It is the lack of retributive justice in this case that irks.
The discount for early plea is also irksome because it took so long to bring a charge (just over a year).
The CPS generally have to make a charging decision within 24 hours of arrest. Soon after there is a committal hearing where the defendant has the opportunity to make a plea. That seems a more logical case for the application of discounting for an early guilty plea, not when the charge is only agreed many months (or years in this case) after the offence.
The driver could count himself lucky he wasn't remanded whilst the CPS decided what charge to bring. I know that this isn't the process, just making a point that Mr Rennie didn't even get a ban until July this year, so he's had a year's free driving which I'd count as a decent discount in the circumstances.
Driving offences and sentences are definitely worthy of some review as the 'outrage' is far too common.
@iamtheresurection - I had a moment on a conference call earlier where I was bored - so looked up the Ryan Saltern case... https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cornwall-53686401. Not quite your classic death by careless driving case.
It is the lack of retributive justice in this case that irks.
Why do we want retribution though? What is it we are trying to punish? To my mind, retribution is probably better linked to the degree of Culpability behind the actions. Fine is someone makes a conscious decision to do something stupid - punish them hard, but someone who we have to assume was just in zombie-driver mode (like most people are driving the same road time and time again - is there anyone here who has never fallen into that complacency trap?)
The discount for early plea is also irksome because it took so long to bring a charge (just over a year).
I assure you that will 99.9% not be anything to do with the driver. The courts are bursting. The prosecution is bursting. They have been since before covid and they've got worse through huge government budget cuts. He could have walked into a CPS office and said "I beg you to start proceedings against me, in fact if you make it a full dangerous charge I'll plead guilty to that, I just want it over with" and it would almost certainly not have gone any quicker!
The CPS generally have to make a charging decision within 24 hours of arrest.
No they don't! They can't keep you in custody longer than 24 hrs without special justification but they certainly don't have to decide if they are charging you. From the press reports at the time its not clear that the driver was even arrested - he was "helping the police with their enquiries".
Soon after there is a committal hearing where the defendant has the opportunity to make a plea. That seems a more logical case for the application of discounting for an early guilty plea, not when the charge is only agreed many months (or years in this case) after the offence.
.
As far as I can see the history is:
Collision 1st June 2020
Charged (by post) 15th July 2021
The charge required the accused to appear at magistrates court on 20th August 2021
There the accused was "committed" to appear on the 14th October 2021
Formally pleads guilty on October 14th 2021, sentence deferred for reports
Sentenced at Crown Court on 12th November.
I'm not an expert in the English system but I don't think there's an expectation that the accused pleads (and may not even be able to plead?) at the first hearing in a magistrates court if the case is going to the Crown Court.
Reading between the lines of the Judge's comments - in the first police interview (presumably a few hours after the collision) the accused gave a "no comment" interview. Its his right to do so, and late at night after an event anyone would find traumatic (or perhaps early the next morning after probably little sleep) I'm not sure you'd find many defence lawyers suggesting you do anything else. Once you've calmed down had a chance to discuss properly with the solicitor then you can give a full response. The judge implies that he did that fairly soon afterwards - that could be the next day or it may be a few days later. There's no suggestion it was months or a year later (it would be rather odd if it was as his statement probably helps the police if they haven't got enough to proceed by then).
The driver could count himself lucky he wasn’t remanded whilst the CPS decided what charge to bring. I know that this isn’t the process, just making a point that Mr Rennie didn’t even get a ban until July this year, so he’s had a year’s free driving which I’d count as a decent discount in the circumstances.
Your point is ridiculous though. Not least because CPS can't remand you whilst they fanny around deciding what charge to bring. They can charge you and bail you, charge you and bring to court for the magistrates to decide if you get remanded or they can charge you by post as they did in this case. The idea that someone is held in custody for months whilst the CPS get their act together is abhorent - and keep in mind that plenty of people would end up in that boat who would never end up charged with an offence that might result in custody.
But the judge doesn't get to make up his mind on arbitrary factors about discounts like "well he's not been banned in the meantime (whilst the CPS couldn't even decide if there was an offence committed!)", he has to follow the guidelines, and that's important because when he says to his solicitor "look I can't explain what happened, I see why that means they are prosecuting for careless driving, what are the chances the jury let me off? any what sentence am I likely to get" the solicitor has to be able to have a realistic way to guide the client. Otherwise, he'd be saying - "look the odds of you getting off are not great, but the sentence probably won't be that much worse so you might as well roll the dice".
It is easy to argue about being tougher when it's only guilty people that are under consideration - but consider the situation of the "second driver" in the Saltern case above. He's hit someone who was already lying in the road. The person dies. He's stopped at the scene so now the police have a suspect for a Death by Careless Driving Case. Does he get locked up for months whilst the case is investigated and the facts established?
Poly, I wasn't advocating remand and it would be 'abhorrent' if I was. My response was deliberately obtuse and flippant, apologies. It's a frustration with a terrible loss of life on a road I've cycled along and disappointment that we continue to see similar catastrophes and similar reactions to sentences. In case you couldn't tell, I feel the driver got off lightly, even though I fully acknowledge that the appropriate legal process has been followed.
And just for the record, quite satisfied that the judge did his job.
But it is ridiculous and abhorrent to the accused and those impacted that the CPS have taken more than a year to bring a charge when so many other serious criminal cases see charges bought within 24 hours of arrest, with significantly more serious consequences to boot.
'Better' offences would mean the CPS could charge more quickly and consistently and better reflect the consequences.
The fact that the families are acknowledged to be uneasy with the sentence shows that the retributive aspect of the sentence is flawed, even if the guidelines have been followed. We see similar reactions in similar cases, with pedestrian and cyclist fatalities most commonly generating a 'life's too cheap' sentiment. That's not just on cycling forums btw 😉
This suggests the law isn't meeting a societal need. The offences are more than 20 years old, and with driver aids and autonomous driving coming along, it's probably well worth the Law Commission taking a look soon.
The crux is whether convictions / sentencing should be based on lapses in judgement or the outcomes of those lapses. Punishing on the lapses alone is causing the disquiet. I can absolutely see why that is, and I don't think you need to be an authoritarian to feel uncomfortable.
As for the second driver in Saltern, I don't really see the issue. As I said at the top, I really wasn't advocating locking people up until charges are decided. However, the second driver could well have been charged within 24 hours (before the existence of the first driver was known about). But those charges would have been dropped when the facts came to light. That's pretty standard as I'm sure you are aware, and happens in cases of remand offences too sadly.
The Ryan Saltern case was debated -
https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2021-11-15/debates/2F33B858-4F79-42CA-9544-790886B089C1/RoadTrafficOffencesFatalCollisions
‘Better’ offences would mean the CPS could charge more quickly and consistently and better reflect the consequences.
Not really, the CPS decision will be based on the material in the case file prepared by the police, an incident such as this is going to require a lot of time consuming investigation and forensic analysis, probably by a very poorly resourced traffic unit. The idea of a 24 hour turnaround is ridiculous unless CPS are just going to start firing out holding charges which would/ could be an abuse of process or human rights; charging someone without carrying out a full or proper investigation and therefore the state not being able to clearly articulate the reasoning.
Sometimes “ serious criminal cases” are “quite easy” and 24hrs is doable (or 36 after an extension), man with a bag of drugs, a gun, or a dead body job done. Multi faceted investigations with a number of different charges, necessary forensics, all in a creaking system etc less so.
