7141 replies to this topic

[Mike K.]

Nope.

[rjag]

In the UK this type of incident is classified as criminal behavior and can carry lengthy prison sentences

 

https://www.rac.co.u...iving-offences/

 

 

Dangerous driving is more serious than careless driving, and is classed as driving which “falls far below what would be expected of a competent and careful driving, and it would be obvious to a competent and careful driver that driving in that way would be dangerous.”

It can include driving aggressively, overtaking in dangerous locations and racing other vehicles.

Dangerous driving offences will be dealt with by the Magistrates’ Court or Crown Court, depending on the seriousness.

If found guilty, you could be hit with an unlimited fine, a driving ban and up to 14 years in prison.

 

We need a bit more like this and less focus on the nanny state stuff

[Victoria Watcher]

it’s hard to prove that’s half the issue. eye witnesses on the street can not observe well*. eye witnesses among the accused either in their car or racing them of course are unreliable.

*its easy to witness a bank robber but harder to tell if a guy was going 50 or 80. multiple witnesses with different versions also complicate.

Edited by Victoria Watcher, 15 September 2018 - 01:32 PM.

[rjag]

it’s hard to prove that’s half the issue. eye witnesses on the street can not observe well*. eye witnesses among the accused either in their car or racing them of course are unreliable.

*its easy to witness a bank robber but harder to tell if a guy was going 50 or 80. multiple witnesses with different versions also complicate.

 

Thats why they have accident reconstruction experts to look at all the info and recreate what happened. When you see vehicles crushed and flipped over like that you know they werent going 60 in a 50 zone ;-)

[Matt R.]

Can’t the cars computer tell you exactly how fast they were going?

Matt.

[nagel]

VV facebook again falsely claiming someone died in an MVI when they didn't.

[shoeflack]

VV facebook again falsely claiming someone died in an MVI when they didn't.

 

Worth noting that the VV Facebook post went up at 8:39 am. VicPD has originally announced the accident involved a fatality, but corrected that statement at 7:00 am. 1 hr and 39 minutes to see that fixed statement. So disappointing to see careless reporting like this again. 

 

If you don’t know, don’t run a major headline story. If the man has neither been fired or resigned, don’t run stories saying he’s about to “x.” Maybe wait for it to happen? Or not happen at all?

[sdwright.vic]

VV facebook again falsely claiming someone died in an MVI when they didn't.

Just so you know, CFAX reported the death first.

[Bingo]

Was it a crotch-rocket?

[Cassidy]

VV facebook again falsely claiming someone died in an MVI when they didn't.

Well, the VicPD said the guy was dead.

So VicPD were wrong ... and VV was doing the job of reporting the news as best a internet web forum can report the news given the sources available.

 

Generally, when VicPD says a guy "is deceased" ... the guy is indeed deceased.

In this case he wasn't deceased ... and the error is all on VicPD.

[nagel]

Just so you know, CFAX reported the death first.

The point is, which Shoeflack actually pointed out, not me, is it had long been corrected by the time VV posted it as a death.

 

And the new point is that each actual news agency that actually reported it as fatal has since done a full correction post but on VV's facebook this is still a fatal incident.

[Cassidy]

......but on VV's facebook this is still a fatal incident.

Maybe Mike has other commitments, and doesn't monitor Facebook once every 10 minutes?

 

Maybe ... if folks want solid news, with a guarantee of no mistakes (EVER!) ... they should seek it elsewhere than Facebook, or a friendly, casual online forum!

[nagel]

Maybe Mike has other commitments, and doesn't monitor Facebook once every 10 minutes?

 

Maybe ... if folks want solid news, with a guarantee of no mistakes (EVER!) ... they should seek it elsewhere than Facebook, or a friendly, casual online forum!

 

Truly, but then don't purport to be a "Media/news company" on your Facebook page.

 

The error was directly pointed out 73 minutes ago.

[Mike K.]

If VicPD reports a death, CFAX publishes content indicating there was a death, and I have an early morning commitment that pulls me away from all forms of communication I can't possibly retract a statement that I never knew needed to be retracted.

 

I get the point shoe's making, but it's a little petty. People acknowledged the update from VicPD within the post itself, so anyone who took the time to look at the post would see the commentary.

[nagel]

If VicPD reports a death, CFAX publishes content indicating there was a death, and I have an early morning commitment that pulls me away from all forms of communication I can't possibly retract a statement that I never knew needed to be retracted.

 

I get the point shoe's making, but it's a little petty.

As a macabre positive spin, if you wait long enough to correct it it may end up becoming true anyways.

[Cassidy]

It's my take, that when users of a forum begin trolling for trouble by implying the moderator or owner is doing a shitty job ... it's probably time that user took a break from the forum or the Facebook page associated with the forum.

 

Besides, the Facebook page has been updated ... a tempest in a tea pot if I've ever seen one.

[Mike K.]

Truly, but then don't purport to be a "Media/news company" on your Facebook page.

 

The error was directly pointed out 73 minutes ago.

 

Is this not a poignant example of how errant news stories can push an incorrect narrative even after information has been corrected?

 

Anyways, it's rare for VicPD to make such a mistake. I don't think I've seen it before.

 

For those of you who have my direct contact information and see something that needs correcting but which has not been corrected, please help me out and send me a message or call me.

[nagel]

I'm not trolling.  There have been 3 fake traffic deaths reported in one year on this forum or associated FB page.  Rob Randall knows of the other two and has gone on about them as well.  I'm just pointing out the downside of fast news provided by essentially one social media savvy person, especially in a day and age when more of us rely on this type of news than old school slow news.

[Rob Randall]

I doubt we would be making a big deal out of it if it weren't for Mike's mainstream media-bashing over every real or imagined error.

 

In past cases where there was "confusion" whether there was a traffic fatality or not it's often  because a decision has been made to put the victim on life support. 

[nagel]

Yeah that's probabaly what has happened.  They don`t close arterials for 6 hours if someone gets cuts and bruises.