Judge makes crap decision in road rage case

What the hell was going through this judge’s mind when she failed to convict the driver in this case?

The cyclist’s, Lee Evans’, reaction was over the top and unnecessary, but that’s not the point. In her summing up Judge Carrie Wainright said the driver, Jeremy Glubb was “intimidated” by the cyclist’s reaction. So intimidated he slammed on the brakes and reversed his car over Evans’ bike.

Wainright also said he’d “succumbed” to road rage, like it was an affliction or disease.

What bollocks. How many other criminals get let off by saying “I was so intimidated by the victim that I robbed his house because I suffer from stealingitis.”

Worst of all, Glubb did not get a conviction because it would wreck his career. Shouldn’t he have thought of that earlier? I’m pretty sure convictions for crimes have meant plenty of other people lost their jobs. Does this mean that if the bloke wasn’t an IT specialist with Government contracts, but some bogan working for the Warehouse he would have been convicted? One rule for some…

PS. A tip for Evans: when I was a bike courier I occasionally used the water-dump-in-car-window technique. But I made sure I had a getaway route because, unsurprisingly, it made the driver really fu#king mad! Doing it on an isolated road was a dumb move.