Re: Heartless b*stard
 

Yes, I only realised that after I posted, did'nt see Sue was a moderator, sorry.:(

Re: Heartless b*stard
 

No need to be sorry mate. ;-))

Re: Heartless b*stard
 

HOW THE F**k IS THIS DISGUSTING PERSON AN INNOCENT VICTIM:ohmy::blink::blink: ????

Mate, he KNOWINGLY drove for 2 kilometers with a teenager's body under his car, he Knew it was there by the trail of blood behind the car as he realised he was being followed by another car, who no doubt tried to attract his attention.

Don't you think the handling would have been affected a bit as well ?

Once he realised he was being followed he pulled off the main road and dislodged the body by driving backward's and forwards.

This is by far the most shocking thing I have ever read, seen, and heard !

Totally agree the charge should be murder, and the wife should be charged as an accomplice !

Wonder if this scumbag cited crime in the UK as one of his reason's for leaving ?

Have to stop typing now as this has really wound me up !:frown:

Re: Heartless b*stard
 

If he couldnt get around the body at the original scene, why not stop and try to help, or at least call an ambulance, as any normal person, of any nationality would have done ?

Re: Heartless b*stard
 

This is a tragedy and I'm certainly not condoning what this individual did but it's not murder. This guy had the body thrown into the path of his car. There was no intent to kill, which is a prerequisite with murder. He was just going along his merry way and had this situation thrust upon him. Up until that point he'd done nothing wrong or illegal. The question really is why did he run. Was there another offence being committed, maybe insurance or alcohol related?

Re: Heartless b*stard
 

I disagree. He didn't know the boy was dead at the time and indeed the suggestion is that he wasn't.

He must have known that driving with him trapped under the car, then driving back and forward to dislodge him, would kill him.

Re: Heartless b*stard
 

I don't know where this piece of information came from. In the report I read when the accident happened the female motorist (British) knocked the guy off the bike, no one at the scene witnessed what happened to the motorcyclist. He was just missing. The surrounding fields were searched and the police were called but no one knew what happened. It was only when police reviewed CCTV camera recordings before and after the area where the accident happened that they knew which vehicles had been in that section of road. There was a follow up done more than 24 hours later on this vehicle and when the GC visited this guy he was in the garage changing the plates and there was human tissue on the underside of the car. That's what the papers said at the time; no mention of being chased by another vehicle.

Re: Heartless b*stard
 

He was Pissed out of his head that is why he didn't stop, he was so drunk he didn't know what he had done.
In my opinion if you get in a car and you are over the limit you are in charge of a lethal weapon, and if someone dies you are responsible.

Re: Heartless b*stard
 

Read the link in the first post.

"According to police, when the driver realised a witness was following the trail of blood left behind by the car, he turned off the road and fled in the direction of the urbanisation El Valle."

Re: Heartless b*stard
 

I kind of agree with your second point about being responsible, however if he drove back & forth (to try to dislodge some(one)thing), wtf did he think he was doing at that point? Didn't know what he had done? If he didn't what was that all about? It sounds like trying to absolve himself from blame to me........

Re: Heartless b*stard
 

Regarding the murder versus death by dangerous driving charges, death by dangerous driving is described as follows:

"A person who causes the death of another person by driving a mechanically propelled vehicle dangerously on a road or other public place is guilty of an offence."

And murder is this:

"when a person, of sound memory and discretion, unlawfully killeth any reasonable creature in being and under the king's peace, with malice aforethought, either express or implied."

Funny old Common Law wording for the offence of murder, but intent or "malice aforethought" is clearly an element of murder, whereas intent does not feature in the office of death by dangerous driving.

So unless you think the guy had intended and planned to kill the kid before the accident took place, this is DbDD.

Re: Heartless b*stard
 

But what are the definitions in the Spanish system?

Re: Heartless b*stard
 

Unfortunately it is against the site rules to post the Spanish definitions!

Re: Heartless b*stard
 

How about if they prove the kid was alive at first under the car, then the driver had "malice aforethought" and thought I will drive until he is dead and the body drops from under my car.

Re: Heartless b*stard
 

Joke, right?

And doesn't the Spanish system have an equivalent of manslaughter?