6 Months suspended sentence

1finny said:
I’m guessing ‘careless driving’ was easier for the CPS than manslaughter.
Click to expand...

The offence of "Causing death by Dangerous Driving" (DbDD) was brought in as it was thought that juries were not convicting drivers of manslaughter. Manslaughter being associated with "criminals" & "criminal acts" not normal people driving cars. The sentences available for DbDD
did mirror those available for manslaughter.

The offence of "Causing death by Careless Driving" was brought in as it was thought that juries were not convicting drivers of DbDD unless their behaviour was egregious (excessive speed, drink, drugs).

Dangerous driving is defined as being a manner of driving that falls significantly below the acceptable standards of competency and driving that is obviously dangerous to a competent driver.

Careless driving is defined as being a manner of driving that falls below the acceptable standards of competency and driving to a competent driver.

Doing 60 in a 40, losing control & killing someone is obviously dangerous.

Without knowing the details in this case it wouldn't surprise me if they were charged with DbDD but agreed to plead guilty to Death by Careless Driving.
 
We need to up the length of our sentencing to try and defer career criminals and anyone who gets behind the wheel of a car or a motorbike and drive like idiots. Cars and motor bikes are killing machines if not treated respectfully and each and everyone of us witness some idiot speeding around estates everyday.

On Thursday I was listening to PC Harper's wife and your heart goes out to her. They also showed a clip of two of the lads who had been found guilty being taken to jail. Both of them giggling their heads off and playing up to the cameras. They should have been given another year just for the lack of remorse.

When I am in France I get out on my bike everyday and take advantage of their cycle routes. I wouldn't dream of riding on the roads in this country and choose similar routes that I know to avoid traffic.
 
newusername said:
Without knowing the details in this case it wouldn't surprise me if they were charged with DbDD but agreed to plead guilty to Death by Careless Driving.
Click to expand...

He was originally charged with death by dangerous driving and pleaded not guilty at a hearing in October last year.
 
coluka said:
He should be doing time for manslaughter, his criminal actions led inadvertently to a mans death. Why is it nearly always the victim that comes off the worst in these matters? Too many sentences get suspended imho. I guess they don’t want to fill up the jails as they are overcrowded as it is. Build some more, create some jobs. Soft on crime, while victims and their families get a life sentence of one sort or another. Human life is cheap in modern Britain it seems. The law is an ass and needs reform.

I can’t watch these reality cop programmes like the Interceptors anymore as it just makes me angry. All you see most of the time are scrotes aged 12- 25 nicking cars driving at speeds of upto 70 mph around towns and estates, ramming other cars, smashing police cars up or driving into some poor sods house. Then you find they have no licence, insurance, have been on cannabis or cocaine, all the passengers are free to go and the driver gets a £75 fine banned for 2 years ( even though no licence exists ) and in an occasional case a few hours community service. The damage to the police cars cost thousands and the tax payer foots the bill not the scrotes that damaged them. They should have to pay every penny of criminal damage back over their lifetime. If they are at school then deduct it in time from wages or benefits. Rant over :censored:
Click to expand...
Agree with all that mate
 
There are people on here who glorify fast cars. They are for the race track only. Letting these cars in to the hands of people who are clueless and idiotic should be banned from the public roads.
These cars should be banned on public roads all together.

Nothing boils my **** as much as seeing some baseball capped numb skull driving at speeds and usually making a lot of exhaust growls on housing estates.

The days of driving for pleasure are confined to the 1950's.

I have not owned any sort of car for a number of years now and I don't miss any of the aggravation.
 
Erimus74 said:
How can he plead not guilty, he killed a cyclist by driving way, way over the speed limit
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, all defence solicitors and barristers coach their clients on roughly what to say and how to present themselves in order to get them the best outcome they possibly can. It is not about ensuring justice it is about damage limitation for their client. I used to deal with defence Barristers and Solicitors a fair bit and they can often be wicked, its like a game to them. They work hard at getting cases delayed, hearings suspended use delay tactics all of which racks up their bills, time, public funding and gives breathing space to alleged perpetrators.

They have no care or thought for the victim in any cases they work on, in my experience. As I say, they work in the sole interests of their clients, the alleged perpetrator, while the victims and their families are put through the mill by them in cross examination if needed as witnesses in the case, they dig to try to find holes in the prosecutions case or cast doubt on witness statements through pressure of questionning. They love to discredit people in the witness box. They paint different pictures of reality to cast doubt. If they are clearly losing a case they often advise the alleged perpetrator to change their plea at the last minute or try plea bargain with the prosecuting solicitor. I have even had judges telling prosecuting solicitors to agree on a half way house outcome just to end a case quickly or risk getting nothing. The District judges seem to err to the perpetrators rather than the victims in my experience. I have even had judges determine an outcome that they had no powers to do. The law is an ass, the County Court and Magistrates Court has a fair few numpties presiding.

I hold many defence lawyers (not all) in the same bracket as money lenders. Ruthless individuals who prey on the weak and vulnerable to help the alleged perpetrator to limit or avoid guilt and often get extremely well paid at the tax payers expense.
 
A lot of our laws seem to be focused upon deterring people from taking money and property when you look at the sentences.

It astounds me that you will do less time for abusing a child than if you stick your hand in a till and run out of a shop with a couple of hundred quid.

I think that people who kill while driving seem to get off very lightly. What's a few months to someone in their early twenties when a family have to spend forever without a loved one?
 
Erimus74 said:
Are you for real?????
Careless driving, FHS 😔

The selfish idiot has killed an innocent cyclist & given a family a life sentence

He was travelling in a lethal weapon at 20MPH above the speed limit, which is set at 40MPH, because rules don't apply to him, the bloke should have been given a life sentence
Click to expand...
That is why he was in court Erimus, not my words CPS mate FHS!
 
coluka said:
Unfortunately, all defence solicitors and barristers coach their clients on roughly what to say and how to present themselves in order to get them the best outcome they possibly can. It is not about ensuring justice it is about damage limitation for their client. I used to deal with defence Barristers and Solicitors a fair bit and they can often be wicked, its like a game to them. They work hard at getting cases delayed, hearings suspended use delay tactics all of which racks up their bills, time, public funding and gives breathing space to alleged perpetrators.

They have no care or thought for the victim in any cases they work on, in my experience. As I say, they work in the sole interests of their clients, .
Click to expand...

Coluka, a solicitor or barrister has a legal obligation to act only in the interest of their client. They have no choice. Anyone who denigrates defense barristers or solicitors is failing to understand the judicial system
 
Laughing said:
Coluka, a solicitor or barrister has a legal obligation to act only in the interest of their client. They have no choice. Anyone who denigrates defense barristers or solicitors is failing to understand the judicial system
Click to expand...

I know that, I understand the legal system well enough Laughing, I should do! It is the tactics and manner they use to do it. The comments they make to undermine witnesses confidence in and out of court when people are feeling vulnerable and scared is frankly shocking at times. I have seen it time and again they can and do intimidate ordinary innocent folk and deliberately make them nervous to confuse and even at times upset witnesses. They at times suggest all sorts that is simply untrue, smoke and mirrors. I have seen too many cases where victims never get the justice they truly deserve.
 
Laughing said:
That may be true Coluka, I am absolutely certain that prosecution barristers do the same.
Click to expand...

I am certain that barristers know reality from falsehood. I can not respesct anyone who is willing to destroy good peoples lives under their view that its their job and making me rich so its ok. By all means defend, but do not call black, white and alienate justice
 
coluka said:
I am certain that barristers know reality from falsehood. I can not respesct anyone who is willing to destroy good peoples lives under their view that its their job and making me rich so its ok. By all means defend, but do not call black, white and alienate justice
Click to expand...
Totally agree mate
 
It's just wrong.
There's nothing wrong with high performance cars, it's the idiots who drive them or the idiots who drive 1 litre bangers that need addressing.
We can all recount numerous stories of idiots who have performed dangerous manoeuvres that could have escalated into a tragedy and probably an equal number of aggressive reactions if you've had the temerity to honk your horn at them. It's bad enough that these people will risk collision with another car, that they'll expose cyclists and pedestrians to the same potentially deadly consequences should see them locked up.
 
HundredRoom said:
There are people on here who glorify fast cars. They are for the race track only. Letting these cars in to the hands of people who are clueless and idiotic should be banned from the public roads.
These cars should be banned on public roads all together.
Click to expand...
Given that very few modern cars are not capable of exceeding the national speed limit that is nonsense. This guy was doing 60 in a 40 the fact he was in a Porsche is neither here nor there he could just as easily have reached that speed in any car you care to name.
 
Muttley said:
Given that very few modern cars are not capable of exceeding the national speed limit that is nonsense. This guy was doing 60 in a 40 the fact he was in a Porsche is neither here nor there he could just as easily have reached that speed in any car you care to name.
Click to expand...
You are right of course, which shows that cars require GPS speed limiters to ensure compliance with posted speed limits.
 
newusername said:
You are right of course, which shows that cars require GPS speed limiters to ensure compliance with posted speed limits.
Click to expand...
Rigid adherence to posted speed limits is not without its problems.

As a hypothetical example you pull out to overtake a tractor and trailer which is doing 25mph on a 30mph urban road, it is safer to exceed the speed limit by say 5mph to complete the overtake manoeuvre than to attempt to pass with a mere 5mph margin which leaves you on the wrong side of the road longer. Of course, you could argue that you should stay behind the tractor. But I like to think that we should be able to exercise freewill for a while longer before submitting to our AI overloads.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top