13yr old killed in F50

[Murph7355]

kiethton said:

But why push for that? How is it right or proper to push for the wrong charge when the lesser charge may be more appropriate?

Tbf, looking at the CPS site I'm surprised it isn't "dangerous driving" :

http://www.cps.gov.uk/news/fact_sheets/dangerous_d...

[kiethton]

Dr Jekyll said:

kiethton said:

But why push for that? How is it right or proper to push for the wrong charge when the lesser charge may be more appropriate?

The job of the CPS is to 'successfully' prosecute. 'Success' meaning a conviction.

But surely the success should be in the correct conviction for the offence committed (or not), not the maximum offence possible for the broad type of offence committed that they think they can stretch things to accommodat

[agtlaw]

mike74 said:

ALawson said:

Man in court.

http://www.gethampshire.co.uk/news/local-news/walt...

Good to see his wealth is already working for him, only charged with careless rather than dangerous driving.

His wealth (if any) isn't a material consideration when a charging decision is made and you've probably overlooked the fact that the car wasn't his. He isn't charged with either of the offences you mentioned.

The charge is causing death by careless driving. This carries a maximum 5 year prison sentence and a mandatory disqualification from driving. The offence will be dealt with on 26th July at a Crown Court.

Edited by agtlaw on Thursday 29th June 15:49

[agtlaw]

Dr Jekyll said:

Plea bargain?

This is England, not America.

[Dr Jekyll]

agtlaw said:

Dr Jekyll said:

Plea bargain?

This is England, not America.

Still happens though, whatever the terminology.

[Phil Dicky]

To Crown Court for sentencing?

[Soov330e]

Vaud said:

Where did you read that he had admitted the offence? The articles that I saw just referenced that it had been referred to Crown Court?

Given AGT is a prominent motoring lawyer I expect he has heard the news from the industry (or maybe he was representing him!)

[agtlaw]

Soov330e said:

Vaud said:

The articles that I saw just referenced that it had been referred to Crown Court?

Given AGT is a prominent motoring lawyer I expect he has heard the news from the industry (or maybe he was representing him!)

Not involved. Ignore earlier deleted comment. Nothing to see here. Presumption of innocence applies.

Edited by agtlaw on Thursday 29th June 16:27

[NDA]

I imagine the driver is in a living hell.... can you imagine accidentally killing a child? I'm not sure how life would be after that.

[Soov330e]

NDA said:

I imagine the driver is in a living hell.... can you imagine accidentally killing a child? I'm not sure how life would be after that.

It's about to get a lot worse for him, to be honest.

[agtlaw]

Quite interesting sentencing stats for causing death by careless driving:

Immediate custody - 39%
Suspended sentence - 35%
Community sentence - 25%
Other - 1%

Average length of custodial sentence: 10 months (13.8 months if convicted after trial).

[Soov330e]

agtlaw said:

Quite interesting sentencing stats for causing death by careless driving:

Immediate custody - 39%
Suspended sentence - 35%
Community sentence - 25%
Other - 1%

Average length of custodial sentence: 10 months (13.8 months if convicted after trial).

What's your thinking on this one?

Young deceased, not his car (TWOC?), no insurance presumably.

12 months?

[Vaud]

Soov330e said:

What's your thinking on this one?

Young deceased, not his car (TWOC?), no insurance presumably.

12 months?

Unlikely to be TWOC, as he ran http://www.toystor-age.com/ so probably had consent to drive the vehicle for purposes of the storage. That and he hasn't been charged with TWOC?

Insurance would be from his business of storing high value vehicles, surely?

[Soov330e]

Vaud said:

Soov330e said:

What's your thinking on this one?

Young deceased, not his car (TWOC?), no insurance presumably.

12 months?

Unlikely to be TWOC, as he ran http://www.toystor-age.com/ so probably had consent to drive the vehicle for purposes of the storage. That and he hasn't been charged with TWOC?

Insurance would be from his business of storing high value vehicles, surely?

Depends I guess, perhaps his policy was limited to required movement, giving a kid a balls out ride perhaps not in contemplation of the insurer at the time they backed the risk.

[Murph7355]

agtlaw said:

Quite interesting sentencing stats for causing death by careless driving:

Immediate custody - 39%
Suspended sentence - 35%
Community sentence - 25%
Other - 1%

Average length of custodial sentence: 10 months (13.8 months if convicted after trial).

10mths for killing someone seems light, regardless of the definitions of "careless" and "dangerous"...

[mac96]

None of those convicted intended to kill anyone though, and the actual circumstances will have varied a lot. In the case under discussion, it appears that the defendant was actually trying to do a good thing, albeit he went about it badly.

[agtlaw]

Murph7355 said:

10mths for killing someone seems light, regardless of the definitions of "careless" and "dangerous"...

The average sentence reflects the relatively
low level of culpability. CDCD sentences are measured in months. CDDD sentences are measured in years. Until 2006, the aggravated offence (CDCD) didn't exist and the worst you could expect was a fine and ban/points for CD. Some CDCD cases are borderline CDDD and the sentence will reflect that. As mentioned above, the maximum sentence is 5 years. The case under discussion appears to be more serious than the average CDCD case from the few facts publicly known.

[Murph7355]

mac96 said:

None of those convicted intended to kill anyone though, and the actual circumstances will have varied a lot. In the case under discussion, it appears that the defendant was actually trying to do a good thing, albeit he went about it badly.

I appreciate I am probably out of line with the law and maybe the majority, but IMO causing death still warrants a higher sentence. If deliberately doing so warrants more (I agree) then they should be higher still. Not the lesser version attracting a small sentence.

True accidents are very rare IMO. Cars and roads are not inherently dangerous. The way they are used are. Being "careless" at the wheel of a car is unacceptable as the consequences of doing so are potentially massive. And if you cause death doing so, all the more so.

"Trying to do a good thing" means nothing whatsoever in my book if you cause a death doing so. I'm no Driving Miss Daisy, but there are risks you simply do not take. If your judgement takes you over that line to the extent that someone dies, 10mths is not enough. Examples need to be made of people to try and deter others from doing the same, and I'd also suggest to keep those whose judgement is poor away from the rest of us.

[TTmonkey]

Do we know any circumstances of the accident yet? E.g., how fast was the car going when it crashed?

[FurtiveFreddy]

TTmonkey said:

Do we know any circumstances of the accident yet? E.g., how fast was the car going when it crashed?

No we don't but I know the location and some of the circumstances and it would have happened in a very short distance and time period.

I think we'll find from the inquest that the reason it turned out so badly (apart from the obvious reason) was partly the road surface and partly the proximity of some low wooden posts/fencing close to where the car went out of control.