Ask the high court judge la.
High court haven't released any documentation yet.

Regardless, her driving resulted in death.
If that's not dangerous, i hope I'll continue to never get to interact with shitty drivers like you and her.
And hopefully putting dangerous drivers off the road for a long time like this one becomes a norm.

The officers investigation supports her being reckless.
Independent expert findings are still just a piece of puzzle, among every other pieces, which non of us are privy to.

It seems like it's you who are presumptive in your opinion.
The disregard for fact checking and integrity is also, yours.
Good job though deducing my driving skills out of a wrong presumption, of your own even.
What a muppet. Playing yourself to this degree.

You can throw all that opinion out the window, it all boils down to the law and the judicial system. The first 2 judges found her not guilty and the third did, now her lawyer will appeal and we wait and see.

Stop making this personal and getting butthurt about something not related to you or within your control.

Fuckin get a life guys….

Still presumptive.
I bet you yourself didn't plow through the transcript as thorough as the lady plowing through 30 kids and bikes, killing 8.
Tengok screen shot from the Twitter post only issit?
Yep. Thought so.

What for going through the details of the proceedings transcript when the summary is sufficient enough.
Yes I've read the judgement and clarifications.

But it doesn't matter now. The high court got it right this time around.

Btw. We are all in this casual corner of an asian tech forum on a Friday night, arguing over a done case.
While i admit i don't have much life, i hope you would atleast not be a hypocrite yourself and "fucking get a life".

Ah so instead of actually discussing about the case, you just want to nitpick my choice of words.
Basically, you have nothing of value to bring into the discussion.

Oh well, until you have learn how to participate in a discussion like a well adjusted adult, I'm done with you.

lol so basically high court concluded she drove dangerously simply because she failed to drive EVEN MORE carefully than careful, and should have anticipated risks behind the slope in the HIGHWAY. Bagus bagus, great judgement     

Anyway I saw this on fb but not sure where the source was

[attachmentid=11136068]

The bicycle were in stationary position. N driver was playing hp?

Another revelation from fb comment which has similar principle as mimr

KEPUTUSAN PENDAKWAAN KES BASIKAL LAJAK..

Selepas saya baca kesemua fakta ini. Keputusan Tuan Hakim adalah munasabah dan bermerit. Bukan berdasarkan sentimen dan semata2 menlihat fakta sebelah pihak sahaja.

Fakta 1 ;

Dalam kertas keputusan tersebut. Tuan hakim mengatakan. Pelaku sepatutnya tidak membawa laju ketika jalan raya GELAP.

Ini tindakan biasa. Kalau jalan yang gelap , tiada lampu jalan. Dah tentu kita bawa perlahan kerana pemandangan mata dan penlihatan di depan tidak JELAS kerana GELAP.  Ini fakta yang kukuh.

Dan andai PELAKU membawa perlahan dan berhati - hati ketika menlalui jalan GELAP. Dah tentu kalau berlaku kemalangan. TIDAK MUNGKIN MATI , mungkin hanya Cedera.

Tapi dalam kes ni. 8 nyawa melayang serta merta ,

Adakah kerana pelaku membawa perlahan dan berhati - hati? Kebiasaannya sebaliknya.. LAJU..

Fakta 2 ;

Dalam kertas keputusan tersebut. Tuan hakim mengatakan , pelaku tahu jalan tersebut berselekoh dan berbukit.

Sepatutnya pelaku membawa perlahan dan berhati- hati. Kerana kebiasaannya pemandu tidak akan bawa laju di jalan yang berselekoh dan berbukit kerana mana- mana pemandu lebih utamakan KESELAMATAN diri sendiri. Bila lalui jalan selekoh dan berbukit..

Ini fakta ke 2 yang munasabah. Logik kita sebagai pemandu dah tentu kita takkan bawa laju atau menekan minyak bila lalui jalan selekoh atau berbukit.

So keputusan TUAN HAKIM munasabah dan bermerit. ( logik ).

******************

Rumusan dari saya ;

6 tahun di penjara tidak sama seperti kehilangan nyawa. Kehilangan nyawa atau kehilangan anak ni LUKA belum tentu sembuh walaupun ibu bapa arwah kanak2 tersebut hidup selama 70 tahun.

Ye mereka kanak - kanak nakal keluar malam lewat pagi. Saya nampak fakta ni.

Namun kenakalan kanak2 ni bukan bersifat SELAMANYA.

Andai mereka tidak dilanggar ketika kejadian kemalangan itu , dah tentu mereka masih ada PELUANG untuk berubah.

Sayangnya , mereka tak sempat berubah. Malah nyawa ditarik sebegitu. 

Maka keadilan perlu ditegak. Itu fungsi MAHKAMAH dan TUAN HAKIM .

Keadilan yang tertangguh bukan KEADILAN. 

Selagi pelaku tidak diberi HUKUMAN , maka KEADILAN TIDAK WUJUD LAGI. 

KEADILAN WAJIB DIBERI BERDASARKAN FAKTA DAN BUKTI. 

Selepas baca kertas keputusan ni. Saya rasa HUKUMAN 6 tahun LAYAK untuk Pelaku..

Macam saya kata tadi , 6 tahun di Penjara TIDAK SAMA seperti KEHILANGAN NYAWA.

Jangan bandingkan 2 perkara ni. Terlalu jauh beza.

Sekian ,
#dieyoadie

Example of herd mentality. U only follow the trend, there is no independent thinking from u.

We are away from that n into new dimension of thought