Lad killed by US wrong side driver, who's done a bunk...
Discussion
I suspect that Mrs S is haunted by what she did, but is not sufficiently possessed of moral fibre to take the (quite modest) rap for it. She is not a murderer - she is a careless person who is lacking in social conscience. There is a chance that she was ordered home and is forbidden from saying so to the media, but I doubt that is the case. If she was a spy, her cover is a bit blown, and she is no longer deployable outside the USA.
BobSaunders said:
She probably does, but ultimately is thinking about herself. She is hounded quite frequently by media etc. so it's not like it will ever go away - or at least not for a few years until media attention wains. sadly.
I can hand on heart say that if i accidentally killed someone I would hand myself over. She wouldn't even get a severe punishment. The fact she was on the wrong side of the road because she is a foreign driver probably without much UK driving experience would surely be a big mitigating factor. - on edit I can see she was charged with death by dangerous driving.
Several here have said that they would do a runner if they had the chance. I cannot understand that position. I suppose that there really are two types of people in the World. The charge is serious, and we can debate forever whether any purpose would be served by a custodial sentence (I think no purpose would be served by that), but standing up and taking the rap would have been the human and decent thing to do. As would admitting civil liability for damages and letting the insurer or the US Gov pay the damages. The damages would be modest.
I would not regard the RHD/LHD thing as providing much or any mitigation.
I would not regard the RHD/LHD thing as providing much or any mitigation.
Mrs S is a moderately well educated woman, but even some educated Americans suffer from exceptionalism, and do not understand that other countries have fair legal systems. Many Americans have no idea that their own legal system was largely inherited from the UK. I have even had American lawyers try to explain legal concepts to me like they were something invented in the US. I can then say to them "Yes, that point was decided by Lord Mansfield in the Court of King's Bench in London, in 1760."
Breadvan72 said:
Several here have said that they would do a runner if they had the chance. I cannot understand that position. I suppose that there really are two types of people in the World. The charge is serious, and we can debate forever whether any purpose would be served by a custodial sentence (I think no purpose would be served by that), but standing up and taking the rap would have been the human and decent thing to do. As would admitting civil liability for damages and letting the insurer or the US Gov pay the damages. The damages would be modest.
I would not regard the RHD/LHD thing as providing much or any mitigation.
I don't know how they assess these things in court but there has to be a difference between a genuine (if stupid) mistake like being on the wrong side of the road and causing a death by driving at 70 in a 30 zone, or having bald tyres etc. One is clearly less knowingly negligent than the others? I would not regard the RHD/LHD thing as providing much or any mitigation.
Yes - going at 70 in a 30 is reckless. Having bald tyres is careless and maybe reckless. A lapse of attention is not so bad, but NB this was not just a quick veer to the wrong side. Many of us may have done that for five seconds while on holiday (I have done exactly that, once or maybe twice in thirty years of driving in the US and Europe). Mrs S chugged along the wrong side of the road for some distance. In civil law terms, this was gross negligence.
agtlaw can better express those concepts using the correct terminology (I am no expert on motoring law, but he is). He can also tell you about the sentencing options, which are flexible and take account of circumstances.
agtlaw can better express those concepts using the correct terminology (I am no expert on motoring law, but he is). He can also tell you about the sentencing options, which are flexible and take account of circumstances.
anonymous said:
[redacted]
It's known as the benefit of hindsight...... if people had known how this would play out, then it's likely things would have been done differently.....A poor decision to leave - but given it was a US military flight, she didn't just choose to run - there were multiple people involved up the chain. Then after a poor decision, things compounded from there.
Not that it would likely apply in this case, but death by dangerous carries potential for a very long custodial. I can see how that could influence someone's thinking, even if I don't agree with their actions.
I'd try them in absence and sentence if convicted. Up to them to do the right thing, then (as now).
I'd try them in absence and sentence if convicted. Up to them to do the right thing, then (as now).
American employers take a dim view of any criminal conviction, as do immigration. There are many people who can't get a visa (or ESTA) to go there on holiday with what many would consider 'trivial' convictions on their record. I'm not sure if they have an equivalent 'rehabilitation of offenders act' where it becomes expunged.
If she does have a (ahem) 'government' position, it would likely affect her career.
If she does have a (ahem) 'government' position, it would likely affect her career.
eccles said:
They even had/have American road markings like 4-way stops and very picky military police!
Rolled up to one of these with a car full of mates, very, very drunk mates, looked all around, it was clear, so drove on through. Cue the cruiser behind lighting up with added siren. " you didn't stop sir" Boy do they take themselves seriously! After 10 minutes of banter that didn't so much as raise a smile,we were escorted off base.
They really are a little slice of America, they have bowling alleys, pizza places, Baskin and Robbins ice cream, pissy American beer that you had to drink by the pitcher just to get any hint of being drunk. They were very controlled on what you could buy in their on base shops, but having loads of Americans as neighbours it was quite easy to get pretty much what ever you wanted apart from cheap petrol.
I know people who have been on US bases outside the USA and they all say the same. To be honest I've always found it a bit creepy/big-brothery/thought controlley. it's like the US want to project their image and force all over the world but are terrified of those they send to do it becoming too comfortable in foreign surroundings so to speak. "American Culture is all you are going to experience unless it's absolutely unavoidable", it's as though they are ramming home the philosophy that everything is inferior so we have to take our culture wherever we go. It's contributing to their personnel not thinking for themselves. Perhaps if they didn't maintain the culture of driving on their side of the road in a base in a country which doesn't then this lad might still be alive and one of their citizens now would not be an internationally wanted fugitive. Rolled up to one of these with a car full of mates, very, very drunk mates, looked all around, it was clear, so drove on through. Cue the cruiser behind lighting up with added siren. " you didn't stop sir" Boy do they take themselves seriously! After 10 minutes of banter that didn't so much as raise a smile,we were escorted off base.
They really are a little slice of America, they have bowling alleys, pizza places, Baskin and Robbins ice cream, pissy American beer that you had to drink by the pitcher just to get any hint of being drunk. They were very controlled on what you could buy in their on base shops, but having loads of Americans as neighbours it was quite easy to get pretty much what ever you wanted apart from cheap petrol.
PeteinSQ said:
BobSaunders said:
She probably does, but ultimately is thinking about herself. She is hounded quite frequently by media etc. so it's not like it will ever go away - or at least not for a few years until media attention wains. sadly.
I can hand on heart say that if i accidentally killed someone I would hand myself over. She wouldn't even get a severe punishment. The fact she was on the wrong side of the road because she is a foreign driver probably without much UK driving experience would surely be a big mitigating factor. - on edit I can see she was charged with death by dangerous driving.
janesmith1950 said:
saaby93 said:
If it's proven isnt it more likely to be careless rather than dangerous?
I don't believe so.dangerous = deliberate?
There were some previous wrong side cases quoted a number of pages back but I cant remember how they went ........
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff