A cyclist jumpts a red light, gets killed by a driver responding to a green light and who is to blame ?
Apparently because the driver had sent a text a few seconds earlier, the court today found the driver to be at fault for the crash and she can now expect a prison sentence. This does seem an odd kind of justice.
Let's be clear, the driver should not have been texting, but did it impair her ability to drive after she had sent the text ? It is debatable I am sure. But the point remains would the cyclist have been killed if he had not jumped the light ? Of course not, there is not debate on that matter.
So when the burden of proof has to be so clear in a court of law, with the debate about "may be this" or "may be that" replaced by cold hard facts and evidence, it seems an odd kind of justive that the driver should be found guilty.
Yes, the criver deserves some sort of punishment, but I fear this is being used for political motives to drive home the government message about using the phone in the car.