Burry Stander: Charges to be reinstated

If you want better road safety, those who - very publicly - kill vulnerable road users need to be, at the very least, taken to task in a court of law.

 

This guy is not even going to trial. He is going straight back to the driving seat, and the next person who he or one of his mates squashes could be you or a family member or one of your buddies.

 

The case has been very public and this is an opportunity for an example to be made - if not a conviction - which seems to me to be the obvious progression - then at the very least a thorough trial with competent prosecution, out of respect for a national hero.

 

No trial at all is nothing but a green light for idiots to drive as they please without any fear of recourse whatsoever. If you cannot see this then I really despair for this country and it's cycling future.

Looks like you got a bit too excited and shot your mouth off a bit prematurely here.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DzBq1npvc54

Charges against the taxi-driver implicated in Burry Stander's death are to be reinstated following outrage from the Stander family at the State's poor handling of the case, according to an article on IOL.

Click here to view the article

Bittersweet news.

IMO I don't really think there's a valid charge of culpable homicide, certainly a case for negligent driving.

I've some empathy for the driver, from the sounds of things he wasn't driving (as we've come to expect with taxis) recklessly and is living with something horrible.

Ultimately though someone lost their life and there needs to be some form of accountability and proper process of prosecution from the authorities in incidents like this. It can't be ignored or left to bungling red tape.

Given the profile of Burry and his accomplishments, lets hope the pressure created by this can become part of a catalyst forcing the powers that be to be more stringent in prosecuting these cases as well as the penalties.

...and is living with something horrible.

I am pretty sure that 6 out of every 7 days, Burry's death doesn't cause a blip on his radar.

I am pretty sure that 6 out of every 7 days, Burry's death doesn't cause a blip on his radar.

That's your view, and maybe that's so and maybe it isn't. Either way, it's besides the point isn't it?

That's your view, and maybe that's so and maybe it isn't. Either way, it's besides the point isn't it?

Sure is.

Why'd you mention it?

Sure is.

 

Why'd you mention it?

Simple. Because that's my view on it.

Not to belabor a single quote, but what are you driving at?

Did he not turn across a solid line into the path of Burry? Is that not reckless? Dassie, are you saying he didn't break the law?

Ok so I have not read every account of what happened on the day , but if you as a person kill someone ( with a car , gun , stone or knife ) should there not be a consequence or something ? or am I not getting this story right .Im glad the case is being relooked .

Did he not turn across a solid line into the path of Burry? Is that not reckless? Dassie, are you saying he didn't break the law?

Thought I was pretty clear in that I didn't say that at all.

It's upto the court to decide what was reckless and negligent, and thankfully some pressure was brought about to have this case go to court.

Did he not turn across a solid line into the path of Burry? Is that not reckless? Dassie, are you saying he didn't break the law?

The solid line prohibits overtaking ...not turning right into the side road ..just my understanding of it ....

The solid white line running down the centre of a road, dividing two lanes of traffic moving in opposite directions, is a No Overtaking line (RM1).

This line applies to vehicles travelling on the road on which the the line is painted, not to vehicles on any intersecting roads. So it does not prohibit vehicles coming from an intersection road from crossing that line in order to turn right into that road. Usually, at an intersection the solid line is broken to indicate that it may be crossed by vehicles turning at the intersection.

RM1

http://carinsurance.arrivealive.co.za/wp-content/uploads/solid-line-at-intersection.JPG

Was the solid line at the intersection broken where Burry lost his life as per above?

"Usually, at an intersection the solid line is broken to indicate that it may be crossed by vehicles turning at the intersection."

What does the rules state if the solid line is NOT broken at an intersection, can it still be crossed at an intersection?

Edit:

C = Burry

D = Taxi driver turned right over a broken or solid white line in front of Burry.

Was the taxi driver turning right into the road at the intersection or was he attempting a u-turn?

I can only assume that your wanking video (which I'm sadly unable to view) is a reference to your earlier speech about the poor taxi driver, how he hasn't adequately saved up to answer the legal repercussions of his lethally *** driving, and should be left alone by the baying media hounds etc etc ad nauseum.

Did he ever send you a thank you note for the flowers?

threads merged, as per request.

I can only assume that your wanking video (which I'm sadly unable to view) is a reference to your earlier speech about the poor taxi driver, how he hasn't adequately saved up to answer the legal repercussions of his lethally *** driving, and should be left alone by the baying media hounds etc etc ad nauseum.

 

Did he ever send you a thank you note for the flowers?

How was band camp?

South Africans in general have a blatant disregard for laws. The attitude amongst almost everyone is that everybody else should follow the rules but "I should be allowed to bend them this time because my circumstances are different".

EXACTLY!!!!

EXACTLY!!!!

This morning there was a taxi that couldn't give a single f*kc about behaving like a human being when driving. He would just pull out of a stream of cars that he judged as being too slow for him, overtake 10 cars and then just swerve back into the stream, cutting people off left and right.

 

 

This morning there was a taxi that couldn't give a single f*kc about behaving like a human being when driving. He would just pull out of a stream of cars that he judged as being too slow for him, overtake 10 cars and then just swerve back into the stream, cutting people off left and right.

I see that every morning on my commute. They don't give a flying vark about rules and regulations, safety is not in their vocabulary!

I see that every morning on my commute. They don't give a flying vark about rules and regulations, safety is not in their vocabulary!

If I had a lekker big 4x4 with bullbars, I'd literally push him off the road and ideally rip one of his wheels off. Other road users won't say anything apart from applauding.

If I had a lekker big 4x4 with bullbars, I'd literally push him off the road and ideally rip one of his wheels off. Other road users won't say anything apart from applauding.

I'm sure that Oscar Pistorius's family saw the taking of a human life as, cut and dried, murder until he was the one who pulled the trigger...........

 

 

Thought I was pretty clear in that I didn't say that at all.

It's upto the court to decide what was reckless and negligent, and thankfully some pressure was brought about to have this case go to court.

You said you have some empathy for the driver and that he wasnt driving recklessly. Wasn't sure if this was fact or opinion, just trying to understand if any new developments have surfaced.

Never mind the poor passengers hey.

They drive like that with passengers?! Taxi drivers have zero respect for human lives, passengers and other road users/commuters.

This was a traffic accident where the taxi driver was 100% at fault. The mistake the taxi made was to turn in into oncoming traffic. Crossing the white is legal when turning into a side road. These cases usually end up with a settlement fine paid towards the deceased family, usually less than R50k, or a minimal jail sentence of 3 months or so.

You said you have some empathy for the driver and that he wasnt driving recklessly. Wasn't sure if this was fact or opinion, just trying to understand if any new developments have surfaced.

You said you have some empathy for the driver and that he wasnt driving recklessly. Wasn't sure if this was fact or opinion, just trying to understand if any new developments have surfaced.

Please go back and read what I said, it's clearly an opinion. Which we all have.

Yes I said I have some empathy for him as well, I also said "from the sound of things" not factually stating he wasn't driving recklessly. However that doesn't preclude him from being negligent.

If there's anything new, we'll probably hear about it in court. But I think that would be giving the authorities too much credit for any accident scene forensics.