Is this sentence enough?

nickEnackEnoo said:
Same here. Some TP members make my blood boil.
Click to expand...
Reaĺly - why? I do not see any 'defending' going on at all.

In any case it is up to the individual to choose their own perception. Nobody on this board was witness to what went on.
 
nilagin said:
Ok the girls are paralysed and their future lives will be changed, but it was not the LR driver's intention to hurt the girls so it was not a wilful act as someone else has already stated. If it is true that he was chasing someone as a result of road rage, adrenaline kicks in and the majority of people do stupid things as a result.

There was a few years ago who was driving a van transporting his race car on a trailer, exiting a roundabout he hit and killed a cyclist, it was proved from phone records that the driver was on his phone at the time. He got a 2 year custodial sentence and was out after 18 months.

Neither act was a malicious or wilful act to cause harm to the victims, they were just both unfortunate outcomes, so in answer to the original question, yes the sentence is enough.
Click to expand...

So if you break the law while driving its all right,theses laws were put into place because breaking them can and does cause death,to me the way that guy was driving was a malicious and wilful act, as simple as that,,its about time people like you and some other drivers grew up,and took responsibility for your action behind a wheel.

:mad:(n)
 
When you see the vid, it's clear that the actions were that of a man devoid of any care whatsoever of his actions whatever the outcome.
The sentence will have gone by the table of penalties available to the magistrate but if he'd embezzled a few quid from the state or employer he'd prob' have gotten a larger sentence.
That's what it seems like, kill, maim or affect physcologically...tough if yer a victim, take money to feed yer family (if you've been upstanding and in a position of trust say) then you can expect a larger book thrown at you than if you'd wasted a families life.
 
tom24 said:
When you see the vid, it's clear that the actions were that of a man devoid of any care whatsoever of his actions whatever the outcome.
The sentence will have gone by the table of penalties available to the magistrate but if he'd embezzled a few quid from the state or employer he'd prob' have gotten a larger sentence.
That's what it seems like, kill, maim or affect physcologically...tough if yer a victim, take money to feed yer family (if you've been upstanding and in a position of trust say) then you can expect a larger book thrown at you than if you'd wasted a families life.
Click to expand...
Was a Judge that covered the case, a Magistrate does not sit in a 'Crown Court' and is limited on cases and sentencing powers. The case may have been presented to a Magistrate who will then be advised by the court clerk of it's serious nature and the elevation to a higher court is mandatory.

Try BLIND RAGE rather than devoid of care. At the time he turned into the oncoming car he was away with his own demons.
 
Aye, Sheriff to judge up here, wasn't sure of the titles down south but and rta offences are the same statute.
Just a horrific incident but made the more horrendous by the dash cam vid.
I really do think that serious injury and death caused by the reckless or dangerous actions by a driver should be given a more severe sentence, def' custody and a life ban at least.
 
tom24 said:
Aye, Sheriff to judge up here, wasn't sure of the titles down south but and rta offences are the same statute.
Just a horrific incident but made the more horrendous by the dash cam vid.
I really do think that serious injury and death caused by the reckless or dangerous actions by a driver should be given a more severe sentence, def' custody and a life ban at least.
Click to expand...
I did 3 years as a magistrate and, frankly, it was a machine to move offenders through the system as rapidly as possible. Was interesting to see a circuit judge cover a magistrate court, wholly different world - offenders were shocked at getting prison time.

On topic, hardly a day goes by when these 'road rage' cases appear before the Crown Court. This one stands out because of the injured children and the very clear dashcam evidence.

My issue is that the heightened emotion of 2 young sisters who are 'paralysed'. I have a friend who has a bed ridden son of 25 who is paraplegic after a car pulled out of a side road straight into him. Another tragedy. All emotive in their own right. The papers could fill their pages with very emotive cases which grab attention until the next hard told story arrives. Life can be unfair and there are bad people all around - there always have been. Oun justice syds is not perfect but the 'kill them all, let God judge them" seems to be the level that some want to see. I defy anybody who drives to, hand on heart, say they have never bent a regulation, broke the law, got angry..... This guy totally lost the plot and will have to face himself every day for the rest of his life. The imprisonment will continue after he is released, inside his head, his home and the extended driving tedt when his driving ban is spent.

As said in one of my earlier posts, if people want the law changed, then get it changed. If all goes through, I hope the extra taxes to pay for the enraged drivers incarceration is acceptable. By then, perhaps the righteous will be throwing the convicted off tall buildings.....

I undersyand that the person who never makes a mistake has yet to be born.
 
The video footage has def' brought the tragedy to the fore Steve and as you say, it occurs day in, day out.
My beef is that such recklessness, not carelessness appears to be a lesser 'crime' when it involves vehicles somehow.
 
tom24 said:
The video footage has def' brought the tragedy to the fore Steve and as you say, it occurs day in, day out.
My beef is that such recklessness, not carelessness appears to be a lesser 'crime' when it involves vehicles somehow.
Click to expand...
Tom

You may fall into semantics. The major factor in detailing the charges and the. prosecution focus on case preparation is the outcome of the actual event.

In this case the 2 girls have suffered 'avoidable' life changing injuries. The 'expectations' of the parents for their children could never be detailed. Te case is on the here and now with, in injury cases, a medical report detailing expected treatments. The rest is hopes, wants and desires.

It's not a perfect world by any stretch of the imagination. It's as good as it can be, today.
 
Hugh Jarse said:
I did 3 years as a magistrate and, frankly, it was a machine to move offenders through the system as rapidly as possible. Was interesting to see a circuit judge cover a magistrate court, wholly different world - offenders were shocked at getting prison time.

On topic, hardly a day goes by when these 'road rage' cases appear before the Crown Court. This one stands out because of the injured children and the very clear dashcam evidence.

My issue is that the heightened emotion of 2 young sisters who are 'paralysed'. I have a friend who has a bed ridden son of 25 who is paraplegic after a car pulled out of a side road straight into him. Another tragedy. All emotive in their own right. The papers could fill their pages with very emotive cases which grab attention until the next hard told story arrives. Life can be unfair and there are bad people all around - there always have been. Oun justice syds is not perfect but the 'kill them all, let God judge them" seems to be the level that some want to see. I defy anybody who drives to, hand on heart, say they have never bent a regulation, broke the law, got angry..... This guy totally lost the plot and will have to face himself every day for the rest of his life. The imprisonment will continue after he is released, inside his head, his home and the extended driving tedt when his driving ban is spent.

As said in one of my earlier posts, if people want the law changed, then get it changed. If all goes through, I hope the extra taxes to pay for the enraged drivers incarceration is acceptable. By then, perhaps the righteous will be throwing the convicted off tall buildings.....

I undersyand that the person who never makes a mistake has yet to be born.
Click to expand...

The same old argument,because every driver has done stupid things its ok,No take responsibility for your driving,and those who wont of the road simple,as for the cost of putting behind bars,what about the cost to everyone by bad driving,Police time, ambulance crews fire crews,hospital time,court time,plus in this case looking after both girls for the rest of their life,car insurance costs going up because of bad driving :(
 
simonblue said:
The same old argument,because every driver has done stupid things its ok,No take responsibility for your driving,and those who wont of the road simple,as for the cost of putting behind bars,what about the cost to everyone by bad driving,Police time, ambulance crews fire crews,hospital time,court time,plus in this case looking after both girls for the rest of their life,car insurance costs going up because of bad driving :(
Click to expand...
Not a 'same old argument'. I have not met anyone who says they never make a mistake while driving or never got annoed....

So given your stance of 'take responsibility'.... Anyone who gets into s car is de facto taking respomsibility. The mark of the person is how they behave after something happens. In an ideal world there would not be road rage, speeding, driving unsafe vehicles, people pi$$ed up driving, not wearing their seat belts, everyone would be courteos to each other, tlHGV drivers would not fribe over old people, 78 year olds clinically blind drivers would not crash into bridges, Costa coffee shops...... and and and.

What paradigm solution. do you seek? A lobotomy after a driving test? Perhaps Google will solve the whole thing?
 
Hugh Jarse said:
Well then your interpretation is not one that the CPS had in mind to use. The definition of negligence is the descriptor, it is not the legal translation into determination of the act itself.

As for the hope that the convicted person should suffer civil action etc... best of luck as you are now drifting into 'double jeopardy'. What next - Weekly flogging in the town centre AFTER he has served his sentence? For the full wrathful punishment, why not place him in a gibbet and hang the whole contraption near his victims' home so they can watch him die slowly and his bones bleach.... a little too 17th Century perhaps? Do you want justice and redemption or just revenge?
Click to expand...

As for the hope? best of luck? INDEED it would seem these are the basis the CPS operate on IT and its agents.

Me, I have lost all hope in seeing JUSTICE here and I am not alone when I find myself wholly unsatisfied at the performance of the CPS and the mechanism of applying the diluted puny laws in this country.

As for YOUR suggestions of going back to the 17th century no need really stay in this one for ideas! Although the suggestion of what I want is irreverent, and more of a personal attack on my hopes for civil action against the man the CPS could not punish properly.

In conclusion then the CPS and the Laws of this land, and it appears its agents " Hands are tied " seem to be the impotent element in the process, the weakest link if you will melud.

I will be in the shed for next few days building some stocks for the village Know where I can get some wrought iron shackles from? I do like AUTHENTIC JUSTICE! lol
 
Hugh Jarse said:
Not a 'same old argument'. I have not met anyone who says they never make a mistake while driving or never got annoed....

So given your stance of 'take responsibility'.... Anyone who gets into s car is de facto taking respomsibility. The mark of the person is how they behave after something happens. In an ideal world there would not be road rage, speeding, driving unsafe vehicles, people pi$$ed up driving, not wearing their seat belts, everyone would be courteos to each other, tlHGV drivers would not fribe over old people, 78 year olds clinically blind drivers would not crash into bridges, Costa coffee shops...... and and and.

What paradigm solution. do you seek? A lobotomy after a driving test? Perhaps Google will solve the whole thing?
Click to expand...

Another case, woman driving home from her mothers,hit an child and kill it,£90 fine 4 points on her license,at the coroner inquest,it was found she had made 7 phone calls on her mobile phone,in which the police and coroner said had been a factor in the accident,their found that the phone calls she had made had been delete of her phone.
Her repose "i dont how the phone calls got deletes" and "me being on the phone in no way was an factor in the accident"

So thats taking responsibility for her actions :(,same old its not my fault :mad:
 
simonblue said:
Another case, woman driving home from her mothers,hit an child and kill it,£90 fine 4 points on her license,at the coroner inquest,it was found she had made 7 phone calls on her mobile phone,in which the police and coroner said had been a factor in the accident,their found that the phone calls she had made had been delete of her phone.
Her repose "i dont how the phone calls got deletes" and "me being on the phone in no way was an factor in the accident"

So thats taking responsibility for her actions :(,same old its not my fault :mad:
Click to expand...

So perverting the course of justice as well then. I hope they charged her with that too !
 
simonblue said:
So if you break the law while driving its all right,theses laws were put into place because breaking them can and does cause death,to me the way that guy was driving was a malicious and wilful act, as simple as that,,its about time people like you and some other drivers grew up,and took responsibility for your action behind a wheel.

:mad:(n)
Click to expand...
Where did I say it was alright? It can only be a wilful and malicious act if it was his intention to hurt the girls, as that wasn't his intention, it isn't.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top