Australian who fled accident scene and was chased by police hits and kills woman 50 in Udon

[docshock13]

19 minutes ago, oldlakey said:

The movement of the pickup after it had stopped after the initial collision was absolutely horrendous and unforgivable

 

The initial collision was 100% her fault 

 

May her and her son RIP

 

Best wishes for the other childs full recovery

Are you serious? For the life of me,  I am hoping you made a mistake by saying her and not his. The initial collision occurred when ur mate drove into some parked cars. And then decided to drive off (do a runner). Nobody is at fault except for your pal who decided that the law did not apply to him. Your post (blaming the victim of a fugitive) is in extremely poor taste given the circumstances. He should have pulled over after his first "mistake." 

Perhaps try reading the OP and subsequent posts before passing judgment. 

 

Edited June 23, 2017 by docshock13
Amendment

[Bluespunk]

2 minutes ago, oldlakey said:

Blame where blame is due, becoming a casualty of your own actions makes you just that, not a innocent victim 

Unless you are talking about the children but I do believe they were both passengers

The only one to blame is the person who fled the initial accident caused by their reckless driving before he went on to kill two people. 

 

If he had stopped after the initial accident he would not have killed them. 

Edited June 23, 2017 by Bluespunk

[oldlakey]

3 minutes ago, balo said:

 

Really , I think they are both to blame here.   Observe the car from the beginning of the video , the speed is just way too high , yes she was trying to cross the road and was expecting the car to see her and slow down , a big mistake from her part. 

 

 

 

 

 

Sorry,  she was so lackadaisical I would not of believed it if I had not just watched it

Your brain must surely urge you on as you are moving into possible on coming traffic

[onthesoi]

The pickup is 100% to blame because he is driving in a reckless manner at high speed.

There is nothing to say a motorbike cannot cross a road if the way is clear.

The motorbike was not speeding, maybe only doing 5-10mph.

 

She may have glanced to the right and seen the immediate incoming traffic was clear, but by the time she actually crossed the road at the slow pace she was travelling the pickup was already bearing down on top of her ....for the simple reason the pickup was driving so quickly.

 

If the pickup had been driving safely within the speed limit would this have happened? No!

 

If a pedestrian crossed the road and was knocked down because the pickup was speeding and not easy to see....would you still be saying the pedestrian is at fault? ....because the law in most western countries says otherwise, if you are speeding you are automatically to blame.

---------

 

It never fails to amaze me how many bad drivers there are on TV who cant analyse a simple road situation and see who is to blame, I can only think they are a lot of old men who did the driving test in the 70s and therefore terrible drivers with no idea about safe driving.

[oldlakey]

2 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

The only one to blame is the person who fled the initial accident caused by their reckless driving before he went on to kill two people. 

 

If he had stopped after the initial accident he would not have killed them. 

He did not stop though did he 

Yes the blame is all his for the fleeing

That blame cannot be loaded on to the second incident in any shape or form it does not apply

You and others must try to remove this from your thinking it simply has no bearing on these subsequent events

[Bluespunk]

Just now, oldlakey said:

He did not stop though did he 

Yes the blame is all his for the fleeing

That blame cannot be loaded on to the second incident in any shape or form it does not apply

You and others must try to remove this from your thinking it simply has no bearing on these subsequent events

If he had stopped he would not have killed the victims. It has every bearing on what happened after that. 

[docshock13]

3 minutes ago, oldlakey said:

Sorry,  she was so lackadaisical I would not of believed it if I had not just watched it

Your brain must surely urge you on as you are moving into possible on coming traffic

Go away. Ppl have lost their lives at the hands of an irresponsible individual. Show some respect and troll elsewhere please.  

[oldlakey]

5 minutes ago, onthesoi said:

The pickup is 100% to blame because he is driving in a reckless manner at high speed.

There is nothing to say a motorbike cannot cross a road if the way is clear.

The motorbike was not speeding, maybe only doing 5-10mph.

 

She may have glanced to the right and seen the immediate incoming traffic was clear, but by the time she actually crossed the road at the slow pace she was travelling the pickup was already bearing down on top of her ....for the simple reason the pickup was driving so quickly.

 

If the pickup had been driving safely within the speed limit would this have happened? No!

 

If a pedestrian crossed the road and was knocked down because the pickup was speeding and not easy to see....would you still be saying the pedestrian is at fault? ....because the law in most western countries says otherwise, if you are speeding you are automatically to blame.

---------

 

It never fails to amaze me how many bad drivers there are on TV who cant analyse a simple road situation and see who is to blame, I can only think they are a lot of old men who did the driving test in the 70s and therefore terrible drivers with no idea about safe driving.

Opinions we all have one and they come in many shapes and sizes 

[balo]

Unfortunately you can't stop idiots on the roads or from posting in this thread,   The video is there and anyone with a working brain will know what happened here.

 

RIP to the victims.   And don't bother to reply to me oldlakey. 

 

 

[onthesoi]

Just now, oldlakey said:

Opinions we all have one and they come in many shapes and sizes 

 

The highway code is not an opinion ...although it doesn't surprise me that you think it is...

[oldlakey]

3 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

If he had stopped he would not have killed the victims. It has every bearing on what happened after that. 

Thats nothing more than an IF

Try and stay with reality, and accept that he did NOT stop

If thats really beyond you then just say that if he had not get out of bed that morning then it wont have happened either so it must be his fault

[docshock13]

8 minutes ago, oldlakey said:

Opinions we all have one and they come in many shapes and sizes 

Like me chocolate starfish. Gonna name it oldlakey coz it only expels excrement. 

Edited June 23, 2017 by docshock13
Poor form with language

[oldlakey]

4 minutes ago, onthesoi said:

 

The highway code is not an opinion ...although it doesn't surprise me that you think it is...

I know its pointless to ask you to prove he was speeding, all the same lets have it

I think I should warn you from the outset that I have now learn to ignore infantile digs

[Bluespunk]

1 minute ago, oldlakey said:

Thats nothing more than an IF

Try and stay with reality, and accept that he did NOT stop

If thats really beyond you then just say that if he had not get out of bed that morning then it wont have happened either so it must be his fault

There is no if. 

 

Had he stopped after the first accident he was responsible for, 2 people would not have died because of his reckless driving. 

 

It's nothing to do with getting out of bed and everything about taking responsibility for your actions. 

 

Had he taken responsibility and stopped after the first accident he would not have killed the two victims of this accident. 

[docshock13]

1 minute ago, oldlakey said:

Thanks I am honoured

 

Welcome. Get some sleep. Things are always clearer in the morning.

[oldlakey]

1 minute ago, Bluespunk said:

There is no if. 

 

Had he stopped after the first accident he was responsible for, 2 people would not have died because of his reckless driving. 

 

It's nothing to do with getting out of bed and everything about taking responsibility for your actions. 

 

Had he taken responsibility and stopped after the first accident he would not have killed the two victims of this accident. 

He did not stop, he continued on, now watch the CCTV thats reality

[anto]

21 minutes ago, onthesoi said:

The pickup is 100% to blame because he is driving in a reckless manner at high speed.

There is nothing to say a motorbike cannot cross a road if the way is clear.

The motorbike was not speeding, maybe only doing 5-10mph.

 

She may have glanced to the right and seen the immediate incoming traffic was clear, but by the time she actually crossed the road at the slow pace she was travelling the pickup was already bearing down on top of her ....for the simple reason the pickup was driving so quickly.

 

If the pickup had been driving safely within the speed limit would this have happened? No!

 

If a pedestrian crossed the road and was knocked down because the pickup was speeding and not easy to see....would you still be saying the pedestrian is at fault? ....because the law in most western countries says otherwise, if you are speeding you are automatically to blame.

---------

 

It never fails to amaze me how many bad drivers there are on TV who cant analyse a simple road situation and see who is to blame, I can only think they are a lot of old men who did the driving test in the 70s and therefore terrible drivers with no idea about safe driving.

Yes his excessive speed and his not braking at all when he had two or three seconds to do so is to blame for what happened .This Woman's death along with her son and severely injured other child  is his fault .

[oldlakey]

2 minutes ago, docshock13 said:

Welcome. Get some sleep. Things are always clearer in the morning.

I suggest you take a butchers at a certain bit of CCTV

 

[Bluespunk]

3 minutes ago, oldlakey said:

He did not stop, he continued on, now watch the CCTV thats reality

He failed to stop, continued his reckless driving and killed two people. 

 

That's reality. 

 

Now, I'm taking the doc's advice...

Edited June 23, 2017 by Bluespunk

[oldlakey]

2 minutes ago, anto said:

Yes his excessive speed and his not braking at all when he had two or three seconds to do so is to blame for what happened .This Woman's death along with her son and severely injured other child  is his fault .

The option I offered earlier is not closed, feel free to back up your opinion with some form of factual evidence

[oldlakey]

4 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

He failed to stop, continued his reckless driving and killed two people. 

 

That's reality. 

 

Now, I'm taking the doc's advice...

Watch the CCTV at your earliest convenience 

Thankfully it turned up just like the proverbial bad penny

[Bluespunk]

7 minutes ago, oldlakey said:

Watch the CCTV at your earliest convenience 

Thankfully it turned up just like the proverbial bad penny

Nothing thankful about this story or your victim blaming. 

 

The driver who failed to stop after the first accident is responsible for two deaths. 

 

He is responsible because of his driving. 

 

You seem to believe your view of that sickening video is the correct one, yet others do not agree with you. 

 

I'll side with them. 

Edited June 23, 2017 by Bluespunk

[mommysboy]

44 minutes ago, onthesoi said:

The pickup is 100% to blame because he is driving in a reckless manner at high speed.

There is nothing to say a motorbike cannot cross a road if the way is clear.

The motorbike was not speeding, maybe only doing 5-10mph.

 

She may have glanced to the right and seen the immediate incoming traffic was clear, but by the time she actually crossed the road at the slow pace she was travelling the pickup was already bearing down on top of her ....for the simple reason the pickup was driving so quickly.

 

If the pickup had been driving safely within the speed limit would this have happened? No!

 

If a pedestrian crossed the road and was knocked down because the pickup was speeding and not easy to see....would you still be saying the pedestrian is at fault? ....because the law in most western countries says otherwise, if you are speeding you are automatically to blame.

---------

 

It never fails to amaze me how many bad drivers there are on TV who cant analyse a simple road situation and see who is to blame, I can only think they are a lot of old men who did the driving test in the 70s and therefore terrible drivers with no idea about safe driving.

 

Simple as that!  Fast driving is reckless driving.  Excellent posting.

 

"If you are speeding you are automatically at fault." 

 

 

 

 

[oldlakey]

29 minutes ago, balo said:

Unfortunately you can't stop idiots on the roads or from posting in this thread,   The video is there and anyone with a working brain will know what happened here.

 

RIP to the victims.   And don't bother to reply to me oldlakey. 

 

 

I do apologize but they were coming in thick and fast and this one slipped by me 

Just for the record you can advise me on my actions if you like, but I reserve the right to ignore your advice as you can see

Yes I have watched the CCTV several times, and yes I am in full agreement with you balo

Bit of a disappointment hey for you after the initial info from the RTP

[anto]

>>2/3 seconds to stop? <<

 

You misinterpret what i said .He had 2 or 3 seconds to react ,not stop as he was going far too fast  .

[oldlakey]

1 minute ago, mommysboy said:

 

Simple as that!  Fast driving is reckless driving.  Excellent posting.

 

"If you are speeding you are automatically at fault." 

 

 

 

 

Speeding is illegal for sure, try to drop the word IF in future it just might help your suggestion

[oldlakey]

13 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

Nothing thankful about this story or your victim blaming. 

 

The driver who failed to stop after the first accident is responsible for two deaths. 

 

He is responsible because of his driving. 

 

You seem to believe your view of that sickening video is the correct one, yet others do not agree with you. 

 

I'll side with them. 

Thankful that the CCTV turned up for some clear evidence NOTHING ELSE thats just OBSCENE what kind of sick mind do you possess 

Desperation or what

Victim blaming I suggest you revisit Post 397

The CCTV is clear enough what happened

Of course I think my view of the CCTV is the correct one WHY would I think otherwise

Yes others see it differently, so be it

You say I'll side with them, you can't possible know how little that concerns me after your Post 421

[Bluespunk]

1 minute ago, oldlakey said:

Thankful that the CCTV turned up for some clear evidence NOTHING ELSE thats just OBSCENE what kind of sick mind do you possess 

Desperation or what

Victim blaming I suggest you revisit Post 397

The CCTV is clear enough what happened

Of course I think my view of the CCTV is the correct one WHY would I think otherwise

Yes others see it differently, so be it

You say I'll side with them, you can't possible know how little that concerns me after your Post 421

I don't need to revisit posts to know what you are doing. 

[oldlakey]

Just now, Bluespunk said:

I don't need to revisit posts to know what you are doing. 

Take the earlier advice and go to bed, hopefully it will help to clear your SICK MIND

Disgusting suggestion / insinuation you should be ashamed of yourself

THANK GOD / THANKFULLY I am the victim of it and not the perpetrator of such a low and tasteless comment

Sleep well

[Bluespunk]

2 minutes ago, oldlakey said:

Take the earlier advice and go to bed, hopefully it will help to clear your SICK MIND

Disgusting suggestion / insinuation you should be ashamed of yourself

THANK GOD / THANKFULLY I am the victim of it and not the perpetrator of such a low and tasteless comment

Sleep well

I always do. 

Edited June 23, 2017 by Bluespunk