Death by dangerous driving
Discussion
Nearly every time I read a newspaper report of a fatal accident it says 'a nn year old man/woman was arrested at the scene on suspicion of causing death by dangerous driving'. Invariably there is no follow up, implying it never went to court.
Is it just a standard procedure to make investigation easier? Or are there specific circumstances when a 'death by dangerous' arrest is used instead of 'death by careless'?
Is it just a standard procedure to make investigation easier? Or are there specific circumstances when a 'death by dangerous' arrest is used instead of 'death by careless'?
In terms of the investigation, it's not so much to make it easier (although it keeps things neater and allows greater control), but it reduces the risk of losing evidence. Obviously the closer to the incident, in terms of time and proximity (in the case of these offences), the more evidence will be generally available. It's very high impact to lose evidence at a death, so if reasonable suspicion is present, then it's likely the person will be arrested. Usually, there's a good indication if there's a possibility a driving standard (dangerous, due care) offence has been committed.
If you're going to arrest someone for a 'death by' offence, it makes no practical difference to do it as the most serious one. It's similar for a assault-based death, you'd nearly always arrest for murder rather than manslaughter. The offence charged with doesn't need to the same as the one arrested for.
If you're going to arrest someone for a 'death by' offence, it makes no practical difference to do it as the most serious one. It's similar for a assault-based death, you'd nearly always arrest for murder rather than manslaughter. The offence charged with doesn't need to the same as the one arrested for.
Death by dangerous driving is one of the cases where you can be found guilty by the court in a number of alternative offences, from Death by Dangerous Driving all the way down to DWDCA. However, you can't "trade up" once you've charged someone. So they'll always go for the worst of all and then work back.
Serious accident cases can take a long time to reach court (easily over 12 months, depending on complexity). Many cases will be admitted and have no trial to report on. Reports on sentencing hearings are rarely as dramatic or long winded, or memorable. Some cases simply won't be reported on at all. Not to mention, following an investigation, there might be NFA and therefore nothing to report.
Dammit said:
^NFA seems to be a very frequent result, I presume because the CPS won't take it forward unless it's beyond nailed-on.
As has been pointed out, Dangerous is one of those offences where the court can acquit you of that offence, yet find you guilty of a lesser one (Careless). Dangerous Driving is relatively hard to prove, however having that net of Careless means it's not quite the gamble it might be with other offences. It appears to be very, very difficult to be convicted of careless driving: http://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/lorry-driver-...
king scandalous.The law is often an ass in many of these cases.Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff