XW GT Crashes into house, injuring four.

[BLU-220]

Originally Posted by 05_ENFORCER

And I do not trust the papers to report correctly either.
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/new...-1226963368337


.

your right, they said it was a 1968 model XW are 1969-1970

but it's funny that the GT crashed in a town named Windsor Downs how ironic is that if it was a '69 model [ 351 Windsor ]

cheers Dean

[LoudPipes]

Originally Posted by Andy777

My cousin is really good mates with the xw owner, the guy involved was at my cousins house the morning it happened

If you google map (street view) the street you will see there is no gutters and there is a small rock garden, which would of acted as a ramp

I thought so, you had info I hadn’t seen in any media reports.
It’s very sad to hear the woman lost the baby, just terrible.
Sometimes what we think are innocuous risks really hit hard and destroys many lives when they take a horrific twist such as this.
I feel sorry for everyone involved.

[pottery beige]

whatever happened it sucks, not a good outcome for anyone involved

[05_ENFORCER]

Originally Posted by LoudPipes

I thought so, you had info I hadn’t seen in any media reports.
It’s very sad to hear the woman lost the baby, just terrible.
Sometimes what we think are innocuous risks really hit hard and destroys many lives when they take a horrific twist such as this.
I feel sorry for everyone involved.

.



So I wonder, is the charge now murder or dangerous driving causing death?


.

[LoudPipes]

Originally Posted by 05_ENFORCER

.

So I wonder, is the charge now murder or dangerous driving causing death?

.

I thought murder had to have intent.


Further:
Has the law in NSW been amended to include an unborn?
Last year they were talking about legislating killing an unborn to be an offence, but I don’t know if it happened.

[XBROO]

Originally Posted by Andy777

My cousin is really good mates with the xw owner, the guy involved was at my cousins house the morning it happened

If you google map (street view) the street you will see there is no gutters and there is a small rock garden, which would of acted as a ramp

What I still don't get is why he wouldn't of put the steering wheel nut on before he took it for a drive. He has only just finished restoring it, you'd think he'd at least do that.

[The Yeti]

Originally Posted by 05_ENFORCER

.



So I wonder, is the charge now murder or dangerous driving causing death?


.

I don't think that law got up, unfortunately the baby has to be born to be cocidered :(

[LoudPipes]

Originally Posted by The Yeti

I don't think that law got up, unfortunately the baby has to be born to be cocidered :(

The Yeti's right. It passed the Lower House but wasn't introduced into the Upper House.



ZOE’S LAW IN NEW SOUTH WALES

On 21 November 2013 the New South Wales Parliament’s Lower House passed the Crimes Amendment (Zoe’s Law) Bill 2013 (No 2).Zoe’s Law seeks to amend the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) (the Crimes Act) to include offences in relation to the destruction of, or harm to, the foetus of a pregnant woman, and to amend the definition of grievous bodily harm to include the new offences.The provision would apply to a foetus of at least 20 weeks gestation or with a body mass of at least 400 grams and would give that foetus the rights of a living person in relation to the harm or destruction of the foetus.

The bill is a private members bill, introduced following an incident which occurred in 2009 in which Brodie Donegan, a woman from the Central Coast of New South Wales was run over by a driver affected by drugs.Ms Donegan was 8 months pregnant at the time with her daughter, Zoe.Zoe was stillborn as a result of the accident, and the driver charged with grievous bodily harm to Brodie Donegan.The driver was not charged with Zoe’s death because the law did not recognise Zoe as a person.

In 2010, the issues raised by the death of Zoe Donegan were considered by the Honourable Michael Campbell QC in “Review of Laws Surrounding Criminal Incidents Involving the Death of an Unborn Child” (the Campbell Review).That review received a large number of submissions including one from Ms Donegan together with submissions from the Australian Medical Association (NSW) Limited, and the Law Society of NSW.The Campbell Review concluded that current offences under the Crimes Act 1900 enable the justice system to respond appropriately to criminal incidents involving the death of an unborn child noting that, as presently drafted, the offences provide a direct path to the punishment of an offender whose actions have resulted in the death of a foetus.

It is of note that the Campbell Review followed changes made to the definition of grievous bodily harm in the Crimes Act in May 2005 to include “destruction of a foetus.”The case of R v King (2003) NSWCCA 399 held that the death of a foetus is capable of constituting grievous bodily harm to a pregnant mother, following a factual scenario where a pregnant woman was deliberately kicked in the stomach and had her stomach stomped on after refusing to have an abortion.The decision in R v King was legislated, giving rise to the Crimes Amendment (Grievous Bodily Harm) Act 2005 (NSW) which amended the Crimes Act to include the destruction of the foetus of a pregnant woman (other than in the course of a medical procedure) under the definition of the infliction of grievous bodily harm.

In 2003, prior to King, the Honourable Mervyn Finlay QC conducted a Review of the Law of Manslaughter in New South Wales (the Finlay Report) which recommended that a change to the current law as to the meaning of personhood for the purposes of unlawful homicide was not recommended but it was recommended that provisions in the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) be amended to allow a charge of manslaughter to be brought in circumstances where an unborn child dies.The Finlay Report also recommended that the offence of “killing an unborn child” relating to a criminal act causing a child capable of being born alive to die before it has an existence independent of its mother.Those suggested amendments were yet to be made at the time of the 2005 amendments, and were ultimately not made.

The law in New South Wales as it currently stands provides that the offence of grievous bodily harm for the destruction (other than in the course of a medical procedure) of the foetus of a pregnant woman, whether or not the woman suffers any other harm is punishable by up to 25 years imprisonment.Key stakeholders have indicated that the law as it stands is adequate and have expressed their concerns that a number of unintended consequences could flow should Zoe’s Law be passed.Those consequences have been said to include intrusion and undermining of the rights of pregnant women.

Zoe’s Law was scheduled to be debated in the upper house in sittings commencing in March 2014. However, the bill was not introduced pending further consultation.

[05_ENFORCER]

That is a shame then if that is the case..................


.

[Stefan]

Originally Posted by LoudPipes

The law in New South Wales as it currently stands provides that the offence of grievous bodily harm for the destruction (other than in the course of a medical procedure) of the foetus of a pregnant woman, whether or not the woman suffers any other harm is punishable by up to 25 years imprisonment. Key stakeholders have indicated that the law as it stands is adequate and have expressed their concerns that a number of unintended consequences could flow should Zoe’s Law be passed.

While I doubt he'd get 25....but I can't imagine him not receiving time with bubba given unregistered, uninsured, unlicenced.

[nuthin' fancy]

Innocents on their doorstep don't deserve such an incident.

No doubt the driver didn't deserve such a car either.

[nuthin' fancy]

Originally Posted by MercurySilver

big whoopdedoos

She has big whoopdedoos but I think they're fake.

[tasdex]

uninsured-unlicenced ,un reged ,etc ,,,
but could afford a personalized plate ? ..


loose nut behind the wheel .

[FPVF6X201]

Funny (or not), but if this was a Holden involved in this accident this thread would be 100 pages long by now abusing the driver/car in every way imaginable. Same mob mentality when you see a Holden that's crashed on the news and the forum explodes with keyboard warriors, but when its a FORD involved, everyone (almost) doesn't seem to go as hard on the car/driver. For the record i'm not a Holden fanatic, just pointing out an observation.

[tasdex]

be more along the lines of ,,, geeze that thing must go 'ard ..
last words would be ,,,,
" now you watch this " ..!!

dont give a stuff ,,be it ford holden , or those twats in skylines whoooop tishing past 12 year old girls walking home from school ,, you will pay the fine somehow ,,,

im a diso pensioner ,, full comp on my cars , my sons first year drivers car , household insurance .
can anyone afford not to have at least that cover ,,? .
as said in the thread , any law abiding fellow would be sweating it ,,
some bogan teeing up $10 a week payment with a lawyer , will walk away laughing . .

[LoudPipes]

If it’s a new build it’s possible the rego and insurance wasn’t far off and the driver has taken it for a quick spin in the meantime. I can see the temptation of just a quick oncer around the block.

I’m not going to defend the driver, the outcome is enough to say punishment is due but there is a big dividing line between someone being a low life scumbag who doesn’t care or take responsibly for their actions and someone who makes a very poor judgement call.
And without knowing the circumstances or the driver’s history I won’t judge but there is no doubt a magistrate will take these factors into account during sentencing.

As I said earlier I feel sorry for the victims but if the driver is a compassionate human being who has made a mistake leading to horrific consequences then I can feel sadness for them as well.

I’ve known 2 driver’s over my long life that have had accidents where a passenger was killed and let me say they changed and never forgave themselves.
For the most, these types of accidents are a lifelong sentence for all parties involved.

[351 DUDE]

Just heard he is pleading not guilty to 2 charges of dangerous driving occasioning grevious bodily harm, they also released his name

[futura]

He comes from a Family racing business.

[Charliewool]

Geesh... TM were pretty legendary Ford guys.
What in the hell was he thinking?

[Bonn]

is there a news link?

[Bonn]

OK - found this one:

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/new...-1226990993313

[Brute 33]

Wow , pleading not guilty....dude better be having deep pockets...

[ILLaViTaR]

it'll buff out

[NTF6]

[QUOTE=Stefan;5135243]Accidents do happen, but this is not an accident./QUOTE]

Correct, an accident is where the outcome is NOT reasonably foreseable. I would say that not sticking the steering wheel nut on is where the outcome IS reasonably foreseable, therefore NOT an accident !

[Nova 8]

I hate how they say allegedly, he did it. Saying not guilty isn't necessary saying you didn't do it but rather saying you don't accept that level of charge.

[fgpsi]

Did he fang it around the corner?

[Morexbs]

No mention of anyone losing a baby in that article either.

[351 DUDE]

Originally Posted by Morexbs

No mention of anyone losing a baby in that article either.

On 9 news in Sydney, they mentioned the pregnant lady lost her baby,
Takes things to a whole new level

[malazn mafia]

Originally Posted by Brute 33

Wow , pleading not guilty....dude better be having deep pockets...

Actually in his situation, is life really worth living anymore?

[FGCOOL]

Jason is a good fella and I'm sure when he took the car for a spin he had no intention of crashing into a house and hurting anyone...He is very sorry for everyone he hurt and will never forgive himself. I've seen people do a lot worse and get let off by the courts so they could go out and reoffend on multiple occasions...yes, he made a mistake as has a heap of other people it just ended bad for him.
It's obvious something happened to the car as he is a very capable driver, I feel sad for the people injured and for the driver... Nobody is perfect