Car vs Pedestrian - What happens now?

Nasqueron

Johno100 wrote: »

Trust me I'm as far from a FOTL'er as you can imagine.

Have a read and apply to the case in question.

http://www.inbrief.co.uk/court-proceedings/defence-of-duress/

And precedents to be relied on.

R v Backshall(1998) CA
R v Conway (1989) CA

R v Backshall(1998) relates to a fight between 2 people where the aggressor had a hammer and and both were clearly idiots, this case does not justify running over a moron who jumps on your bonnet

R v Conway (1989) relates to a case where a car sped away from plains clothes police as they thought they were hitmen trying to kill the passenger, this case does not justify running over a moron who jumps on your bonnet

Joe_Horner

Nasqueron wrote: »

R v Backshall(1998) relates to a fight between 2 people where the aggressor had a hammer and and both were clearly idiots, this case does not justify running over a moron who jumps on your bonnet

R v Conway (1989) relates to a case where a car sped away from plains clothes police as they thought they were hitmen trying to kill the passenger, this case does not justify running over a moron who jumps on your bonnet

True, but the principle could well justify driving off without normal concern for the well being of said moron when they appear to be trying to get through your windscreen at you. Depending on traffic, reversing away so you don't actually run them over might be prudent though.

Johno100

Nasqueron wrote: »

R v Backshall(1998) relates to a fight between 2 people where the aggressor had a hammer and and both were clearly idiots, this case does not justify running over a moron who jumps on your bonnet

R v Conway (1989) relates to a case where a car sped away from plains clothes police as they thought they were hitmen trying to kill the passenger, this case does not justify running over a moron who jumps on your bonnet

We are not talking a playful monkey in a safari park here, what do you think the blokes intentions would have been if he'd have managed to get to the driver?

I think any reasonable person would understand how a driver in the circumstances shown in the video could be in genuine fear of death or serious injury. Accordingly, if they broke the law by driving dangerously or without due care and attention to escape the threat then a defence of duress/duress of circumstances could be used to defend those charges.

gilbert_and_sullivan

Quite, he would have been off the bonnet and on his backside 5 seconds after climbing onto mine, get out and try to discuss it like gentlemen with some ape like that, no way.

Joe_Horner

I say, young ruffian, just what do you think you're doing climbing on my bonnet like that? Kindly desist from such shenanigans forthwith!

Guest101

Common Law is very real and commonly both Assault and Murder are common law crimes which you will read about on a daily (unfortunately) basis.


Similarly there are common law defences.


Nothing FOTL about it.

Silver-Surfer_2

Guest101 wrote: »

Common Law is very real and commonly both Assault and Murder are common law crimes which you will read about on a daily (unfortunately) basis.


Similarly there are common law defences.


Nothing FOTL about it.

Which assault is a Common Law offence?

Common assault is contrary to section 39 Criminal Justice Act 1988 and the others are Offences Against the Persons Act 1861.