

Oh, it was some pasta thing i made last night. I used milk for the sauce, thought it would be reet today. Definitely wasn't.

[Lost Leopard Spot]

I don't get this...

Mr Tvrdon pleaded guilty to manslaughter on the grounds of diminished responsibility and guilty of seven counts of attempted murder at a hearing last month.

So he kills somebody but isn't done for murder because of his pleading guilty to manslaughter on the grounds of diminished responsibility because basically he's a nutter but pleads guilty to seven counts of attempted murder even though he didn't actually kill them but if he had have done then he wouldn't have been done for murder because he's a nutter and would only have been found guilty of manslaughter on the grounds of his diminished responsibility.
To my mind if somebody can be guilty of attempted murder surely they can be guilty of murder.

[BWFC_Insane]

These here new driving rules. On the spot fines and points for "Careless Driving".

Now the exact classifications of what this will entail are not yet released by the Department of Transport, but they MAY include...

Driving too close to the vehicle in front
Failing to give way at a junction (not requiring evasive action by another driver)
Overtaking and pushing into a queue of traffic
Being in the wrong lane and pushing into a queue on a roundabout
Lane discipline, eg needlessly hogging the middle or outside lanes
Inappropriate speed
Wheel-spins, handbrake turns and other careless manoeuvres

Now these all seem like relatively sensible things. Except most are down to the judgement of the police officers there at the time. Will it be just traffic cops giving these out or will any police vehicle who observes such driving give out tickets for it?

I think the worry for me is that whilst speeding is a very definitive measure "You were going at 35 in a 30 zone sir" most of the list above (whilst irritating) are somewhat open for debate in certain situations. Whilst police forces have been accused of being overly "zealous" on speeding tickets in some areas of the country, ultimately don't speed and you'd be ok.

However, will targets mean that people get pulled for absent mindedly sitting in the middle lane for a few seconds too many in some areas where traffic cops are abundant? Or for example will people who are genuinely lost and in the wrong lane for their direction of travel be done.

Whilst I think discouraging middle lane driving and other irritating and careless driving habits is a good thing I'm not convinced by this totally as of yet.

[thebish]

^ there are virtually no traffic police on the road to enforce these "rules" anyway... it's just tough-talk to make it sound like the government is doing something....

[BWFC_Insane]

^ there are virtually no traffic police on the road to enforce these "rules" anyway... it's just tough-talk to make it sound like the government is doing something....

I see quite a lot of traffic police when driving over to Leeds and Bradford for example. Seems a lot of them about in West Yorkshire.....

[Bruce Rioja]

^ there are virtually no traffic police on the road to enforce these "rules" anyway... it's just tough-talk to make it sound like the government is doing something....

Given the amount of people I see pulled over by unmarked vehicles I'd venture that that's a nonsense, Sir.

[bobo the clown]

I don't get this...

Mr Tvrdon pleaded guilty to manslaughter on the grounds of diminished responsibility and guilty of seven counts of attempted murder at a hearing last month.

So he kills somebody but isn't done for murder because of his pleading guilty to manslaughter on the grounds of diminished responsibility because basically he's a nutter but pleads guilty to seven counts of attempted murder even though he didn't actually kill them but if he had have done then he wouldn't have been done for murder because he's a nutter and would only have been found guilty of manslaughter on the grounds of his diminished responsibility.
To my mind if somebody can be guilty of attempted murder surely they can be guilty of murder.

My thoughts exactly .... the one you kill is not considered a murder charge (which could well be the case) but the one's you don't kill are considered attempted murder.

Something doesn't compute.

[thebish]

^ there are virtually no traffic police on the road to enforce these "rules" anyway... it's just tough-talk to make it sound like the government is doing something....

Given the amount of people I see pulled over by unmarked vehicles I'd venture that that's a nonsense, Sir.

well - it's what a traffic cop said on t'radio this morning...

he said - you can introduce all the new rules you like - but there are virtually none of us out there to enforce them in any meaningful way. he said there were Highway Agency cars - which he called pretend police - but precious few real police cars... traffic police numbers have fallen by 30% in the last 10 years....

the Gov. official seemed to tacitly agree... he was saying how using a mobile whilst driving is a serious criminal offense. the interviewer asked (5 or 6 times) whether you should call the police if you are on the street and see someone driving whilst using a mobile phone and give them the registration number... the official hemmed and hawed and ducked and dived until time ran out - and never said you should - because he knew that the next question was "have the police got the resources to follow it up?"

[Montreal Wanderer]

I don't get this...

Mr Tvrdon pleaded guilty to manslaughter on the grounds of diminished responsibility and guilty of seven counts of attempted murder at a hearing last month.

So he kills somebody but isn't done for murder because of his pleading guilty to manslaughter on the grounds of diminished responsibility because basically he's a nutter but pleads guilty to seven counts of attempted murder even though he didn't actually kill them but if he had have done then he wouldn't have been done for murder because he's a nutter and would only have been found guilty of manslaughter on the grounds of his diminished responsibility.
To my mind if somebody can be guilty of attempted murder surely they can be guilty of murder.

My thoughts exactly .... the one you kill is not considered a murder charge (which could well be the case) but the one's you don't kill are considered attempted murder.

Something doesn't compute.

I imagine PB or some young legal eagle will answer this, but I would venture to suggest (guess actually) that there is no such crime as attempted manslaughter, although one can be charged with manslaughter. If (as part of his deal or not) he pleaded guilty to the charge of attempted murder, he is guilty of that offense. It is not a matter of linguistic logic, but the criminal code.

[bobo the clown]

I don't get this...

Mr Tvrdon pleaded guilty to manslaughter on the grounds of diminished responsibility and guilty of seven counts of attempted murder at a hearing last month.

So he kills somebody but isn't done for murder because of his pleading guilty to manslaughter on the grounds of diminished responsibility because basically he's a nutter but pleads guilty to seven counts of attempted murder even though he didn't actually kill them but if he had have done then he wouldn't have been done for murder because he's a nutter and would only have been found guilty of manslaughter on the grounds of his diminished responsibility.
To my mind if somebody can be guilty of attempted murder surely they can be guilty of murder.

My thoughts exactly .... the one you kill is not considered a murder charge (which could well be the case) but the one's you don't kill are considered attempted murder.

Something doesn't compute.

I imagine PB or some young legal eagle will answer this, but I would venture to suggest (guess actually) that there is no such crime as attempted manslaughter, although one can be charged with manslaughter. If (as part of his deal or not) he pleaded guilty to the charge of attempted murder, he is guilty of that offense. It is not a matter of linguistic logic, but the criminal code.

There's a logic to that, but there must be a charge something along the lines of (my words) "endangering life by willful recklessness".

The charge the way they have seems to be a gift to a smart-arsed Barrister (once they finish making coffee).

Anyway ... I await the input of "some young legal eagle" who actually knows what they're taking about.

[CrazyHorse]

^ there are virtually no traffic police on the road to enforce these "rules" anyway... it's just tough-talk to make it sound like the government is doing something....

See I think that they've developed a new camera system to catch the middle laners and the up the jaxiers so they've changed the system to be fixed penalty cos it allows it to be automated.

I'd say ITK but I'd be lying.

Sod it, I'm going to say it anyway.
ITK.

[Lost Leopard Spot]

^ you're lying you dirty mare.

[mrkint]

Making my stand up comedy debut next Wednesday.

FUUUUUUUUCCCCCCCCCKKKKKKK

[Harry Genshaw]

Making my stand up comedy debut next Wednesday.

FUUUUUUUUCCCCCCCCCKKKKKKK

You Sir, are 1 very brave man

You going to tell us where? It will give me someone to boo in the close season

[Montreal Wanderer]

b

I don't get this...

Mr Tvrdon pleaded guilty to manslaughter on the grounds of diminished responsibility and guilty of seven counts of attempted murder at a hearing last month.

So he kills somebody but isn't done for murder because of his pleading guilty to manslaughter on the grounds of diminished responsibility because basically he's a nutter but pleads guilty to seven counts of attempted murder even though he didn't actually kill them but if he had have done then he wouldn't have been done for murder because he's a nutter and would only have been found guilty of manslaughter on the grounds of his diminished responsibility.
To my mind if somebody can be guilty of attempted murder surely they can be guilty of murder.

My thoughts exactly .... the one you kill is not considered a murder charge (which could well be the case) but the one's you don't kill are considered attempted murder.

Something doesn't compute.

I imagine PB or some young legal eagle will answer this, but I would venture to suggest (guess actually) that there is no such crime as attempted manslaughter, although one can be charged with manslaughter. If (as part of his deal or not) he pleaded guilty to the charge of attempted murder, he is guilty of that offense. It is not a matter of linguistic logic, but the criminal code.

There's a logic to that, but there must be a charge something along the lines of (my words) "endangering life by willful recklessness".

The charge the way they have seems to be a gift to a smart-arsed Barrister (once they finish making coffee).

Anyway ... I await the input of "some young legal eagle" who actually knows what they're taking about.

Reckless endangerment is certainly a criminal offense over here (and probably the UK) but the tariff would be much less than attempted murder. Attempted murder means intent - reckless endangerment means generally means stupidity.

[Prufrock]

You can't attempt manslaughter because you can't intend 'manslaughter' as it is commonly understood. If you attempt to kill someone, then you intend to, and so we're talking murder.

There are three 'partial defences' (as well as full defences such as self-defence) to murder: Diminished responsibility, loss of control (formally known as provocation), and killing in relation to a suicide pact. We didn't study the last one in any depth, so I know naff all about it, but the first two are laid down in statute, are only defences to murder, and basically reduce the conviction to one of 'manslaughter'. They were thought to be reasons which meant you couldn't be guilty of murder, but ought not to get away with it either. This 'manslaughter' is slightly different to the usual 'murder without meaning it' manslaughter we think of when people are guilty of gross negligence, or illegal act manslaughter.

[Montreal Wanderer]

Well, that certainly clarifies everything

[mrkint]

Making my stand up comedy debut next Wednesday.

FUUUUUUUUCCCCCCCCCKKKKKKK

You Sir, are 1 very brave man

You going to tell us where? It will give me someone to boo in the close season

Ha, thanks - there's still time for me to clam up and then not go, but I kinda have to (otherwise i'll just be 'that guy' who says a lot of stuff but doesn't do it).

The problem I have now is that I had a set I was quite happy to do, and then last night i had an idea for another set which i wrote down and seems also ok. Decisions.

Have you heard of a little place called the Manchester Evening News Arena? Well, it isn't there. It's a pub in Farringdon.

[Lost Leopard Spot]

Good luck. And booooooooo gerroff.