Seacost Century=FAIL

[OakLeaf]

And it goes back to what I keep harping on about the mental element. I'm glad that this driver may get what she deserves. But it points out how near impossible it is to prosecute vehicular homicide as currently defined *without* drugs being involved. Even when the mens rea is merely negligence (which negligent homicide is still a misdemeanor), that concept returns back to a community standard of care, and when it's generally accepted that a driver doesn't really have to exercise any care at all behind the wheel, it means that all this carnage is "just accidents."

Speeding is a strict liability offense. Marked lanes and assured clear distance are strict liability offenses. But bingo, kill someone and all of a sudden they have to prove that you were driving much worse than the average person, AND that you knew it and drove anyway. Bah.

[velo]

I've been reading about this and just have to say that it make my heart ache for the cyclists and their families. So unnecessary and senseless. It makes me angry at the lawmakers, too.

[shootingstar]

If our North American laws could be closer to that of the Netherlands:

A car driver involved in injuring /killing a cyclist is deemed to be at fault first, unless the driver can prove otherwise.
I have no idea if their law allows laying charges of manslaughter (or whatever the appropriate legal term here would be).

I heard this twice:

May 2013, from a Dutch cycling education coordinator direct from the Netherlands as a speaker here in our city.
2nd time only 2 wks. ago from a Dutch-Canadian cyclist who works as a consultant and also works for the Dutch embassy in Ottawa.

[BikeDutchess]

Here is more information on the so-called "strict liability" laws in the Netherlands: http://bicycledutch.wordpress.com/20...e-netherlands/
As I read the description, it appears to be more geared towards civil liability (financial damages) rather than criminal liability.