Nick

Stockport Express this morning (Oct 6).

Speed camera contributed to death

by Jane Lavender

A CORONER and traffic police have claimed a speed camera, designed to reduce road deaths, could have been a cause of a fatal car smash.

Retired school burser, Myra Nevett, 69, (pictured) was fatally injured on December 16 last year as she crossed High Lane, near her Alderdale Drive home.

The keen golf and tennis player was rushed to Stepping Hill Hospital, but died later that day. At her inquest coroner John Pollard accused the yellow speed detector cameras of 'distracting drivers, even momentarily, who look at them and their speed rather than the road'.

PC Michael Jeffrey, an accident investigator at the scene, said: 'Yes, they do tend to divert drivers' attention away from other areas and they concentrate solely on their speed.'

On the night grandmother-of-six Mrs Nevett was killed, a street lamp was also not working close to where she crossed the road. The inquest also heard how other street lights were shielded by tree branches.

Recording a verdict of accidental death Mr Pollard said: 'In this particular area the lighting leaves much to be desired. I'm going to write to the appropriate authorities with a view to seeing whether there might be an amendment in their checking rota to ensure lights on main roads are dealt with more quickly.'

Mrs Nevett's husband, insurance broker, Michael, 71, who was planning to retire to spend more time with his wife of 44 years, said: 'She was a very active lady. She spent a lot of time with her grandchildren and adored them.'

Arthur Hadfield has been charged with driving without due care and attention. His trial will be held at Stockport Magistrates next January

NotoriousREV

It was only a matter of time, IMHO

Jap2Scrap

I almost got wiped out on the A43 due to the first southbound speed camera off the M1.. Dual Carriageway, 70 mph limit, MASSIVE warning sign so no problem.. Except the car in the inside lane just ahead of me hadn't noticed until the last second. He was actually well within 70, I know cos I was pacing him in the outside lane and I was doing 65.. Suddenly he must've seen the camera and panicked, stamping on the brakes. Unfortunately the guy behind him was caught completely by surprise and swerved right, into my lane, about 6 inches in front of me. There was no driving skill involved, just sheer luck there wasn't a nasty collision. We pulled alongside each other and exchanged a "nice to be alive" glance..

The guy who nearly caused it was oblivious. He was probably still wondering whether he'd avoided the points. Fact of the matter is he was fine anyway.

Adrian F

Why are we surprised we all know they are there to raise more Tax revenue!

In Essex road deaths went up 30% with 70+ camera's and 80,000+ speeding tickets issued in one year. But apparently the rise in deaths is caused by not having enough speed camera's and not enforcing the limits strictly enough according to the Police! Of course no mention of all the extra over time the Police offices will get that these draconian measures justify.

hedgehog

Accidents increased at 743 speed camera sites in 2003 according to government figures.

Traditionally government figures are sympathetic to government policy and yet they still had to admit to there being more accidents at 743 camera sites.

Of course this increase in accidents is being used by some to call for, you guessed it, more cameras.

Mick

iTrader: (1)

Have there been any accidents due to the flash from cameras on the opposite side of the road? - I always find it really distracting when the flash goes off in my field of vision in the dark!


Mick

hedgehog

I am not aware of any documented instances of the flash causing accidents but I am aware of people saying similar things.

That I am aware of there has been no scientific or published research into this matter but the reason the GATSOs took a photo of the rear of your car was to avoid flashing in your eyes and was for safety reasons.

Safety reasons are no longer sufficient to interfer with the dash for motorists cash.

sillysi

This happended close to where I live. The sad thing is there are two pedestrian crossings close to where she decided to cross. If she had used either off them she would probably still be here.

Tiggs

NOOOOOOOOO! dont say that!

woman dies from crossing road in stupid place doesnt help the "i cant see where im going because i spend so long looking at my speedo (despite installing 19 boost gauges on my A pillar)" anti camera brigade!.

hedgehog

One thing that has been interesting to note from this inquest is that even though the verdict recorded was that of "accident" and despite the fact that the police accident investigator said:

"Cameras tend to divert drivers' attention from other areas and they concentrate solely on their speed."

And the coronor said:

"This case highlights what I have been thinking for some time - cameras, road markings, different coloured tarmac, illuminated and non- illuminated signs, distract many drivers from having their full attention on driving."

The police are still going to charge the driver with driving without due care and attention. So once more the motorist pays while the people who put up the devices that caused the accident walk free.

CrisPDuk

With apologies to the family of the deceased, as I do not know the particalar circumstances of this incident, but, I use that particular stretch of road on a regular basis, and have myself come close to hitting stupid ******* too lazy to walk the extra ten yards, in fact they're often too lazy to even look to see if you're there
I think the speed camera gives the pedestrians a false sense of security, they assume that any car must 'only' be doing thirty, therefore the driver must be able to stop if I step out in front of them

Iwan

Indeed.

And the woman who caused the accident by walking across a road (where it's not uncommon for cars to be driving) is entirely absolved of any responsibility. Ooh she's dead, we can't pin any blame on her now can we, no of course not. Lets blame a motorist, a speed camera, etc etc instead.

Leslie

Certainly true that the behaviour of pedestrians these days is little short of suicidal at times. It seems quite normal for them to step off the kerb with their backs to the traffic without looking first or walking along the road at an angle rather than crossing it at 90 degrees. They often step in front of a car even if they see it very close so that the driver has a difficult time in slowing in time. Children seem to have no idea of any road sense with relation to how they cross the road either.

Les

hedgehog

Any one remember having to learn their Green Cross Code at school?

The situation has changed and, as Les says, I think children are now told to walk out and see if they get a good claim!

Calculations based upon the government pedestrian accident figures have shown than when they are hit the average impact speed is less than 12mph so it is hardly the case that nutter motorists are mowing down the poor pedestrian.

It is also the case that in over 80% of accidents where the motorist does "mow down" the pedestrian the official cause of the accident is "entered the carriageway without looking." I've never heard of a case of "motorist entered the footpath without looking" though I am sure it happens occasionally in cases of failure of the vehicle or, for example, the driver having a heart attack.

That, knowing these circumstances, the motorist still has to "pay" is nothing short of unreasonable. This is especially true in view of the fact that I bet the motorist involved isn't exactly happy about the whole thing and has probably suffered a considerable degree of mental trauma. The last thing they need is the police on their door every 20 minutes trying to pin something on them.

Geezer

Although tragic, you can hardly blame the speed camera!

One of the biggest causes of accidents in built up areas is blokes letching at attractive women! What you gonna do? Ban fit women?

As already mentioned, if an appropriate crossing point had been used, it may have been avoided.

Lots of things distract drivers, like lighting a *** or changing the CD in the player, it only takes a seconds lapse.

Gezer

AndyC_772

iTrader: (2)

I disagree, there's no such thing as an 'OK' distraction. Why do you think billboards are banned where they'd be visible from motorways?

ChrisB

Ahh, does that explain the increasing number of adverts stuck on the side of farm trailors and old wagons visable from the motorway? I thought they might be an attempt to get past some rule.

Iwan

I was in the Tufty Club, I had a nice badge with a squirrel (Tufty) on it to remind me how to cross the road. Still remember the message today.

AndyC_772

iTrader: (2)

That's exactly what it is, yes. You can ban billboards (quite rightly IMHO), but you can't ban farmers from parking trailers on their own land, whatever they may happen to have written on them.

Go to the US where they don't have this rule and it's alarming how many billboards you see - a needless distraction IMHO.

Leslie

As Iwan says, he still remembers the Green Cross code as it was taught at school. Do
they still bother with teaching road sense now or do they just rely on the school crossing attendants to keep them safe on just one crossing place. Not much good when the attendant is not there of course.

Les

Iwan

I'll ask my mum when i speak to her next, she's a headteacher at a primary school so she ought to know what's being taught these days...

Leslie

Thanks Iwan, it would be interesting to know.

Les