Taxi Driver Online

UK cab trade debate and advice
It is currently Sun May 03, 2026 12:21 pm

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 20 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Aug 21, 2008 10:43 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 7:25 pm
Posts: 37494
Location: Wayneistan
Family's grief over taxi driver trial collapse



A TAXI driver’s widow today recalled the words on her husband’s grave as his alleged fare-dodger killer was cleared.

The epitaph for 72-year-old family man Ray Quigley reads: "Heroic in life, Valiant in death."

Retired nurse Dorothy told how she and her family suffered while hours away from getting a verdict in the manslaughter case.

Judge David Hodson was forced to discharge the Newcastle Crown Court jury after a juror admitted he had made his own inquiries and discussed his findings with other members of the panel.

Defendant Dale Patterson was then formally cleared of all charges after Judge Hodson said the prosecution case was fatally flawed.

Dorothy, 69, was forced to listen to a defence case which had attempted to tarnish Ray’s reputation and motives for his struggle with the defendant.

After Mr Patterson, 18, of Manila Street, Sunderland, was found not guilty of manslaughter, Dorothy, of Nursery Lane, Felling, Gateshead, told of her wish to carry on living without hate, in memory of her husband.

"We’ve been through hell and back these last few days. No-one has slept and we wanted justice for Ray at the end of the case," she said, surrounded at home with cards from neighbours and friends.

"Hate is not a word we use in this family. But things said in court during the trial have twisted and distorted everything Ray stood for.

"I was comforted towards the end when the defence barrister admitted words said by Ray in the situation could have been misinterpreted by the defendant.

"My Ray would only want what was right and just in this world. He was a good, honourable, hard-working man. If someone had got into his taxi and expected to be taken somewhere, he would have naturally wanted his payment. He would have even taken someone to a cashpoint to get the fare if necessary."

Mr Quigley, a cabbie for nearly 40 years, died from a heart attack in the early hours of September 2 last year.

Mr Patterson had decided to take a cab when he missed his last train home after attending a skateboarding event in Newcastle’s Exhibition Park.

The teenager was accused of trying to flee Mr Quigley’s taxi without paying his fare from Newcastle to Sunderland.

He was then alleged to have been involved in a violent struggle with the grandfather, who collapsed and died from a heart attack.

It was said in court Mr Patterson was then seen to kick Mr Quigley in the face while he was on the ground and allegedly shouted he hoped he "died".

Dorothy said she didn’t feel any animosity to the juror who caused the case to collapse.

Dorothy added: "By this stage we had already been sickened by things which had been said during the case in which the defendant implied Ray was trying to rape him.

"We as a family, and everyone who knew Ray, including taxi driver colleagues, had absolute belief this was blatantly disgusting and untrue.

"Ray had lost his life doing his job, and yet his character was being besmirched. It was horrible to hear. The strength of this family kept us together. And I can’t thank everyone enough who rallied round and came to our support.

"If only Patterson or someone from his family had shown some remorse for Ray’s death and had the decency to say so, but that never happened."

The widow said she has been comforted by the calls and words of sympathy from friends and strangers.

"I have my children and grandchildren around me. Hatred eats you up inside, and Ray wouldn’t have wanted that for me or his family."

Her son Shaun said: "We’ve all cried and our mother has remained dignified and strong, giving us courage to go on. She is a remarkable woman.

"My wife, Julie, has also been a marvellous help to my mam and me. She was an absolute rock following my dad’s death and has been an even greater help during this incredibly stressful and hurtful time.

"I would also like to thank her employers, Choice Care of Washington, who have allowed her all the time off to be at my side."

Dorothy added: "Ray was a gentle, modest man. He would help anyone - he was respected and loved. He still enjoyed the social side of driving, especially meeting different people. That’s why he didn’t want to retire.

"I would like to thank the police team, especially Mick Paterson and John Cowell for their fantastic efforts. Also witness support and all the management at the firms where my children work for allowing them to have time off."

The close-knit Catholic family are seeking solace in their faith. Ray’s children, Shaun, 48, Maria, 42, Danny, 40, and youngest son Pat, 37, and grandaughter, Jessica, 13, are comforting Dorothy.

Mr Quigley had worked as a cabbie in Newcastle for decades, originally for the Slaters firm, but had, since the mid-1980s, been registered with Newcastle City Council.

Dorothy met Ray when she was 18 and he was 23 at a local pub. Everyone knew them as a devoted couple and Ray as a devout churchgoer and family man.

Newcastle Crown Court had heard six days of evidence at an estimated cost to the public purse of more than £60,000 - not including additional legal fees for defence and prosecution lawyers.

But Judge Hodson was forced to halt the trial on Monday after finding out about the juror’s inquiries.

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Aug 21, 2008 12:12 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2004 5:53 pm
Posts: 10381
In car CCTV would have gone a long way in determining the facts in this case.

Regards

JD

_________________
Copyright notice © The contents of this post are copyright of JD and are not to be reproduced outside of TDO without written permission.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Aug 21, 2008 12:19 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 7:25 pm
Posts: 37494
Location: Wayneistan
JD wrote:
In car CCTV would have gone a long way in determining the facts in this case.

Regards

JD


I think you're right JD....between that and a juror who didnt seem to think he was quincy md.

very sad indeed.

CC

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Aug 21, 2008 12:28 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2006 1:20 am
Posts: 2948
Location: Over here!
I cannot understand ever why anyone gets off on a technicality - a costly but simple answer is a re trial.

_________________
if you cannot be yourself, then who can you be.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Aug 21, 2008 1:14 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2004 5:53 pm
Posts: 10381
cabby john wrote:
I cannot understand ever why anyone gets off on a technicality - a costly but simple answer is a re trial.


The process of justice must be lawful anything that isn't done by the book is considered unlawful and that is why technicalities and loopholes are the stock in trade of every good legal practitioner.

In this case it was the Juror who went beyond his duty and decided to physically investigate the evidence himself but not only that, he discussed his findings and activities with the other jurors therefore planting evidence in their minds which might or might not be correct or relevant.

In short his actions could have contaminated the jurors decision and under such circumstances the Judge had no other option but to dismiss the case. He did however form the opinion that there should not be another trial because he was going to direct the jury to find the defendant not guilty on the grounds of insufficient evidence.

I think the actions of the Juror were only incidental to the outcome of the trial.

Regards

JD

_________________
Copyright notice © The contents of this post are copyright of JD and are not to be reproduced outside of TDO without written permission.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Aug 21, 2008 8:22 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 7:30 pm
Posts: 57356
Location: 1066 Country
cabby john wrote:
I cannot understand ever why anyone gets off on a technicality - a costly but simple answer is a re trial.

I think that's normally the way these things pan out, but in this case the judge decided that the prosecution case was a poor one and ended it there and then.

I suspect the family would have been told beforehand that the defence would ask for the case to be stopped once the prosecution case ended, and that there was a good chance the judge would agree to it.

In this case there simply weren't enough witnesses, which alas is par for the course for the taxi/PH trade late at night. :sad:

_________________
IDFIMH


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Aug 22, 2008 7:12 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 06, 2006 12:31 pm
Posts: 1761
Location: Commonsense Country
Hilary Clixby, The Journal, Aug 20 2008 wrote:
THE teenager accused of killing taxi driver Raymond Quigley after trying to make off without paying his fare walked free from court yesterday after a judge said the prosecution case was fatally flawed.

Dale Patterson was alleged to have struggled so violently when 72-year-old Mr Quigley tried to restrain him until police arrived that the cabbie suffered a fatal heart attack.

Patterson, 18, had denied charges of manslaughter and making off without payment and was cleared on both counts after legal submissions at Newcastle Crown Court.

Judge David Hodson said: "The Crown has not proved a legal obligation on the defendant to make a payment to the point where the vehicle came to a halt.

"Any attempt by Mr Quigley in those circumstances, however understandable it may have been and however sympathetic one feels towards him, to restrain the defendant would not have been justified and was arguably unlawful. Given the fare was not legally enforceable, what Mr Quigley did was unlawful. He had no lawful power of arrest as no offence had been committed under the Theft Act.

"In the circumstances, the defendant was entitled to use such force as was necessary to resist unlawful arrest.

"It cannot be shown he did any unlawful act, let alone unlawful acts which contributed to the death of Mr Quigley. The prosecution case was fatally flawed."

As a result of the judge’s findings, the prosecution offered no evidence against Mr Patterson on either count and not- guilty verdicts were recorded.

The teenager’s acquittal came the day after the jury hearing the case was discharged after it emerged one of the jurors had been carrying out his own investigations into the case.

Mr Patterson got into Mr Quigley’s hackney car early on September 2 last year near Newcastle Central Station after he had missed his last train home because he had been attending a skateboarding event in the city centre.

He claimed he had tried to flee the car in Ryhope, Sunderland, because the route taken was unfamiliar to him and he feared for his safety.

But the court heard that Mr Patterson, a student of Manila Street, Sunderland, now realised that his fears were the result of a complete misunderstanding.

"The public should not draw any conclusions from the result of this case adverse to Mr Quigley in any way," said Robert Smith QC, defending.

_________________
"Here's a simple solution. If you don't want to pay more for a premium service then wait in the queue, problem solved".
Skull on TDO

TF pi$$ed on his chips.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Aug 22, 2008 10:08 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2008 4:06 pm
Posts: 24391
Location: Twixt Heaven and Hell, but nearest Hell
72 and still working? what is this country coming to?

(i dont deny anyones right to work at over retirement age, just the sad fact many have to)

if gas/leccy/rates werent so kin high, and pensions so damn low this cabbie could have been relaxing and enjoying hiw twighlight years


my dad is in hospital, had a stroke at 86 years of age, but he retired at 65, and i hope to be watching the sun go down over the med from my balcony before that, we arent born to work.

_________________
Of all the things ive lost, i miss my mind the most


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Aug 24, 2008 8:46 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 06, 2006 12:31 pm
Posts: 1761
Location: Commonsense Country
wannabeeahack wrote:
72 and still working? what is this country coming to?

(i dont deny anyones right to work at over retirement age, just the sad fact many have to)

if gas/leccy/rates werent so kin high, and pensions so damn low this cabbie could have been relaxing and enjoying hiw twighlight years


my dad is in hospital, had a stroke at 86 years of age, but he retired at 65, and i hope to be watching the sun go down over the med from my balcony before that, we arent born to work.


Ray worked passed retirement because he wanted to ........... he enjoyed the social interaction.

The fact that the anus involved wanted to run and was prepared to fight to get away isn't being considered, Ray was a big bloke who didn't put up with any $hit .............. if another driver had picked this bloke up we could have been reading about another driver being beaten, the only reason this t*** go off with it was because Ray died.

As JD rightly said ......... CCTV would have provided all the evidence ......... and we should all fit it whether a council approves or not, our safety is at stake.

B. Lucky :D

_________________
"Here's a simple solution. If you don't want to pay more for a premium service then wait in the queue, problem solved".
Skull on TDO

TF pi$$ed on his chips.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Aug 24, 2008 10:57 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 11:27 pm
Posts: 20130
CCTV is not the be all and end all. If the driver is attacked outside the car it won't be on any cctv. All the tape will show is a passenger making off without paying.

_________________
Grandad,


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Aug 24, 2008 1:41 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 06, 2006 12:31 pm
Posts: 1761
Location: Commonsense Country
grandad wrote:
CCTV is not the be all and end all. If the driver is attacked outside the car it won't be on any cctv. All the tape will show is a passenger making off without paying.


This attack was inside the car.

and cameras can be installed to view outside the car as well.

so in my opinion they are the be all and end all.

B. Lucky :D

_________________
"Here's a simple solution. If you don't want to pay more for a premium service then wait in the queue, problem solved".
Skull on TDO

TF pi$$ed on his chips.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Aug 24, 2008 3:40 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2005 8:44 pm
Posts: 10591
Location: Scotland
Mr Dale Patterson, a student of Manila Street, Sunderland

Well everyone knows where he lives now


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Aug 24, 2008 8:29 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 7:30 pm
Posts: 57356
Location: 1066 Country
grandad wrote:
CCTV is not the be all and end all. If the driver is attacked outside the car it won't be on any cctv. All the tape will show is a passenger making off without paying.

That's still good evidence as it places the mush at the scene, and would give a jury a good idea as to his character i.e. doing a runner.

_________________
IDFIMH


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Aug 24, 2008 9:48 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 11:27 pm
Posts: 20130
GA wrote:
grandad wrote:
CCTV is not the be all and end all. If the driver is attacked outside the car it won't be on any cctv. All the tape will show is a passenger making off without paying.


This attack was inside the car.

and cameras can be installed to view outside the car as well.

so in my opinion they are the be all and end all.

B. Lucky :D


How are you sure the attack happened in the car? The driver was kicked in the face. Now please explaine to me how this was done during a struggle inside the car?

_________________
Grandad,


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Aug 24, 2008 10:07 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2008 3:22 pm
Posts: 14152
Location: Wirral
grandad wrote:
CCTV is not the be all and end all. If the driver is attacked outside the car it won't be on any cctv. All the tape will show is a passenger making off without paying.


CCTV is a good deterrant kind of like the imaginary baseball bat that everybody seems to think I have stashed under my seat, lol. Obviously I don't but if they think I do and it makes them think twice about thumping me then that's fine with me. I'd feel safer with CCTV in my vehicle but to be honest having to ask permission to have it in my car and having to justify why I need it before the council is too much like hard work.

_________________
Note to self: Just because it pops into my head does NOT mean it should come out of my mouth!!


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 20 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 905 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group