Personally I think Kemi is doing a good job but I don't know how long she can last as leader with figures like this.
Regular crossover with the LDs is only a few weeks away.
There's another hatchet job on her in The Times this morning. Some bollocks about falling out with her official driver and then hiring her own car and driver at vast expense.
Watching a politician bleed out in real time is rare sport. You don't even have to feel sorry for her because she's tory scum.
She needs to sack every one of the poisonous snotrags at CCHQ whether she makes it or not. Might as well have some sort of legacy. If they briefed the press against Starmer at the same rate as they brief against Kemi the Tories would be 5 points ahead.
It's always the Times too.
I think it's Gove playing a George Smiley style deep game.
Quite a good point on X: the car reg from the Liverpool horror must be visible in one of the many videos
How hard is it to search the reg and find the owner? That's probably the perp
As more videos emerge it does look like this really is some hideous panic by the driver that turned into utter carnage. Tragic
Quite difficult, you need the V5C, and even then that's only the registered keeper, not the owner or driver.
And plenty of murder charges are levelled at people who "panic" and stab people in a fight, as we've seen with the Dumbiedykes murder in Edinburgh. It's quite astonishing how the language changes when you swap that kitchen knife for a two-tonne motor vehicle.
You won't find it legally, as it is privileged information.
It's a common complaint thrown against dashcammers - "You doxxed me", which they can't unless there was criminality in accessing the PNC, or personal knowledge.
You can get a full history of the car, MOT and insurance status etc, but not the owner.
Suspect arrested on suspicion of attempted nurder, dangerous driving and driving while unfit due to drugs
It's not yet charged so I think I can still comment in general terms.
I'd say that Causing Serious Injury by Dangerous Driving is an obvious multiple charge (6 months to 5 years in prison), and when he tries to bargain it down to a guilty plea for Serious Injury by Careless (max 2 years) they will reject that.
The drugs charge is one they should be confident about if the test results are suitable.
Attempted murder is a stretch as it needs mens rea.
I'm not sure how the concurrent / consecutive sentencing would be handled.
Nor am I sure of the impact of "but he panicked in his fear", which could potentially be heavy on the other side of the scales.
When the lady drove into the Plymouth Half Marathon in 2018 (linked by @Eabhal ), there seem to have been no charges at all - that is, I can't find any reporting.
There's an interesting difference in Scots Law for attempted murder. "Wicked recklessness" is sufficient.
Suspect arrested on suspicion of attempted nurder, dangerous driving and driving while unfit due to drugs
It's not yet charged so I think I can still comment in general terms.
I'd say that Causing Serious Injury by Dangerous Driving is an obvious multiple charge (6 months to 5 years in prison), and when he tries to bargain it down to a guilty plea for Serious Injury by Careless (max 2 years) they will reject that.
The drugs charge is one they should be confident about if the test results are suitable.
Attempted murder is a stretch as it needs mens rea.
I'm not sure how the concurrent / consecutive sentencing would be handled.
Nor am I sure of the impact of "but he panicked in his fear", which could potentially be heavy on the other side of the scales.
When the lady drove into the Plymouth Half Marathon in 2018 (linked by @Eabhal ), there seem to have been no charges at all - that is, I can't find any reporting.
There's an interesting difference in Scots Law for attempted murder. "Wicked recklessness" is sufficient.
Suspect arrested on suspicion of attempted murder, dangerous driving and driving while unfit due to drugs
Looking like it's your common or garden variety ar*ehole driver, just with far worse consequences than normal driving while under the influence deliberately ignoring a road closure
At the same time, we need to remember that 99.9% (which we're not at yet) isn't good enough for a Robotaxi. It needs to be 99.99999%. And those last tenths and hundredths of a percent - those really tough edge cases - are hard.
The problem is that humans are not 99.99999%
People accept that humans make mistakes: they are much less forgiving of machines.
Machines that are 99.99999% reliable at driving are going to get in accidents more than 0.0001% of the time because of other road users who are less reliable
I am not clear where the blame for that will be apportioned.
Suspect arrested on suspicion of attempted murder, dangerous driving and driving while unfit due to drugs
Looking like it's your common or garden variety ar*ehole driver, just with far worse consequences than normal driving while under the influence deliberately ignoring a road closure
Interesting choice of attire from Carney/Charles - business suit in contrast to his Mum's bling during the 1977 speech. That was part of a jubilee tour though whereas this is a speech that is very much part of the "business of Canada".
Suspect arrested on suspicion of attempted nurder, dangerous driving and driving while unfit due to drugs
It's not yet charged so I think I can still comment in general terms.
I'd say that Causing Serious Injury by Dangerous Driving is an obvious multiple charge (6 months to 5 years in prison), and when he tries to bargain it down to a guilty plea for Serious Injury by Careless (max 2 years) they will reject that.
The drugs charge is one they should be confident about if the test results are suitable.
Attempted murder is a stretch as it needs mens rea.
I'm not sure how the concurrent / consecutive sentencing would be handled.
Nor am I sure of the impact of "but he panicked in his fear", which could potentially be heavy on the other side of the scales.
When the lady drove into the Plymouth Half Marathon in 2018 (linked by @Eabhal ), there seem to have been no charges at all - that is, I can't find any reporting.
Attempted murder unlikely to make it to indictment, but as a ground of arrest completely proper - allegedly driving a car at people is reasonable cause for arrest on that ground. At this stage you just stick various possibles in. GBH, which can be without intent, is much more likely in the end.
If there is no intent to do GBH (at least) then neither murder nor attempted murder are feasible. For attempted murder you need intent to kill.
Panic as such goes to sentence, not guilt. But of course self defence (driving away from someone trying to kill me, the third party consequences being an accident) is always runnable, which if accepted would clear him.
Suspect arrested on suspicion of attempted nurder, dangerous driving and driving while unfit due to drugs
It's not yet charged so I think I can still comment in general terms.
I'd say that Causing Serious Injury by Dangerous Driving is an obvious multiple charge (6 months to 5 years in prison), and when he tries to bargain it down to a guilty plea for Serious Injury by Careless (max 2 years) they will reject that.
The drugs charge is one they should be confident about if the test results are suitable.
Attempted murder is a stretch as it needs mens rea.
I'm not sure how the concurrent / consecutive sentencing would be handled.
Nor am I sure of the impact of "but he panicked in his fear", which could potentially be heavy on the other side of the scales.
When the lady drove into the Plymouth Half Marathon in 2018 (linked by @Eabhal ), there seem to have been no charges at all - that is, I can't find any reporting.
Attempted murder unlikely to make it to indictment, but as a ground of arrest completely proper - allegedly driving a car at people is reasonable cause for arrest on that ground. At this stage you just stick various possibles in. GBH, which can be without intent, is much more likely in the end.
If there is no intent to do GBH (at least) then neither murder nor attempted murder are feasible. For attempted murder you need intent to kill.
Panic as such goes to sentence, not guilt. But of course self defence (driving away from someone trying to kill me, the third party consequences being an accident) is always runnable, which if accepted would clear him.
For any non-nerds, "Serious Injury by Dangerous Driving" is defined as starting with GBH ie I think broken bones or more serious. There is a lacuna for less serious injuries.
Of course, in English Law manslaughter is also possible.
Suspect arrested on suspicion of attempted murder, dangerous driving and driving while unfit due to drugs
Looking like it's your common or garden variety ar*ehole driver, just with far worse consequences than normal driving while under the influence deliberately ignoring a road closure
Chaz slapping Trump down from the throne in Ottowa. This is funny to watch!
DISAPPOINTED TO SEE "KING" CHARLES WHO IS AN OVERRATED GUY AND NOT AT ALL ATTRACTIVE BUT WHO I HAD AGREED TO HONOUR WITH A STATE VISIT TO HIS FAILING LITTLE COUNTRY WHICH I LOVE LATER THIS YEAR HAS BEEN DISRESPECTFUL. MIGHT NOT GO NOW!
Suspect arrested on suspicion of attempted nurder, dangerous driving and driving while unfit due to drugs
It's not yet charged so I think I can still comment in general terms.
I'd say that Causing Serious Injury by Dangerous Driving is an obvious multiple charge (6 months to 5 years in prison), and when he tries to bargain it down to a guilty plea for Serious Injury by Careless (max 2 years) they will reject that.
The drugs charge is one they should be confident about if the test results are suitable.
Attempted murder is a stretch as it needs mens rea.
I'm not sure how the concurrent / consecutive sentencing would be handled.
Nor am I sure of the impact of "but he panicked in his fear", which could potentially be heavy on the other side of the scales.
When the lady drove into the Plymouth Half Marathon in 2018 (linked by @Eabhal ), there seem to have been no charges at all - that is, I can't find any reporting.
There's an interesting difference in Scots Law for attempted murder. "Wicked recklessness" is sufficient.
Sir Sadiq Khan has proposed a 20pc rise in London’s congestion charge and plans to scrap a discount for people who live within the zone unless they drive an electric vehicle (EV).
Transport for London (TfL), which is overseen by the Mayor, plans to raise the daily charge for driving in central London from £15 to £18 from January 2026. It will be the first increase since 2020, when the fee climbed from £11.50.
TfL also plans to close the residents’ discount scheme to new entrants unless they drive an EV. Currently, locals can qualify for a 90pc discount, a policy that has been in place since the congestion charge was introduced in 2003 by Ken Livingstone.
Be interesting if Musk is true to his word and before the next London Mayoral election, city road transport is almost completely displaced with his robocabs. A policy challenge I’m not sure they’ve even begun to properly consider yet.
Worth remembering that there are thousands of Waymo vehicles on the streets of San Francisco, Phoenix, Los Angeles and Austin.
By contrast there are zero Tesla robotaxis.
For there to be autonomous Tesla robotaxis in London means you have to believe
(a) that they will be able to offer (in city) autonomous driving without LIDAR at acceptable levels of safety...
BYD plans to have LIDAR on even their cheaper cars within a very few years.
Tesla screwed the chances of the US to compete by opting not to use it, so no volume US market. LIDAR will be mass market, and probably another industry China owns.
Defenestration in Russia: Senior Inspector for the Khabarovsk region government fell out of an 8-story window at work and died, 15 minutes before he was to meet with the governor. https://x.com/igorsushko/status/1927157880160969083
This shows what is wrong with Barty's plan to relax building standards here.
I assume that's a joke, but for the record I've never proposed to relax building standards.
My position is we should revert to 1930s planning laws, while keeping building standards and anti-pollution standards.
Build what you want, where you want it, within reason, so long as it is built to standard.
So the Tories will be the 5th biggest party, in danger of a cunning policy move from Mebyon Kernow, which would put them into 6th
Looks like the 10 seats the Tories would win are:
Harrow E Ruislip Croydon S East Grinstead Epping Forest Hertsmere Beaconsfield Windsor Earley & Woodley (a gain from Labour oddly enough) Stone (Gavin Williamson's seat, so he'd probably be leader)
East Grinstead should be a top LD target next time. It looks safe even though the Tory vote wasn’t any better than other seats around, because Labour and LibDem split the opposition vote. But the LDs secured the all important second place, and with LDs now so strong in the south and with an unpopular government, it is easy to see the centre-left vote swinging significantly behind them next time around.
Indeed, if the political environment looks anything like last time, it would make a great constituency bet, as on the figures it looks far more of a long shot than it is.
Grinstead also lacked a Reform candidate which will eat the Tory share away too
Indeed of those 10 'holds', Stone, Grinstead and Epping all lacked a Reform candidate in 2024
Indeed. My old MP (Penrith and Border) got booted out in favour of a rather dim Tory on boundary changes, had the luck to get in at Epping, had the further luck of having no Reform against him, so is still in the Commons while his old seat went Labour. Still, I think, the only vet in the House of Commons. Decent bloke.
Sir Sadiq Khan has proposed a 20pc rise in London’s congestion charge and plans to scrap a discount for people who live within the zone unless they drive an electric vehicle (EV).
Transport for London (TfL), which is overseen by the Mayor, plans to raise the daily charge for driving in central London from £15 to £18 from January 2026. It will be the first increase since 2020, when the fee climbed from £11.50.
TfL also plans to close the residents’ discount scheme to new entrants unless they drive an EV. Currently, locals can qualify for a 90pc discount, a policy that has been in place since the congestion charge was introduced in 2003 by Ken Livingstone.
Be interesting if Musk is true to his word and before the next London Mayoral election, city road transport is almost completely displaced with his robocabs. A policy challenge I’m not sure they’ve even begun to properly consider yet.
Worth remembering that there are thousands of Waymo vehicles on the streets of San Francisco, Phoenix, Los Angeles and Austin.
By contrast there are zero Tesla robotaxis.
For there to be autonomous Tesla robotaxis in London means you have to believe
(a) that they will be able to offer (in city) autonomous driving without LIDAR at acceptable levels of safety (b) they will overcome massive regulatory scrutiny (and insurance requirements)
Plus, of course, there's an awful lot of infrastructure you need to build to offer these: whether it is dedicated charging stations (going to be tough to site in London) or warehouses full of people able to take over if a vehicle stops due to unfamiliar circumstances and need to be manually controlled.
I would be staggered if there were Tesla robotaxis on the streets of London before the end of this decade.
---
Edit to add: in the US, especially on the West Coast, I can see Tesla launching robotaxi services in the next couple of years. (Albeit not in 2025.) But London is an entirely different kettle of fish: much, much harder to navigate around - and much denser - than cities built around the car.
I’d be staggered if there weren’t to be honest with you. The Waymo solution has never been truly scalable, or most likely particularly economic.
Happy to make a bet with you on this one if you like: given we're both staggered, shall we say evens.
Commercial robotaxi service powered by Teslas on the streets of London before 1 January 2030? £100?
I am already financially exposed enough to my hunch but thanks for the offer
Comments
It's a common complaint thrown against dashcammers - "You doxxed me", which they can't unless there was criminality in accessing the PNC, or personal knowledge.
You can get a full history of the car, MOT and insurance status etc, but not the owner.
https://www.scotlawcom.gov.uk/files/7315/4055/0036/Homicide_seminar_-_James_Chalmers_mens_rea_slides_5_Oct_2018.pdf
driving while under the influence
deliberately ignoring a road closure
https://news.npcc.police.uk/releases/nearly-60-000-drink-and-drug-tests-conducted-in-seasonal-roads-policing-crackdown
And America.
I am not clear where the blame for that will be apportioned.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/property/buying-selling/london-flat-nightmare-cant-sell/
So there's a potential question around whether that had been done too early, before they had cleared, or a misjudgement was made.
If there is no intent to do GBH (at least) then neither murder nor attempted murder are feasible. For attempted murder you need intent to kill.
Panic as such goes to sentence, not guilt. But of course self defence (driving away from someone trying to kill me, the third party consequences being an accident) is always runnable, which if accepted would clear him.
Of course, in English Law manslaughter is also possible.
NEW THREAD
Tesla screwed the chances of the US to compete by opting not to use it, so no volume US market.
LIDAR will be mass market, and probably another industry China owns.
I'm still loyal to the Old Queen.
(By which I mean Elizabeth)
My position is we should revert to 1930s planning laws, while keeping building standards and anti-pollution standards.
Build what you want, where you want it, within reason, so long as it is built to standard.