Is it time we get tough on killer drivers?
Discussion
Its all getting a bit beyond the joke.
https://www.kentonline.co.uk/sheerness/news/delive...
No insurance. Driving at 60mph in a 40. Loses control and hits 2 people, one of which is killed.
Not even arrested, allowed to go home and later charged by email.
Receives 220 hours community service and 3 year driving ban.
Is it just me (fine if it is!) this is just another example of failed justice.
I really do think we need to start seeing custodial sentences for this sort of behaviour.
https://www.kentonline.co.uk/sheerness/news/delive...
No insurance. Driving at 60mph in a 40. Loses control and hits 2 people, one of which is killed.
Not even arrested, allowed to go home and later charged by email.
Receives 220 hours community service and 3 year driving ban.
Is it just me (fine if it is!) this is just another example of failed justice.
I really do think we need to start seeing custodial sentences for this sort of behaviour.
king narcissist. Stedman said:
I believe we are reaping the benefits of the dismantling of Traffic over the last 20 years.
I agree that dismantling the roads policing units has/ is contributing to poor driving, however, this sort of thing lies squarely at the government failing to build more prisons and the justice/ court system being so weak.The law has got continuously tougher on road death offences.
Death by careless wasn't even an offence until 2008. So if this were before then you'd just be looking at careless (IIRC causing death whilst uninsured wasn't an offence prior to then, but I may be mistaken).
Death by dangerous was made more serious in 2022.
She did receive a custodial sentence - it was just suspended. The government have increased the maximum sentence that can be suspended from 2 to 3 years, so she fell well within it.
If we didn't have suspended sentences we'd need a lot more prison space!
Now whether road death offences should be even more serious and keep heading in the direction they have is another question.
Death by careless wasn't even an offence until 2008. So if this were before then you'd just be looking at careless (IIRC causing death whilst uninsured wasn't an offence prior to then, but I may be mistaken).
Death by dangerous was made more serious in 2022.
She did receive a custodial sentence - it was just suspended. The government have increased the maximum sentence that can be suspended from 2 to 3 years, so she fell well within it.
If we didn't have suspended sentences we'd need a lot more prison space!
Now whether road death offences should be even more serious and keep heading in the direction they have is another question.
Stedman said:
I believe we are reaping the benefits of the dismantling of Traffic over the last 20 years.
Depends what you're measuring. If it's death on the roads, then not really. MrBogSmith said:
The law has got continuously tougher on road death offences.
Death by careless wasn't even an offence until 2008. So if this were before then you'd just be looking at careless (IIRC causing death whilst uninsured wasn't an offence prior to then, but I may be mistaken).
Death by dangerous was made more serious in 2022.
She did receive a custodial sentence - it was just suspended. The government have increased the maximum sentence that can be suspended from 2 to 3 years, so she fell well within it.
If we didn't have suspended sentences we'd need a lot more prison space!
Now whether road death offences should be even more serious and keep heading in the direction they have is another question.
Have you ever considered a career in politics? Death by careless wasn't even an offence until 2008. So if this were before then you'd just be looking at careless (IIRC causing death whilst uninsured wasn't an offence prior to then, but I may be mistaken).
Death by dangerous was made more serious in 2022.
She did receive a custodial sentence - it was just suspended. The government have increased the maximum sentence that can be suspended from 2 to 3 years, so she fell well within it.
If we didn't have suspended sentences we'd need a lot more prison space!
Now whether road death offences should be even more serious and keep heading in the direction they have is another question.
Stedman said:
I believe we are reaping the benefits of the dismantling of Traffic over the last 20 years.
Depends what you're measuring. If it's death on the roads, then not really. MrBogSmith said:
CMTMB said:
Have you ever considered a career in politics?
No because everything I wrote there is the truth. Unless you think anything was incorrect, then let me know.
Rather than posting graphs and statistics, why don't you tell us what you actually think?
Personally it's not the (lack of) custodial sentence and tiny fine that is the issue, it's the complete inconsistency in our sentencing as seen by the "Man on the street". How is it right that you can be arrested and receive a custodial sentence for something you wrote on social media, or for not paying council tax, yet neither of these are the result of killing a young man through wreckless driving? I do not buy this being "careless" driving... clipping a kerb is careless...
So a custodial sentence should have been imposed here. However, if not, why so little community work? If she does the bare minimum of 6 hours per week, she's done in 9 months. If a sentence is suspended then at the very least I'd like to see community work of an equivalent time.
And finally the joke of a fine. We have graduates that have to pay back 10s of 1000s of pounds over most of their working life for the privilege of an education, yet you can kill someone and have the fine repaid in a few months. Significant compensation should be paid to the family over a significant period. Finger in the air, but for someone like this it should be £10k or more to be taken from salary and/or benefits until paid. It won't make up for the loss of a partner/son/brother etc, but it is something.
Finally, why was sentencing reduced to take account of her age? She was an adult when she killed this young man so this I do not understand.
Oh, and anyone saying the sentence needs to be suspended because we don't have the prison space... I have no words.
So a custodial sentence should have been imposed here. However, if not, why so little community work? If she does the bare minimum of 6 hours per week, she's done in 9 months. If a sentence is suspended then at the very least I'd like to see community work of an equivalent time.
And finally the joke of a fine. We have graduates that have to pay back 10s of 1000s of pounds over most of their working life for the privilege of an education, yet you can kill someone and have the fine repaid in a few months. Significant compensation should be paid to the family over a significant period. Finger in the air, but for someone like this it should be £10k or more to be taken from salary and/or benefits until paid. It won't make up for the loss of a partner/son/brother etc, but it is something.
Finally, why was sentencing reduced to take account of her age? She was an adult when she killed this young man so this I do not understand.
Oh, and anyone saying the sentence needs to be suspended because we don't have the prison space... I have no words.
55palfers said:
Her car was insured, just not for business use.
It unlikely she would have cancelled the business cover just to save a few quid. Admin costs would have been more then the potential saving.
Employer should keep a copy of cert on file with a reminder to check again next year
If that's the case then yeah I would have thought there's an argument there that they haven't fulfilled their obligations as an employer.It unlikely she would have cancelled the business cover just to save a few quid. Admin costs would have been more then the potential saving.
Employer should keep a copy of cert on file with a reminder to check again next year
No idea where that leaves them legally but I'd have hoped and probably assumed anyone employing delivery drivers would be able to show they'd checked they had suitable insurance - with the caveat in my previous post.
CMTMB said:
It's just the same spin, distraction and apologist nonsense you post day in, day out.
I try to post things based on facts and evidence (where relevant). The direction of travel for 'toughness' would seem a little relevant to the topic. As well as actual data.
I think you could look at many of the 50,000 or so suspended sentences a year in isolation and make the case the punishment should be tougher. I think you'd then need to build a lot more prisons if you did. I don't think there's the money to do that.
Careless driving is a low threshold, but we could change things where a suspended sentence isn't available in the case of a death. Or there could be a presumption that the custodial sentence won't be suspended unless there's exceptional circumstances (although given there's scope in the sentencing guidelines for a non-custodial sentence, perhaps that's already covered).
I'd be happy with latter (subject to looking into it in more detail), and the numbers would be few enough to be absorbed into the prison system.
I completely understand why people react strongly when someone dies and the sentence is suspended. It feels, at first glance, like the court has said “no real punishment”, which is an ugly thing to read when a life has been lost.
But a suspended sentence is still a conviction. It is not the same as walking away untouched.
For someone who has otherwise lived a law-abiding life, that conviction can follow them around in very practical ways. Car insurance may become extremely expensive or difficult to get. Home insurance can also become harder if the conviction is unspent and the insurer asks about it. Some finance or mortgage applications may ask about unspent convictions. Jobs can be affected too, especially roles involving driving, trust, regulated work, children, vulnerable people, or DBS checks.
That does not mean it is equivalent to prison. It clearly is not. But it also is not “no consequence”. A criminal conviction, a driving ban, insurance problems, job limitations, public shame, and living with the knowledge that your carelessness killed someone are all serious consequences.
Whether that is enough in any specific case is a fair debate. But it is worth remembering that a suspended sentence is still a sentence, and a conviction can make ordinary life much harder than people sometimes realise.
But a suspended sentence is still a conviction. It is not the same as walking away untouched.
For someone who has otherwise lived a law-abiding life, that conviction can follow them around in very practical ways. Car insurance may become extremely expensive or difficult to get. Home insurance can also become harder if the conviction is unspent and the insurer asks about it. Some finance or mortgage applications may ask about unspent convictions. Jobs can be affected too, especially roles involving driving, trust, regulated work, children, vulnerable people, or DBS checks.
That does not mean it is equivalent to prison. It clearly is not. But it also is not “no consequence”. A criminal conviction, a driving ban, insurance problems, job limitations, public shame, and living with the knowledge that your carelessness killed someone are all serious consequences.
Whether that is enough in any specific case is a fair debate. But it is worth remembering that a suspended sentence is still a sentence, and a conviction can make ordinary life much harder than people sometimes realise.
GCN (with a bit of cycling focus) did a interesting film on it last week. Spoke to few experts, worth a watch
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dHRfClVJg70
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dHRfClVJg70
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff