[Closed] 1 life= 6 months

well, three months then.

Was this the guy working his laptop as he was 'driving' ?

OK what about this hypothetical scenario - the three people killed were all in the same car, which was being driven erratically and all the occpants were over the legal limit of alcohol. The accident happened primarily because the car pulled out infront of the lorry, but the lorry driver admits that he was travelling above the speed limit, say 40 mph in a 30mph zone.

So the root cause of the accident was the stupidity of the car driver, but the lorry driver's actions contributed, in some way, to the three deaths. You can't say with any degree of certainty whether a) if the lorry had been going at 30mph, the accident would not have happened, or b) if the lorry had been going slower, the three occupants would not have been killed.

So you need to punish the lorry driver in some way.

Isn't being a murderer a pre-requisite of being a lorry driver? They all pick up hitch-hikers/prossies and dump their dismembered corpses behind the Travelodge at Scotch Corner services, don't they?

a) crash speed was said to have been 31mph.

The max sentance for death by careless driving is far too lenient imho.

But the crux of this is the difference between Careless/Dangerous driving.

Heart goes out to the family.

Terrible tragedy.

With regard the detail, had the family's car hit the Volvo in front before the lorry driver hit the family's car as the defence claimed? Also, couldn't they have been able to tell from the laptop if it had been switched on?

6 months more than my friends life was worth

[url= http://www.readingcyclingclub.com/node/321 ]click[/url]

geetee1972 - I get that things aren't always clear cut, but from the reports this was a staionary queue of traffic into which said driver ploughed without even touching the brakes. It's clear cut that he just wasn't watching the road, the road was straight and the traffic ahead was visible, it's indefensible, 18months (actual serve time) is a disgrace ....

I'm torn on this sort of thing though, because while I agree it seems a very lenient sentence for the loss of life, the bloke didnt intend to do it, nor will punishing him for longer make the event any more punishment than knowing he's killed people for his own stupidity. Ultimately some of the sentence has to come down to "revenge" for the victims family but I'm not sure how helpful such punishments are in these situations.

It's disgraceful he will serve 18 months for killing a family of 6... so gob smacked I can't say anything else!!

Its not so long ago that there were rarely jail sentences for this sort of thing - as no jury would convict on manslaughter. Now we have the offence of "causing death by dangerous / careless driving" convictions are easier to obtain and jail sentences are happening.

What good does a longer sentence do? 3 yrs is enough for deterrent and I am not at all sure of the deterrent value of jail sentences for motoring offences anyway. Punishment - getting locked up for 3 yrs ( or 18months) is a serious punishment. He will have lost his job and the ability to do that job again, will be virtually uninsurable. Probably lose his home as well. Retribution? any eye for an eye?

I am not defending the truckers actions nor defending the sentence - merely asking questions.

Yeah Toby I agree with your anger in that scenario. I hadn't seen the news story so I wasn't sure of the specifics. If he or she had been using a mobile phone for example....

A family of six in one car? Was it a people carrier/ 7 seater?

Yes, Bob. But it might as well have been a Sherman tank to get sandwiched between two fully loaded trucks when one is sitting with the brakes on and the other one tools in behind and never hits the brakes.

I think the moral of the story is be careful out there people, even when stationary in traffic and if it's a truck in frint then leave a massive distance between you and them!

Stupidity and carelessness are not really the hallmarks of rational criminals. It is impossible to deter people from screwing up. Additional prison time is unlikely to make the guy feel significantly worse about his life.

The roads of this country are the only place you can literally get away with murder. A ****ing travesty. 3yrs. Thats all this poor innocent family are worth.

God bless all of them. The only saving grace is that when this stupid arsed Spanish **** crushed them all to death they probably died instantly.

Of course this thread has the usual attention grabbing twunts out of the woodwork defending the indefensible because it gets them a voice.

Its not murder if there is no intent.

Note I very carefully said "I am not defending the truckers actions nor defending the sentence - merely asking questions"

Fond of the Spanish are we Takisawa? Is it the Spanish specifically you hate or just foreigners in general?

Ummm, the lorry driver is Portugese...

And, 'it was one episode and the prison sentences must be concurrent' (said the sentencing judge). So: did he in fact get eighteen years?

At least let's get the facts right and not make it a racist rant: how would it be different if it were a lorry driver of any other nationality?

It's a terrible thing to have happened and I would be devastated if it were people I knew, but I agree with the above posts that the driver is in plenty of trouble already and that longer sentences will not be a deterrent to screwing up.

Don't know how to odds it really. It's a tragedy all round. Awful.

Concurrent means at the same time, consecutive would mean 18yrs

The maximum sentence for this is only 5 years!!!

Driving down A14 this morning passed a truckdriver buttering bread whilst driving .....obviously doesn't watch the news....I'm from N Wales and actually worked with the lass who was killed for a short time

I wondered whats the correct thing to do in this situation...didn't seem to warrant a 999 call....but suppose it could have caused a similar accident!...what would people here have done?

It's an absolute tragedy. However despite the sentence and any potential "deterent" it will happen again. As whytetrash witnessed you can't legislate against idiocy. How many people do you see using mobile phones, either talking or texting, whilst either manouvering round town or caning it down the motorway. As TJ says, what's the point of the driver receiving a longer punishment? He didn't intend to kill them. He is guilty of gross stupidity and arrogance. If he had received 50 years, do you really think that "white-van-man" or "school-run-4x4-mom" will either ignore their phone if it rings or not just make that quick call to let someone know they are running a micro-second late.

If someone *is* found guilty of causing death by dangerous / careless driving then the first thing I would do is ban them for life from any form of driving. Maybe a few life bans would help focus the minds a little more.

Shooting is the only deterrent...

The only solice would be if said Truckdriver was accosted in the showers every morning.

I for once agree with TJ (****) you can't do anything against people screwing up. Everyday when I was commuting in southampton I was seeing people playing with their phones, eating, reading the newspaper fafing around with the cigarettes or getting make up on. All of them new it wasn't probably the most sensible things to do. And it probably happened to me, as I am a fan a a nice and good thermos of tea for motorway trip. Save TJ (he doesn't own a driving licence) it probably happen to all of us even on the bike (who NEVER ran a traffic light or jumped on the kerb).
I fail to see how jail can make a difference, unless obviously you are thinking revenge rather than justice.
takisawa2 all my eldest in my family are spanish, how am I supposed to consider your post?

Thanks, TJ, but I do know the difference betweem concurrent and consecutive! What I mant was did he actually get 3 years for each person who died, thus making six times three years equals eighteen years running concurrently?

The guy apparently had an excellent driving record and this was a lapse, according to the judge in the summing up.

Yes, he should be punished for being careless, yes, it's a tragedy for the family, but a huge prison sentence wouldn't do any good for anyone involved.

Any of us can have a lapse and make a mistake in a vehicle - how many of us have had to drive with kids playing up in the back?

And, let's be honest, if that poor family hadn't been in the wrong place at the wrong time and he had hit a lonely rep in a Mondeo, none of us would have heard about it, as the press wouldn't have whipped it into a frenzy

And, let's be honest, if that poor family hadn't been in the wrong place at the wrong time and he had hit a lonely rep in a Mondeo, none of us would have heard about it, as the press wouldn't have whipped it into a frenzy

That is soooo true

Did anyone else read anagallis_arvensis's link?

I'm almost in tears at that story. Absolutely unbelievable.

A_A - may join you on the sportive, I'm no roadie, but it'll be good "training" and for a worthy cause.

The guy apparently had an excellent driving record

how about this one then:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article5732449.ece

all over our local news. the vast majority of the coverage is around how tragic the deaths of the lads was. now FAR BE IT FROM ME TO JUDGE before there has been a full investigation but statistics and common sense say that a car full of teenage lads at 11pm is more likely to have caused the accident than 2 pensioners. if the 4 lads had lived and the pensioners had died, the news coverage would be completely different and would centre on how dangerous teenage drivers are etc. It really gets my goat, death is always a tragedy and yet time and time again we see 'he was a lovely lad, dead helpful' when their irresponsible actions have caused mayhem and tragedy. families shouldn't be allowed to put big stacks of flowers next to the road where boy racers have piled into a tree (all too common round here), they should put pictures of mangled and burnt bodies pulled from car accidents.

MrMW

Similar one near us last year - a couple of lads and the other driver killed on the A52 beween Derby and Ashbourne. Two days of tragic tributes in the local press, two weeks later lots of low key stories about Police cracking down on chav racing/cruising in the area.

In defence of Chavs....I rack up a fair few miles and some of the crappest driving I see is from very old people....they seem to come to the coast in North Wales to retire/die....followed one the other week who was literally all over the road....she was quite happily driving through some red lights until I hit the horn!...also had a pensioner drive across a zebra crossing whilst I was on it with my 2 kids, and they also seem to go up motorways the wrong way on a frequent basis!

Off to polish my Saxo VTR now!

that may be true but the accidents they cause tend to be more 'steam roller running over henchman in austin powers' than 'need for speed 2'

should be strong enforcement of existing laws re using mobile / failing to take due care while driving. unfortunate that the lapse in this case resulted in death. i think sentence should have been higher, as a deterrent.

The stats also suggest that teenagers cause an awful lot more crashes (and resulting deaths) than pensioners. Though round here I see more than my fair share of rubbish driving by old people, most of it isn't all that dangerous.

in my experience, pensioners consider themselves safe drivers, what they mean by this is that they 'feel' safe themselves and do not necessarily take other peoples safety into consideration. for instance, the '40 mph club'

'we are safe because we don't go fast' but 40mph is not an appropriate speed to do in a 30mph limit, or when entering a motorway, or past schools

pensioners always seem to drive the closest when passing me on my road bike, all be it slowly

Thats all this poor innocent family are worth.

It so doesn't work like that.