Click to go to Forum Home Click to go to maXbimmer Home

Go Back   maXbimmer Forums > Misc > Off-topic
User Name
Password


Welcome to Maxbimmer.com!

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
Old 09-04-2009, 08:00 PM   #1
rendered
6th Gear Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Toronto, ON
Posts: 1,746
Karma Kicks the bucket for a pyramid scheme owner and his brand new porsche 911.



http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/article/691084

Quote:
Deadly crash caused by racing cousins, Crown argues


A deadly crash where a British resident was killed and a soon-to-be married couple were critically injured was caused by the deceased driver's cousin's dangerous driving, Crown prosecutor Sean Doyle has told a Brampton court.

It's the Crown's case that Alan Kippax, now 41, was at the wheel of his Mercedes when he street raced his cousin Peter Kippax, 31, driving a brand new Porsche 911.

The Mercedes travelling north made it through the intersection at Mavis Rd. and Eglinton Ave. just before 10:30 p.m. on the night of June 3, 2006.

But the Porsche lost control, crossed the road and slammed into a southbound Pontiac Sunfire.

Peter Kippax died in the high-speed crash. Allison Hickey, then 32, and her then-fiance Mark Radman, 31 at the time, sustained multiple injuries. They were on their way to a late movie in Mississauga.

Alan Kippax is charged with dangerous driving causing death and two counts of dangerous driving causing bodily harm in a judge-alone trial before Madam Justice Deena Baltman. She's to deliver her decision on Oct. 2

This morning she asked and received clarification on a number of issues that will ultimately decide whether she can hold the actions of the accused to be criminally responsible for the deadly driving of his cousin.

It's the Crown's case that Alan's driving did directly cause the fatal collision. The cousins engaged in a dangerous joint activity, which caused the death of Peter Kippax and serious injuries to others.

"It's not a co-incidence that two people driving aggressively would be doing so independent of each other," Doyle told the court today.

Defence lawyer Barry Fox argued during the seven-day trial that the driving of his client and his cousin aren't linked. His client's driving that night didn't cause his cousin to lose control.

Peter Kippax had run a British-based pyramid scheme under the name of the Treasure Traders Company, which was shut down by British authorities in 2005. Investors put money in precious gems and then recruited others with the hope of earning big bucks as they moved up the ladder.

Alan Kippax also once ran a network marketing company called Ontario Treasure Traders International that involved the selling of emeralds.

He currently is involved in a company called UltraLife Club, a network marketing vacation company, whose clients pay a $3,200 membership fee. It's part of another entity known as Business in Motion, which has been investigated by the RCMP's commercial crimes unit.

The company has also been fodder for numerous complaints posted on various Internet sites from people alleging they lost money.

Court heard during the trial that Peter Kippax closely followed his cousin through the intersection. They each used the northbound right-turn lane in order to bypass other traffic at the intersection.

After crossing the intersection the accused was able to merge back into the northbound traffic but Peter Kippax lost control of his car and veered into the southbound lanes, colliding with another vehicle.

The accused's Mercedes wasn't involved in any collision. Allan Kippax initially left the scene but later returned.

Court heard that Peter Kippax obtained his Canadian driver's license the day before the collision. He had picked up the Porsche only that morning.

Isn't it ironic, After all those years of scamming people with his pyramid scheme business, could it be all the money he earned through the scheme, bought him a new Porsche 911, and killed him in the end!? Talk about karma.
rendered is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-04-2009, 10:44 PM   #2
Deep 3.2TL
6th Gear Member
 
Deep 3.2TL's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Milton
Posts: 3,233
Am I missing something here or is this article from 2006?

Edit - nevermind - actually read it...
Deep 3.2TL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-04-2009, 11:29 PM   #3
ericdalinda
6th Gear Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Toronto
Posts: 1,243
one word.... good...
ericdalinda is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2009, 12:11 AM   #4
sirex
King Sirex
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Toronto
Posts: 9,850
right, good because hes a pyramid schemer and people are to stupid to realise they are being conned? or good because he might get charged?

I think its retarded that he could be blamed for the death or the accident. No one had to race. They weren't forced with a gun to their heads saying "drive fast or else." His car didn't lose control. His actions didn't cause the other car to lose control. Stupid case. If the crown wins, you can say bye bye to more of our rights and freedoms.
__________________

Last edited by sirex; 09-05-2009 at 12:13 AM.
sirex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2009, 11:46 AM   #5
xlash
Still learning....
 
xlash's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Center of the Universe
Posts: 641
Quote:
Originally Posted by sirex View Post
right, good because hes a pyramid schemer and people are to stupid to realise they are being conned? or good because he might get charged?

I think its retarded that he could be blamed for the death or the accident. No one had to race. They weren't forced with a gun to their heads saying "drive fast or else." His car didn't lose control. His actions didn't cause the other car to lose control. Stupid case. If the crown wins, you can say bye bye to more of our rights and freedoms.
i don't get it. in the michael bryant thread you're supporting bryant and in here you won't recognize that kippex broke one of bryant's street racing law!?!?
__________________
Selling: Winter Tires/Wheels for E36/E30
xlash is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2009, 12:08 PM   #6
sirex
King Sirex
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Toronto
Posts: 9,850
breaking a street racing law is one thing, being charged for the actions of someone else is another thing. they were both acting independently of each other.
__________________

Last edited by sirex; 09-05-2009 at 12:16 PM.
sirex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2009, 01:10 PM   #7
xlash
Still learning....
 
xlash's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Center of the Universe
Posts: 641
the kippexes were racing against each other. if one wasn't there i highly doubt the other would be racing.
__________________
Selling: Winter Tires/Wheels for E36/E30
xlash is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-06-2009, 03:37 AM   #8
slemmer
Driving in the fast lane
 
slemmer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Missed in 'sauga
Posts: 3,002
Nemesis.
__________________

'04 645cic
'05 GMC Sierra SLT Z71 CCSB 4x4
'00 740i Sport
slemmer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-06-2009, 06:02 PM   #9
spoony_prelude
Eurowerke
 
spoony_prelude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Toronto
Posts: 1,874
I agree with "Xlash"! They were both doing something illegal. If two guys are shooting guns randomly and one of them happens to kill someone, what should only one guy get charged with murder? No **** them both.

Before you decide to race another car on the street you should be well aware of the consiquences! Both of their actions led up to what happend, not just the driver that crashed!

Jay
__________________
spoony_prelude is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-06-2009, 06:53 PM   #10
sirex
King Sirex
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Toronto
Posts: 9,850
the article distinctly says that one lost control. he lost control because of his action, or in action, at handling his automobile. I dont see how this is linked.

spoony, your example also makes no sense. If we are both firing our guns at random, but I am more experienced then you and I am aiming at a spot that I know there is no pedestrians behind, and aiming downwards, and your aiming your gun at a street, then clearly theres a difference here.

so the facts of the situation matter. you cant just make people guilty because of association.
__________________
sirex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-06-2009, 09:52 PM   #11
Blackedout95
5th Gear Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,111
On one hand I can see the arguement he wouldnt be racing to start with without the cousin, however, you are respondsible for your own actions and therefore I say he did nothing to cause the deaths as he was not in control of his cousins car.

If this type of link is made it is truly a sad day and opens up a can of worms..what happens if you roll p on a light and buddy wishes to race, takes off kills someone and guess what, a witness saw you racing! Mean while you did nothing, big can of worms.
__________________
E46
Blackedout95 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-07-2009, 12:31 AM   #12
sirex
King Sirex
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Toronto
Posts: 9,850
What if you make a right hand turn on a red in an intersection where no right on red is allowed.

Then someone sees you and follows suit but runs over a pedestrian. You both broke the law, maybe you should be tried for manslaughter to because that guy would never had made that right turn if he didn't see you do it!


What if you want to smoke some weed. youve never done it before, and so you and your friend decide to smoke it together for the first time... you smoke it get high and enjoy it. your friend passes out and dies..should you be charged, because he would never have smoked that weed if it wasn't for you.

you decide to rob a bank. you plan with your friend. you say, we wont use guns. you show up with no gun, you friend pulls out a shot gun and murders someone. Did you pull the trigger as well?


Everyone should be charged individually for the crime they commit.

This is not the same as offering up a hit man, etc.. E.g. girl ask guy to murder girl, in return he will be sexed, guy murders girl goes to jail, girl gets off scott free? No, that is not 2 in the same because they are not acting as individuals. There is a trade, an exchange going on for each other services. Both are guilty.

robing a bank, there is no trade. turning on red, no trade. Everyone in those situations are acting on their own behalf.
__________________

Last edited by sirex; 09-07-2009 at 12:39 AM.
sirex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-07-2009, 01:32 AM   #13
MiroE36
6th Gear Member
 
MiroE36's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Toronto
Posts: 1,896
^^^ totally agreed, egged on or not, each person is acting in their own accord to follow by example, if you see someone jump off a bridge, do you automatically follow. Hence if someone is speeding, do you go barreling down the road trying to catch them? Only if you decide to do so.
If you jump, you risk the chance of falling, not the person watching the other jump.
__________________
1992 325i / Briliant rot - SOLD @ 301,000km
1998 318is / Arktic silber - SOLD @ 207,000km
2007 335i / Jet Black - CURRENT @ 28,000 km

MiroE36 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-07-2009, 11:20 AM   #14
xlash
Still learning....
 
xlash's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Center of the Universe
Posts: 641
Why are you throwing in a whole bunch of ridiculous what-ifs? The perp was street racing for which your car gets impounded automatically before you can even mention a lawyer. I am not saying it's fair, hell I think most laws are unfair but that's how this particular one is being doled out.

If you don't want to get into trouble for something that you know could potentially land you in hot water then just don't do it/get involved in it. It isn't rocket science.
__________________
Selling: Winter Tires/Wheels for E36/E30
xlash is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-07-2009, 11:26 AM   #15
Blackedout95
5th Gear Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,111
Quote:
Originally Posted by xlash View Post

If you don't want to get into trouble for something that you know could potentially land you in hot water then just don't do it/get involved in it. It isn't rocket science.

Not so fast, the what if's regard not getting involved but rather getting accused. If I roll up on a light youre sitting at, take off, hit something, get caught and say ya I was racing that guy in the bimmer or a witness claims she/he saw you race, mean while you did nothing but look cool/fast.

In the US if you commit robbery where a victim is killed, all participants get charged with murder, not just the shooter. Beyond this law in the US which I can agree with for the most part, how does a man in another car get blame for the actions of another man in a seperate car? To me this is a case of not having the real killer here to charge and thus they turn to the next best thing in their minds, slippery slope.
__________________
E46
Blackedout95 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:21 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Maxbimmer Copyright 2001 - 2015