Suspended sentence for 95 year old driver who killed a man.
Discussion
Andehh said:
Everyone debating punishing her, does need to remember she was an innocent old lady who just killed someone. She needs to now live with that & know the shame it brings on her, her family and her entire 'social' life. Her punishment will be severe & the strain of it will likely kill her earlier.
Brilliant, you should have been Harold Shipmans barrister with an argument like that.The Surveyor said:
vonhosen said:
I'm comfortable to leave it to the courts to look at each individual case on it's merits & sentence as per the guidelines.
There is an appeal process also available should the sentencing be out of kilter.
Why do we need an appeal process if we're comfortable that the courts look at each individual cases on their merit?There is an appeal process also available should the sentencing be out of kilter.
The appeal courts are an integral part of that justice system.
vonhosen said:
As a quality assurance measure to ensure that the law/guidelines are being applied correctly.
The appeal courts are an integral part of that justice system.
I very much appreciate that, it was just a comment to highlight that the courts judgement on sentencing isn't beyond challenge. The appeal courts are an integral part of that justice system.
The Surveyor said:
vonhosen said:
As a quality assurance measure to ensure that the law/guidelines are being applied correctly.
The appeal courts are an integral part of that justice system.
I very much appreciate that, it was just a comment to highlight that the courts judgement on sentencing isn't beyond challenge. The appeal courts are an integral part of that justice system.
The Surveyor said:
Understood and I largely agree, the only thing here is I just don't see what this lady did as being as trivial as an 'innocent mistake'. We all know as you get old, there are things you can no longer do, and things which become more difficult. Eye-sight and reactions times diminish and 'IF' there is any suspicion that this lady knew she shouldn't be driving, it was worse than just an innocent mistake. For me, it's more like somebody who knows you shouldn't drive after a few beers, but who still does and then kills somebody.
Her acceptance of the dangerous driving (rather than careless driving) charge would suggest she knew she shouldn't have been behind the wheel.
I think you're making statements without evidence to support. I've had a google around of the case and nowhere is reporting facts to support your opinion.Her acceptance of the dangerous driving (rather than careless driving) charge would suggest she knew she shouldn't have been behind the wheel.
Indeed I've seen :
>>"You have pleaded guilty to what is a serious offence, but it is a somewhat unusual case and, above all, this it is an utterly tragic case for the family of Paul Miller.
"The decision is not straightforward and it requires a lot of thinking from the prosecution and defence.<<
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/pensioner-95-...
>>Defending, Richard Shepherd told the court: 'Mrs Lister has taken the brave decision with her family to enter a guilty plea. She does not want to put the Mills family through further heartache.'
Judge Paul Dugdale said 'It's an extremely unusual and very sad case.<<
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5235203/Ma...
And I can't find the link now, but I have also read that either the judge or the coroner stated that this case was "wholly exceptional".
I also think it's a shame that the family couldn't accept her written apology, which to me seems genuine and heartfelt. http://metro.co.uk/2018/01/04/woman-95-spared-jail...
She's pleaded guilty to save the family further heartache, it seems, but there still doesn't appear to be any evidence that her driving was willfully dangerous. If there was evidence that she was dangerously unfit, would that have not become apparent when the sentencing was addressed?
At the moment I think you're on the side of the lynch mob simply 'Because 95', but without any further evidence.
Some years ago here on PH there was a lengthy thread about an accident in which two children had been killed (as pedestrians) as a result of a collision between two vehicles at a busy junction. One car had passed a red light, but that driver had subsequently died through causes unrelated and so never appeared in court. The other driver was a lady who, it was accepted, had ran an amber stop light at about the speed limit whilst involved in a hands-free phone conversation.
The lady did not go to prison, and that was felt by many to be the right decision because "it was an accident". I argued strongly that the consequences of running a stop light whilst driving too fast for the conditions and being engaged in a phone conversation were neither unforeseeable nor unpredictable and therefore not accidental, but I didn't have too much support.
Younger drivers, even when speeding and stop lights and possibly a bit more are involved, seem to get more sympathy then elderly drivers, even when there was no wrong doing beyond the mistake that caused the crash.
The Surveyor said:
Andehh said:
Everyone debating punishing her, does need to remember she was an innocent old lady who just killed someone. She needs to now live with that & know the shame it brings on her, her family and her entire 'social' life. Her punishment will be severe & the strain of it will likely kill her earlier.
Brilliant, you should have been Harold Shipmans barrister with an argument like that.The judge said it was a low level case which we can reasonably interpret as being the low category of the sentencing guidelines.
That takes it within the scope of the sentence given.
Without knowing the full details no one can say the sentence was too lenient (in terms of matching the offence with the sentence) and the same circumstances for someone younger would attract the same sentence.
That takes it within the scope of the sentence given.
Without knowing the full details no one can say the sentence was too lenient (in terms of matching the offence with the sentence) and the same circumstances for someone younger would attract the same sentence.
Andehh said:
Everyone debating punishing her, does need to remember she was an innocent old lady who just killed someone. She needs to now live with that & know the shame it brings on her, her family and her entire 'social' life. Her punishment will be severe & the strain of it will likely kill her earlier.
Indeed. Depending on the nature of the individual, that 'internal punishment' could be very severe indeed, without the imposition of any external sanctions whatsoever. On the other hand the guilty party might show little or no remorse, in which case I expect the courts would take account of this when deciding what sanction to apply.I don't really get why people go to prison over an accident full stop.
A friend is serving two years over the death of a motorcyclist.
Thick thick fog on a dual carriageway. Friend pulls into a lane and so does motorbike.
Neither driver deemed totally not at fault.
Motorcyclist family appeals for the prison sentence to be dropped.
Nope 2 years.
What's the bloody point?
Someone driving recklessly on purpose fair game.
A friend is serving two years over the death of a motorcyclist.
Thick thick fog on a dual carriageway. Friend pulls into a lane and so does motorbike.
Neither driver deemed totally not at fault.
Motorcyclist family appeals for the prison sentence to be dropped.
Nope 2 years.
What's the bloody point?
Someone driving recklessly on purpose fair game.
The Surveyor said:
We all know as you get old, there are things you can no longer do, and things which become more difficult. Eye-sight and reactions times diminish
"We" all know that and most nonagenarians probably do too, but do they admit it? My mother got her driving licence during WWII, so never had to take a test.
We could see her standard of driving slipping, and in 2010 at the age of 88 managed to talk her into selling her car. Cost was the main motivator (she liked to be frugal) - she paid £520 for insurance, but barely did 500 miles a year!
So she used a local cab company for a few years, until I was able to take early retirement and took over cab duties!
She is now 95 and I'm so pleased she doesn't drive any more, but not everyone has family to guide them.
As tragic as this case is, how exactly would society benefit from putting a 95 year old in prison when the offender has already committed to not being a repeat offender by surrendering their licence?
captainaverage said:
People want a 95 year old in prison for an accident 
wow
I think it's a case of the OP wants a very binary sentencing system, personally I'm grateful that we have judges that see humanity in the cases that come before them. If you read more about the case it's clear this was exceptional, it was a short few seconds of confusion that the old dear suffered and sadly a family are suffering greatly for it. Literally shot round a truck, over the kerb and down a bank into the victim. wowHow on earth one can think that's a binary 'lock em up as with any other death by dangerous driver' scenario, I am not sure, and thankfully for this world most others agree. I can't understand why he doesn't 'get it' to be honest but it is a personality trait I've seen often, typically associated with the autistic spectrum, so let's not get all upset about it. Some just don't see the world in the same way.
It's always an emotive topic, so many 'innocent' car accidents happen daily due to human nature with trivial consequence, sometimes freak events make it fatal and a judge needs to look at all angles of it and make a difficult decision, in this case it was dealt with correctly in my opinion.
Condolences to the family of the deceased, of course they'll feel robbed - they were - but I would expect they were more heartbroken at their loss than a 95yr old walking 'free'. If not then hopefully as they work through the difficult stages of grieving they will come to terms with it for what it is, and get past that.
It's difficult with elderly drivers - I've dealt with this twice in my family and both times the keys were hung up later than should have, and the authorities have some blame here as they don't give the right support until often it's too late (like this). I've had a chat with a traffic cop on this and he had the same frustrations, not enough power to do something about it quickly, even with family asking for assistance.
Better evaluation is needed to solve the problem, I doubt society will fix the issue before the automated car does.
captainaverage said:
People want a 95 year old in prison for an accident wow
I think it's more a case of she should not have been driving in the first place............ A prison sentence is just firefighting the problem, it doesn't address the root cause, which is allowing those incapable of driving to an acceptable standard to keep on driving. wowsurveyor_101 said:
Nothing is being done to stop them, I am told it would take too many resources to retest them.
My friend's wife was badly injured child was killed by an 87 gent who optician had told him his sight was terrible and to stop driving. His daughter had written to DVLA to try and get them to take her father licence but she was offered no help. Apparently, the DVLA just contacted him and he said he was ok to drive so he carried on until he ploughed through and red light killing my friends 4 year old and injuring his wife.
That guy got the same ok don't drive anymore.
The 83 gives zero cares and remained inconvenienced by the hole court case!
Did you friend beat him to death? Nobody could’ve complained if he had. My friend's wife was badly injured child was killed by an 87 gent who optician had told him his sight was terrible and to stop driving. His daughter had written to DVLA to try and get them to take her father licence but she was offered no help. Apparently, the DVLA just contacted him and he said he was ok to drive so he carried on until he ploughed through and red light killing my friends 4 year old and injuring his wife.
That guy got the same ok don't drive anymore.
The 83 gives zero cares and remained inconvenienced by the hole court case!
Douglas Quaid said:
surveyor_101 said:
Nothing is being done to stop them, I am told it would take too many resources to retest them.
My friend's wife was badly injured child was killed by an 87 gent who optician had told him his sight was terrible and to stop driving. His daughter had written to DVLA to try and get them to take her father licence but she was offered no help. Apparently, the DVLA just contacted him and he said he was ok to drive so he carried on until he ploughed through and red light killing my friends 4 year old and injuring his wife.
That guy got the same ok don't drive anymore.
The 83 gives zero cares and remained inconvenienced by the hole court case!
Did you friend beat him to death? Nobody could’ve complained if he had. My friend's wife was badly injured child was killed by an 87 gent who optician had told him his sight was terrible and to stop driving. His daughter had written to DVLA to try and get them to take her father licence but she was offered no help. Apparently, the DVLA just contacted him and he said he was ok to drive so he carried on until he ploughed through and red light killing my friends 4 year old and injuring his wife.
That guy got the same ok don't drive anymore.
The 83 gives zero cares and remained inconvenienced by the hole court case!
At a loss really.
As a thread resurrection, this case was reported locally and had many similarities with the original one I posted :- http://www.thenorthernecho.co.uk/news/local/northd...
In this instance, the driver also mistook the brake for the accelerator, this 42 year old didn't kill anybody like the original case (thankfully), but did cause life-changing injuries, the driver was impaired due to tiredness due to fasting, was guilty of 2 counts of causing serious injury by dangerous driving and has been jailed for 16 months and has got a 2 year ban.
As a comparable, it highlights to me that the suspended sentence given to the elderly driver who killed that cemetery worker was unreasonably lenient and too much allowance was given to it being a 'sad case' because of her age.
The driver in Newcastle made a very similar error, with less serious consequences, but who is today waking up in prison.
In this instance, the driver also mistook the brake for the accelerator, this 42 year old didn't kill anybody like the original case (thankfully), but did cause life-changing injuries, the driver was impaired due to tiredness due to fasting, was guilty of 2 counts of causing serious injury by dangerous driving and has been jailed for 16 months and has got a 2 year ban.
As a comparable, it highlights to me that the suspended sentence given to the elderly driver who killed that cemetery worker was unreasonably lenient and too much allowance was given to it being a 'sad case' because of her age.
The driver in Newcastle made a very similar error, with less serious consequences, but who is today waking up in prison.
The Surveyor said:
As a thread resurrection, this case was reported locally and had many similarities with the original one I posted :- http://www.thenorthernecho.co.uk/news/local/northd...
In this instance, the driver also mistook the brake for the accelerator, this 42 year old didn't kill anybody like the original case (thankfully), but did cause life-changing injuries, the driver was impaired due to tiredness due to fasting, was guilty of 2 counts of causing serious injury by dangerous driving and has been jailed for 16 months and has got a 2 year ban.
As a comparable, it highlights to me that the suspended sentence given to the elderly driver who killed that cemetery worker was unreasonably lenient and too much allowance was given to it being a 'sad case' because of her age.
The driver in Newcastle made a very similar error, with less serious consequences, but who is today waking up in prison.
"Woman tired from fasting at Ramadan jailed after driving car into Newcastle Eid worshippers"In this instance, the driver also mistook the brake for the accelerator, this 42 year old didn't kill anybody like the original case (thankfully), but did cause life-changing injuries, the driver was impaired due to tiredness due to fasting, was guilty of 2 counts of causing serious injury by dangerous driving and has been jailed for 16 months and has got a 2 year ban.
As a comparable, it highlights to me that the suspended sentence given to the elderly driver who killed that cemetery worker was unreasonably lenient and too much allowance was given to it being a 'sad case' because of her age.
The driver in Newcastle made a very similar error, with less serious consequences, but who is today waking up in prison.
Whats the name of that song by Alanis Morisette?
The Surveyor said:
As a thread resurrection, this case was reported locally and had many similarities with the original one I posted :- http://www.thenorthernecho.co.uk/news/local/northd...
In this instance, the driver also mistook the brake for the accelerator, this 42 year old didn't kill anybody like the original case (thankfully), but did cause life-changing injuries, the driver was impaired due to tiredness due to fasting, was guilty of 2 counts of causing serious injury by dangerous driving and has been jailed for 16 months and has got a 2 year ban.
As a comparable, it highlights to me that the suspended sentence given to the elderly driver who killed that cemetery worker was unreasonably lenient and too much allowance was given to it being a 'sad case' because of her age.
The driver in Newcastle made a very similar error, with less serious consequences, but who is today waking up in prison.
I don't see them as analogous.In this instance, the driver also mistook the brake for the accelerator, this 42 year old didn't kill anybody like the original case (thankfully), but did cause life-changing injuries, the driver was impaired due to tiredness due to fasting, was guilty of 2 counts of causing serious injury by dangerous driving and has been jailed for 16 months and has got a 2 year ban.
As a comparable, it highlights to me that the suspended sentence given to the elderly driver who killed that cemetery worker was unreasonably lenient and too much allowance was given to it being a 'sad case' because of her age.
The driver in Newcastle made a very similar error, with less serious consequences, but who is today waking up in prison.
Sleep driving is more like drunk driving.
She also purposely mounted the kerb onto the grass where people were & did it in to a crowd, so there was always likely to be somebody in her path (in fact seven were) & lucky she didn't hit more, as opposed to somebody who wasn't trying to mount the kerb towards pedestrians & was unlucky to hit the single worker down a bank.
We also don't know if there was anything else different about this person relevant for sentencing (ie previous offending etc).
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff