Kawasaki Sportsbike Riders Club - Australia - Online Forum

Please do mick, it will be interesting to see if an appeal does happen & the outcome,
I know there are 2 sides to the story but based off the information when we first heard about this & reading the above makes me sick to the stomach that they found her not guilty of dangerous driving causing death.... which is exactly what she sounds guilty of

Angry yes, surprised?, sadly no

Question is what was the jury directed to based their decision on (I am assuming there was a jury?). What is the definition of dangerours driving causing death? I don't mean literally but in legal terms there are definitions that determine what is and what isn't considered dangerous driving.

It is not illegal to make a u turn over double white lines (or wasn't in VIC) unless signed otherwise

I found some court instructions for the trial - Defence lawyere "McKenna said tens of thousands of people performed a U-turn every day and that such a manoeuvre did not amount to dangerous driving.

Carbonneau is facing four charges: dangerous driving causing death, dangerous driving, failing to give way doing a U-turn and failing to keep left of dividing lines.

Magistrate Peter Mealy committed the officer to stand trial, saying that a jury, if properly instructed, could conclude that it was hazardous to perform a U-turn is such poor conditions, and therefore support a conviction.


Based on what the Magistrate said you would have to believe he thought she was guilty

mick_dundee wrote:My understanding is she still has a charge or two to be heard, not sure what else but yes, that's bullshit if ever i've read bullshit!! Unfortunately, not inconsistent wtih other penalties received by drivers for killing riders in this state, do 83 in an 80 zone and rest assured, we'll catch you before someone gets hurt, unless of course you're a copper, then you can hang a u turn over double lines whilst hanging your arse out the window and drinking a bottle of scotch, then it was a simple mistake..

Do know for a fact that the riders family are trying to obtain a court transcript and I hazard a guess they will appeal the not guilty verdict as that's just plain WRONG big time!!

I'll keep this thread updated as I hear more.

There's a protest rally in this one for sure

DaveGPz wrote:our boys and girls in blue are often incompetent and frequently untouchable.

How do you figure that? Believe me when I say there is no love lost between magistrates/lawyers/judges and the Police. It seems to me that this verdict was determined by the jury whom are made up of members of the Victorian public - don't the general public hate the police? The woman was charged the most serious offence given the circumstances by other police. Hardly makes them untouchable.

DaveGPz wrote: "Travelling at 80 - 97kph". Convenient that when the cops are at fault they can't pin the speed down to less than 25%.

Have you ever tried to determine the speed of a vehicle based on accident damage and scratches on the road surface??

mick_dundee wrote:unless of course you're a copper, then you can hang a u turn over double lines whilst hanging your arse out the window and drinking a bottle of scotch, then it was a simple mistake..

Come on Mick, I expect better from you.

Thankfully Naked Twin brought some sensibility to this thread. As a motorcyclist it gives me the shits to also see results like this, however, you do need to look at the legal side of the argument instead of the emotional side.

Causing death by dangerous driving is probably going to be the most serious offence charged in this case. Just because she isn't guilty of that offence, and as alluded to doing a u-turn couldn't really be considered dangerous (unless taking into account all of the other factors), that doesn't mean she isn't guilty of offences like acts likely to cause harm or cause death.

Whilst the result might seem poor at this time, perhaps it's best to remove the emotion and let the legal system run it's course - including any appeals that might take place. Only then will we be able to work out if the result is appropriate.

Naked Twin wrote: It is not illegal to make a u turn over double white lines (or wasn't in VIC) unless signed otherwise

actually it is. Rule 132 of the Road Safety Rules

(2A) A driver on a road with a single continuous dividing line, a single continuous dividing line to the left of a broken dividing line or 2 parallel continuous dividing lines must not drive across the dividing lines to perform a U-turn.
Penalty: In the case of a bicycle, 5 penalty units;
In the case of any other vehicle, 10 penalty units.

Dilligaf, I will stand corrected and make sure I never do it in the Southern state.

No matter the view whether you are a copper, the victim or just an intetested party, there are no winners. The question you have to ask and this is how I see the jury took it, you make an illegal manouvure a mistake that has castrophic consuequences it is dangerous, negligent, stupid or ill thought.

One part of me says throw the book at her (not because of her profession) but another part of me says I am not infalible and how would I like to be treated for a similar mistake and we have all done something silly at some point in our lives that whether through luck or good management didn't have similar outcomes.

From what I understand there are still other charges that either aren't mentioned or weren't deliberated on.

As I say no winners only losers

Apparently dangerous driving is a difficult thing to prove. I think its sort of "would a reasonable driver regard it as dangerous" sort of thing. Anyway she was found not guilty.

Killed for a cupcake and a dickhead gets off. That's pretty tragic but why do the dickheads always have to imply that it may have been the bike riders fault ie 90 zone and estimated speed of 80 - 97. Absolute bullshit but I guess that's what you expect.

Typical.

And she got off without a fine aswell.....cos thats about all they usually get when binging a biker.......Wonder how many jurers there were who had motorcycle experience......ZERO!!!!......conflict of interest....blah blah.....this kinda stuff just makes me wanna grrrraaa

i hope she has been issued with the appropriate fines already... she's very lucky to have gotten off the dangerous driving charge...yes technically a u-turn isnt inherently dangerous... but the same could be said of lots of other traffic offences.

maybe she'll plead guilty to "idiotic driving resulting in the death of an innocent person" i like the ring that has to it

Six Addict wrote:she's very lucky to have gotten off the dangerous driving charge

Is luck the new name for corruption?

Sadly for all of us,some things will never ever ever change.

Hold on........... was this case held in front of a Jury or just a Judge?