Girl dead due to sat nav error

[pits]

Apparently.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-12360687

So let me get this right, road signs no right turn

BBC said:

"There's plenty of signage there saying 'No right turn'. The sat-nav said turn right and they followed that and didn't follow the signs."

Sgt Lyle said he returned to the scene with a similar sat-nav and it also told him to turn right.

But the sat-nav carried a warning telling motorists to follow road signs and restrictions, the inquest heard.

How is that the Sat Navs fault? Highway code clearly says

Signs giving orders
Signs with red circles are mostly prohibitive. Plates below signs qualify their message.

No right turn means no right turn regardless of what the Sat Nav says, why isn't the driver being pulled up on causing death by dangerous driving or driving without due care, sat nav is merely a guide it isn't the law, a sign with red means you must follow the order being given.

Maybe I am being a bit harsh, but anyone who obeys a Sat Nav over the actual rules of the road needs their licence taken off them, especially when trying to pass the buck for the death of someone especially a child, what next, some guy knocks a kid over killing him/her then says "my sat nav didn't tell me it was a 30mph road and didn't warn me I was doing 40mph, even though the signs on the road said 30mph"

Bit of a piss boiler considering some of the people that have gone to jail for less, that biker who got 3 years for doing 140mph even though the copper couldn't actually clock him at that speed (something like that anyways) and this guy, disobeys a traffic sign giving an order, kills a child and gets away with out even a slap on the wrist, don't tell me, he wasn't speeding.

[singlecoil]

Perhaps the driver isn't too good at written English, and the signs didn't mean anything to him?

[deckster]

singlecoil said:

Perhaps the driver isn't too good at written English, and the signs didn't mean anything to him?

?? Exactly what isn't entirely clear about this, whatever your mother tongue?

[KrazyIvan]

Very sad that the little girl died. Sat-Nav didnt make them take a wrong turn or ignore road signs, and if they were unable to read or understand the road signs, then that brings in to question a much bigger issue then incirect instructions form a bit of tech.

[freecar]

singlecoil said:

Perhaps the driver isn't too good at written English, and the signs didn't mean anything to him?

That's OK then, or how about they can't drive until they can understand signs, jesus it's not rocket science is it?

[Jobbo]

I'm not clear how turning right there led to them being hit by another car - even if it's not permitted, the driver really ought to be aware of other traffic.

[KaraK]

Saw a headline about this on a paper while I was out getting lunch it was "Killed by satnav" or similar and I thought: "No, girl killed due to driver error" the satnav wasn't driving the car it was merely advising the driver. The fact that it advised a maneuver that wasn't legal is unfortunate but it is still the driver's repsonsibility to ensure that an action they take on the road is legal and more importantly safe. If the satnav had said "shoot your daughter in the head" would he have done that?

I appreciate that learners can make mistakes but why wasn't the supervising driver (presumably his wife) more on the ball? Also I know there isn't any rule against it but why the heck would you be driving your kids around as a learner?

[LeoSayer]

pits said:

and this guy, disobeys a traffic sign giving an order, kills a child and gets away with out even a slap on the wrist, don't tell me, he wasn't speeding.

It was his own child that died.

[Carrot]

This is almost as bad as the "MAN KILLED BY LETHAL DRUG ECSTASY" stuff, then when the story is read, it appears that said man took drugs, then climbed up a tree and fell out breaking his neck.

Unfortunately, Satnavs cannot prevent morons being morons, whatever their culture.

[Vanya]

KrazyIvan said:

Very sad that the little girl died. Sat-Nav didnt make them take a wrong turn or ignore road signs, and if they were unable to read or understand the road signs, then that brings in to question a much bigger issue then incirect instructions form a bit of tech.

Ivan, did you suddenly get vodka'ed at the end of your sentence, or is that just the "krazy" part?





V.

[SplatSpeed]

we all treat driving as a skill

they treat it as a chore with as little input as possible

this is the result!

[KaraK]

LeoSayer said:

It was his own child that died.

Does that make it ok?

[AndrewW-G]

Article should realy be "Young girl dies in accident as learner driver ignored road signs"

[993AL]

Ive come across this with my sat nav when the maps have been out of date, i.e. being directed the wrong way up a one way street that used to be a two way.
It cant be anything other than driver error, an error which in this case the driver paid way too high a price.

[anonymous-user]

The torture the parent will go through when they realise it was thier stupidity that killed their daughter.

FFS!

[SplatSpeed]

he must have been speeding!

[tenohfive]

pits said:

why isn't the driver being pulled up on causing death by dangerous driving or driving without due care, sat nav is merely a guide it isn't the law, a sign with red means you must follow the order being given.

Whilst I agree that the driver was at fault and I've seen countless examples of poor driving due to people using a satnav and neglecting basic road skills, I can guarantee the police would have been pilloried if the driver had been sent to court for killing his own daughter through careless driving. I'd suggest that provided he acknowledges the mistake was his it is not in the public interest for a prosecution to be brought.

Edited by tenohfive on Friday 4th February 14:29

[DonkeyApple]

This doesn't add up.

It says that the Audi hit the rear passenger door of the offending Astra.

This would imply that the Astra was T-boned by the slow travelling Audi as it crossed the other lane as turning right?

This implies that the Astra crossed the oncoming traffic without checking for oncoming traffic, regardless of whether the manoevre was legal or not.

The Audi was travelling at 45mph, and while it would have been taken by surprise I'm wondering whether the child was actually strapped up in a proper child seat? The reason being that it is amazing just how many children of overseas parents are loose in the back of the car.

Anyway, all terribly sad and maybe I have misunderstood but it doesn't sound like a head on collission after turning into the side road but a collision in the middle of the A6 on the other lane?

[Stevenj214]

I'll admit that there has been an occassion or two when I've been on 'auto-pilot' and wrongly followed sat nav directions.

[Parrot of Doom]

The accident happened here:

http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?f=q&source=s_q&a...

The unfortunate motorist turned right there, I'm presuming as the Audi was travelling in the opposite direction.

How anyone can confuse the signals there is beyond me. I read in one report a quote from one silly woman who said "of course if the speed limit had been more reasonable they might have lived". These people should never be allowed near a road.