It's early days for the court case of the Ottawa motorist who plowed into a group of cyclists -- the Kanata Five -- way back in 2009, but the reporting from Ottawa Citizen this week is pretty good reading (try this one from the Ottawa Citizen.)
I was particularly amused by the bit from Tuesday's testimony where the accused motorist, Sommit Luangpakham, says he had briefly nodded off at the time of the 7:30 a.m. July accident, and thought he'd hit a post. This despite the fact that one of the bloodied cyclists wound up in his windshield, staring right at him.
This "nodding off" defence seems somewhat at odds with the defence filed against a civil suit by the cyclists in 2010, (a report on that case here) in which Luangpakham states that one of the cyclists was knocked into him by another car, that they weren't following road markings and that one cyclist in particular wasn't wearing her safety gear (a helmet). He even suggested that one cyclist was riding as though affected by intoxicants.
So, how do you swear that you didn't see them, while swearing you saw them doing all these things?
Anything and everything to avoid taking responsibility. About par for the course.
Posted by: Rob (Mk.2) | October 19, 2011 at 02:05 PM
Times are tough for Luangpakham now, but after it's all over, he might be able to find a book deal like Michael Bryant. These days it's easy to turn a profit of those you kill.
Posted by: Peter Parker | October 19, 2011 at 03:55 PM
You see, or don't see, as the case requires and hope that the testimony from one trial isn't allowed in the other. Thank god our "justice" system would always find and uncover this sort of thing and the guy will get a significant sentence, and have to pay significant damages. ( Hee Hee I like, once in a while, to make up funny stories like that. It helps keep me sane.)
Posted by: David Hendry | October 19, 2011 at 08:54 PM