TT 2022 ??

[John Wright]

43 minutes ago, Shake me up Judy said:

Has the Coroner's report of the sidecar incident been pulled from the Courts website as well ?

There hasn’t been a judgment to publish yet. Formal identity, time and place of death and medical cause. 

The full inquest, with jury, won’t be held for months.

[John Wright]

19 minutes ago, Hooly said:

JW will know for sure, but I don't believe every inquest is published online, only those with a 'significant public inquest', hence why there are relatively only a handful of inquest judgments published. In any case, the inquests from deaths at TT have only been opened and adjourned

 

John, why is it the case not all judgments are published when all other judgments are? I suspect it is not required to be published due to, the relatively speaking, private matters at hand of suicides etc. Unless of course they are under the care of a government dept etc

 

 

It’s only published when there’s a written judgment with explanations and reasons, whether it’s a coroners inquest, a criminal trial, a civil trial, or a tribunal.

Most coroners cases aren’t controversial and there is no written judgment. Same with criminal cases. Just a verdict.

With civil cases, or tribunals, many, the vast majority, are settled or never defended and there’s no findings of fact, or applying law to the facts, to generate a judgment.

If you think about it, a jury decision is just guilty, not guilty, or we can’t agree. So nothing to publish.

Same with Coroners juries. The narrative verdict where there are important questions of public care or duty, which generate a written judgment, are rare.

[quilp]

35 minutes ago, Kopek said:

Even the five deaths in this current year? With all the lurid hints at the type of death?

The shock stories have always existed, at least locally. The only difference this year is the increased publicity generated by the sidecar incident, the gruesome manner of those 5 deaths and the aftermath thereof.

Publish and be damned I say. 

[Hooly]

10 minutes ago, John Wright said:

It’s only published when there’s a written judgment with explanations and reasons, whether it’s a coroners inquest, a criminal trial, a civil trial, or a tribunal.

Most coroners cases aren’t controversial and there is no written judgment. Same with criminal cases. Just a verdict.

With civil cases, or tribunals, many, the vast majority, are settled or never defended and there’s no findings of fact, or applying law to the facts, to generate a judgment.

If you think about it, a jury decision is just guilty, not guilty, or we can’t agree. So nothing to publish.

Same with Coroners juries. The narrative verdict where there are important questions of public care or duty, which generate a written judgment, are rare.

Thanks John. And what determines whether a coroner inquest has a jury? Is it common? 

[0bserver]

53 minutes ago, Max Power said:

It's not that at all, most seemed disgusted that the descriptions of the deaths were so graphic and disrespectful. It wasn't easy to say what their thoughts were about the TT, I'd have said most were neutral? 

I'm not sure Max. 

I'll be honest with you I was angry during TT at the continued deaths that just seem to get swept away and racing carries on like nothing ever happened. 

But life's too short and I can't be bothered to argue the anti-TT corner. So I've deleted that post. 

I just wish they made a concerted effort to clean up their act and we wouldn't be having conversations about Coroner's reports every year. 

[John Wright]

8 minutes ago, Hooly said:

Thanks John. And what determines whether a coroner inquest has a jury? Is it common? 

It’s when there are disputed facts. That actually doesn’t happen often.

It used to be a jury was sworn for every inquest. Wasteful and slow.

This is the shortest summary:

At most inquests there is no jury and the Coroner decides the conclusion on their own.

However, occasionally a jury is needed.  This will happen if the deceased died in custody of an unnatural cause, or if their death was linked to their own or someone else's actions while at work, or to certain health and safety issues. 

The Coroner may also decide to use a jury in other cases because they feel it would be helpful or in the public interest.  If there will be a jury at an inquest, the Coroner  will let family/interested parties know well beforehand.

If there is a jury, it does not significantly change how the inquest runs.  The jury will be in court while all the witnesses give their evidence.  At the end of the inquest, instead of the Coroner deciding the conclusion, they will give the jury a choice of possible conclusions and they jury will select the one they feel best fits the facts.

[Max Power]

1 hour ago, 0bserver said:

I'm not sure Max. 

I'll be honest with you I was angry during TT at the continued deaths that just seem to get swept away and racing carries on like nothing ever happened. 

But life's too short and I can't be bothered to argue the anti-TT corner. So I've deleted that post. 

I just wish they made a concerted effort to clean up their act and we wouldn't be having conversations about Coroner's reports every year. 

The thing is that they do try to make things safer and analyse causes to take reasonable steps to mitigate as best that they can. The nature of racing can throw up all sorts of things which are unforeseen. I know that the organisers feel the pain as much as anyone, many of them know those who are involved quite well don't forget. It's never a case of simply sweeping up and carrying on just for the sake of it, and this didn't happen this year at all. It's very difficult to do what some people think is the right thing and others may think is wrong. 

[Passing Time]

4 hours ago, Kopek said:

I didn't say that he would want to but rather he would be the sort of person who could be respected to offer a balanced view?

Of course, if he came out in favour of continuing, I would flame him!!!

JW’s opinion is no more important than anybody elses. You seem keen to end the TT so put your own head above the parapet

[Kopek]

1 hour ago, Max Power said:

The thing is that they do try to make things safer and analyse causes to take reasonable steps to mitigate as best that they can.

Max, all circuits do that! A few years ago, was it Thruxton?, spent half a million on an earth bank to make a corner safer, there hadn't been any injuries or deaths there, they just thought it a wise move!!! If we can't do that, then we can't make our course safer?

[Max Power]

16 minutes ago, Kopek said:

Max, all circuits do that! A few years ago, was it Thruxton?, spent half a million on an earth bank to make a corner safer, there hadn't been any injuries or deaths there, they just thought it a wise move!!! If we can't do that, then we can't make our course safer?

Well there you go then! 

[Happier diner]

9 hours ago, Max Power said:

The thing is that they do try to make things safer and analyse causes to take reasonable steps to mitigate as best that they can. The nature of racing can throw up all sorts of things which are unforeseen. I know that the organisers feel the pain as much as anyone, many of them know those who are involved quite well don't forget. It's never a case of simply sweeping up and carrying on just for the sake of it, and this didn't happen this year at all. It's very difficult to do what some people think is the right thing and others may think is wrong. 

If they actually did this then people would be less angry. I haven't seen any examples though. Vast quantities of money seem to be spent making the course faster rather than safer.

[Steady Eddie]

10 hours ago, quilp said:

The shock stories have always existed, at least locally. The only difference this year is the increased publicity generated by the sidecar incident, the gruesome manner of those 5 deaths and the aftermath thereof.

Publish and be damned I say. 

They did publish and then I note that the initial news reports were subsequently revised quite quickly. The early editions online covered the fact that in the father and son incident they were both completely unrecognizable due to the nature of the trauma. Those articles now seem to have been toned down quite a bit with just a focus on the tags being lost. Makes you wonder if disapproval was expressed? 

[Non-Believer]

26 minutes ago, Happier diner said:

If they actually did this then people would be less angry. I haven't seen any examples though. Vast quantities of money seem to be spent making the course faster rather than safer.

Because the TT has now been moved up several gears in being commercialised as a revenue earning spectacle. More speed = more spectacle. It's not about manufacturers selling bikes anymore, it's about selling coverage and rights, TV or otherwise.

The question is, given the nature of the course and event itself, is this the thing to do? Because if the money men break the TT in the course of exploiting it, they won't be bothered, they'll just move on to the next opportunity.

[Shake me up Judy]

10 hours ago, Max Power said:

The thing is that they do try to make things safer and analyse causes to take reasonable steps to mitigate as best that they can. The nature of racing can throw up all sorts of things which are unforeseen. I know that the organisers feel the pain as much as anyone, many of them know those who are involved quite well don't forget. It's never a case of simply sweeping up and carrying on just for the sake of it, and this didn't happen this year at all. It's very difficult to do what some people think is the right thing and others may think is wrong. 

I don't doubt what you're saying Max but does anything really come from it ? The T.T. must always go on. This year it was five deaths but it could've been six, seven, eight, nine.... it wouldn't stop it all happening again next year. I don't think everyone truly understands that.

[Happier diner]

16 minutes ago, Shake me up Judy said:

I don't doubt what you're saying Max but does anything really come from it ? The T.T. must always go on. This year it was five deaths but it could've been six, seven, eight, nine.... it wouldn't stop it all happening again next year. I don't think everyone truly understands that.

I think a lot of people understand it. Sadly not those with influence. The irony will be that the intransigence of those who love it and organise it will ultimately be responsible for its downfall.