Brunstrom: "I would do it again"

[Spanner Man]

Afternoon all.

Richard Brunstrom is something a T055er whose views are sometimes a bit extreme, of that there is no doubt. It was probably a bit insensitive to show the pictures at a private meeting with the press, but they haven't been released to the press in general, so what's the problem?

However, the rider in question was riding a Hayabusa & travelling at over 100mph in a 60 zone. Which makes him criminally responsible for the accident. He also had no licence or insurance, which makes him an irresponsible To55pot in my book.
There are cases daily where criminal behavior & associated photographs are shown in the press. No consultation with the family has been sought, & nor should there be any need to.

My sympathies are with the family who were stuck in their vehicle for 90 minutes, with a headless corpse embedded in the front of the car.

Cheers.

[the_lone_wolf]

Originally Posted by Spanner Man

However, the rider in question was riding a Hayabusa & travelling at over 100mph in a 60 zone. Which makes him criminally responsible for the accident. He also had no licence or insurance, which makes him an irresponsible To55pot in my book.

i was aware of the circumstances, but the family aren't responsible for that are they? his actions are indefensible, but if anything the extreme nature of the crime means that it bears even less relevance to the "speed kills" message brunstrom was trying to push, i can't think of anyone who thinks riding into an oncoming car at 100mph+ isn't going to result in horrific injuries

i also can't think of an example where the press have used photos of a dismembered head, identifying the deceased, consultation or no, ever, i'd imagine if they did they would be on the end of a level 5 bollocking

just because the pictures weren't released doesn't mean they can't hurt the relatives, obviously if you'd been told your son or brother had died in a road accident you'd be upset, but to be hold he was decapitated and would have remained concious for some time afterwards is going to f*** you up is it not?

The decision to show the pictures was in hindsight misguided. It was though done in private and leaking of the photos in to the public domain was never envisaged.

I do sympathise with the family but only if they equally accept that their relative was a law abusing idiot who's death was caused by his stupidity,attitude and inept riding ability.

No license,insurance etc and blasting around on a Hayabuse? FFS!

Originally Posted by Spanner Man

Afternoon all.

Richard Brunstrom is something a T055er whose views are sometimes a bit extreme, of that there is no doubt. It was probably a bit insensitive to show the pictures at a private meeting with the press, but they haven't been released to the press in general, so what's the problem?

However, the rider in question was riding a Hayabusa & travelling at over 100mph in a 60 zone. Which makes him criminally responsible for the accident. He also had no licence or insurance, which makes him an irresponsible To55pot in my book.
There are cases daily where criminal behavior & associated photographs are shown in the press. No consultation with the family has been sought, & nor should there be any need to.

My sympathies are with the family who were stuck in their vehicle for 90 minutes, with a headless corpse embedded in the front of the car.

Cheers.

I don't see the slightest relivance of the mans criminality. His family are already victims of his stupidity, they shouldn't be made to suffer further because he died while breaking the law.

Least still be made to suffer by the police. They're there to protect the public and enforce the law, not pass judgement and traumatise people.

I think it goes without saying the guy is a tosser. the whole thing about this "biker" annoys me. he had no license or insurance so at the end of the day he shouldnt have been on the road at all (sympathy? - not a bit!) I do have sympathy for the family involved, and brunstroms obsession with speed needs to be reigned in. am I right, that Brunstrom had a daughter killed in a car accident?

[the_lone_wolf]

Originally Posted by Pedrosa

The decision to show the pictures was in hindsight misguided. It was though done in private and leaking of the photos in to the public domain was never envisaged.

a room full of journalists, come on, you have to be naive to the point of incompetence to think that anything you say/show to a room full of journalists is going to be kept between you and them

Originally Posted by Flamin_Squirrel

I don't see the slightest relivance of the mans criminality. His family are already victims of his stupidity, they shouldn't be made to suffer further because he died while breaking the law.

what he said

[Luckypants]

No you are thinking of his then deputy Bill Brereton. See this. Mr Brereton is another area where the Chief Constable covered himself in glory... (sarcasm). I won't post my opinion in case big Brunstrom is watching.

[Spanner Man]

Originally Posted by Flamin_Squirrel

I don't see the slightest relivance of the mans criminality. His family are already victims of his stupidity, they shouldn't be made to suffer further because he died while breaking the law.

Least still be made to suffer by the police. They're there to protect the public and enforce the law, not pass judgement and traumatise people.

Steady on! Aren't all relatives of criminals victims of their stupidity? Why the hell should we make an exception in this case!

Many murder victims families also have to read & hear about the suffering & injuries they endured. That is worse in my opinion.

The families suggestion that they knew nothing of his injuries is somewhat un believable, or didn't any of them go to identify him? Some of them must have known...At the risk of sounding incredibly cynical, I expect the possibility of a law suit against the police has been considered.

I agree with Busasean that Brunstrom needs to be reigned in, but I can't see why the fact it's a Police force that has made it public makes it any worse than if it was reported by the press in general.

Cheers.

What happened to the good old burning at the stake.

[the_lone_wolf]

Originally Posted by Spanner Man

The families suggestion that they knew nothing of his injuries is somewhat un believable, or didn't any of them go to identify him? Some of them must have known...At the risk of sounding incredibly cynical, I expect the possibility of a law suit against the police has been considered.

The father was the only one who knew details, if you read some of the previous news articles you'll see he had understandably tried to keep the details from the rest of the family.

the IPCC report concluded that he had broken no laws or code of conduct, that's not the issue here, it's not so much what he did as his attitude towards it that riles me and so many others, to say that pictures he was going to use in his presentation "aren't grusome enough" and the ones of gibney were "outstandingly good" smacks of someone who is only going for the shock tactics, the headline grabber who is willing to put his own agenda over the well being of innocent people who happened to be related to someone who did something stupid.

then to basically say it wasn't his fault and the only mistake he made was trusting journalists not to report what they'd been shown shows a complete detatchment from ethics and reality. his objective was obvious from the beginning, whether he set out deliberately to cause an uproar and go after the family is arguable, but it's certain that he was so desperate to get his name in the papers again that any question of the morality of his actions never went through his mind.