Why aren’t more death by dangerous driving sentences like this?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cgl2klz0gw9o

Goes some way to reflecting the awfulness of the crime. It seems sufficiently unusual that I find myself wondering if it’s only because the deceased was the daughter of someone with a bit of clout. Thoughts?

Guidelines are here

Causing death by dangerous driving

Probably culpability a (speed significantly in excess), possibly b

Plus a couple of aggravating conditions (previous speeding conviction, victim was vulnerable, blame placed on others),

No mitigating factors at all

Looks like 10 years was fairly light

Every collision is different, the sentence will vary according to the circumstances. In this case, the driver was clearly at fault but tried to blame the victims. That would not have helped his cause.

Also, every judge and jury is different and will make different judgements when faced with the same facts. We use humans to make those judgments because circumstances are complex and require judgements about degrees of culpability. If you have humans making judgements, you will get varying degrees of severity for seemingly similar circumstances.

Should have been longer given his earlier conviction for speeding. So did not learn the lesson and continued on with the same behaviour. Keep in mind it isnt murder, so he’ll do a lot less than that.

Unfortunate to have been exposed to the legal system in a RTC case, the CPS were excellent at explaining to family why certain decisions are made.

It’s extremely difficult to get a conviction of dangerous driving. The ‘beyond reasonable doubt’ and ‘persistent’ driving below the required standard meaning there needs to be evidence or witnesses would make statements and are reliably going to turn up to court, of poor driving well before the incident happened. Also they will consider charges that can go before a magistrate judge as well as Crown court in front of jury. (juries are quite poor when deciding on things like mobile phone use).

Once you’ve got a conviction, sentencing is pretty separate. As above, there are clear guidelines with aggravating and mitigating circumstances clearly stated. This is when victim statements are taken into account, as well as previous convictions can be disclosed and considered, and the demeanor of the convicted (their plea, did they help police or just ‘no comment’ their way through interviews, did they appear remorseful in court, etc). So the sentence is pretty tightly controlled.

It isn’t posted yet, however, have a look on https://www.judiciary.uk/judgments/ (set the “subject” to Central Criminal Court – Old Bailey)

Prison time aside, I’ve no idea why he’s ever allowed to drive again.

Killing someone with a car has a much shorter sentence than killing someone by ‘other methods’ – so if you want to get away with murder, or serious injury, use a car.

This sentence is a bit of a one off, it’s usually a slapped wrist or equivalent.

Apologies for my view, but having been on the end of a few ‘bad drivers’, one nearly leaving me paralysed, and not even a driving course as ‘punishment’, I’ll excuse my views.

Killing someone with a car has a much shorter sentence than killing someone by ‘other methods’ – so if you want to get away with murder, or serious injury, use a car.

If you deliberately plan to kill someone with a car it would be premeditated murder and you would expect to be charged as such. Driving carelessly or dangerously and killing someone unintentionally is not premeditated, hence you are charged with a different crime.

I find myself wondering if it’s only because the deceased was the daughter of someone with a bit of clout. 

So do I..

That said, he got what he deserved..

There was that terrible crash recently that wiped out a family of four & a married couple on a motorbike. The last I heard was that the driver of a grey Porsche had been arrested, then the story got lost in all the noise of the Southport stabbings and rioting.

If the case is charged and a conviction  won, it’ll be interesting to see the sentencing, but yes, generally sentencing does seem very much on the low side. I wonder if it relates to the motonormativity thread we had recently (certainly very little public backlash against dangerous driving considering the death toll).

— Edit —

Chap still on bail by the sound of it – https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cn5rz2yn57ko

I’ve no idea why he’s ever allowed to drive again

They’ve got technology these days.. no insurance permitted without a black box. I wonder why they don’t do this with convicted motorists.

Driving carelessly or dangerously and killing someone unintentionally is not premeditated, hence you are charged with a different crime.

yes but doing more than twice the speed limit is premeditated – it doesn’t “just happen”. You are very deliberately doing something extremely dangerous/risky which you should know full well could result in a death. I don’t see why the charge can’t be manslaughter in the more egregious cases such as this – exactly the same as if someone were to get punched in the heat of the moment, and die as a result.

This guy will be out in 4 years – it’s crazy. I also don’t understand why lifetime driving bans aren’t a thing.

The BBC article alone is full of motonormativity (!) – it took them 45 minutes to decide someone travelling 55mph in a 20 was guilty. ‘It wouldn’t have happened if he had been driving 30’ – in a 20. And that was from the judge..

it took them 45 minutes to decide someone travelling 55mph in a 20 was guilty.

That’s extremely fast for a jury to arrive at a verdict. They have to review the evidence and discuss any differences of opinion, then report back to the judge. 45 minutes means that they all just said, “yes, he’s guilty” without any need for serious discussion.

I find myself wondering if it’s only because the deceased was the daughter of someone with a bit of clout. Thoughts?

I doubt that the Judge gave that even a moment’s consideration.  It might well have been something that passed through the prosecutor’s head if the defence inevitably offered a G to careless driving as an alternative (they may not have).

I don’t see why the charge can’t be manslaughter in the more egregious cases such as this

Quite simply because when that was the normal way to deal with death by driving offences juries rarely convicted, so parliament created specific offences to stop people getting away with death by driving offences.  Proving manslaughter is harder than providing dangerous driving.  Probably wouldn’t have been much difference in total sentence in a manslaughter case anyway?  And because its not dealt with under the road traffic offenders act, judges “forget” their general power to disqualify and so he’d probably not have been banned.

This guy will be out in 4 years – it’s crazy. I also don’t understand why lifetime driving bans aren’t a thing.

Do you believe that people can ever be rehabilitated for any crime?  That they can learn to be less of a dick behind the wheel?  That people can learn that driving like a dick can have very serious consequences?  That your driving manner is exactly the same today as 15 years ago, or will be the same in 15 years time?   He’s 39.  He’s been jailed for 10yrs – you are right he might be out in <5 depending on how full the prisons are, then he’s got a 10y8m driving ban, after which he’ll have to retake his driving test.  So he’ll be 55 when he is allowed to start driving again at the earliest.  Is he more or less likely to rehabilitate into society (getting a job etc) in his mid 50s if he is unable to drive?  as he ages and needs health services etc are you happy for the state to transport him to appointments etc just so he can never drive?

They’ve got technology these days.. no insurance permitted without a black box. I wonder why they don’t do this with convicted motorists.

He may well find that in 15 yrs time if he is seeking insurance that the only way he can get insurance is with some sort of black box.  There is a balance though – if you make it too hard for someone to be insured, that makes it more tempting not to bother at all.

Threads going the way they always do on this subject.

Though for some reason it’s the first time I’ve noticed someone suggest a compulsory black box for motoring offences,  which I think is an excellent idea.

All those people who (wrongly) are allowed to keep their license at 12 points could get one last chance to show they can be responsible.

This is pretty much a gold standard death by dangerous driving case, driving over twice the speed limit, shouting and screaming at the victims afterwards, no discount for pleading guilty, no feeling of guilt and so on, should be more than 10 years.

I can agree with shorter sentences for some people who have a momentary lapse in judgement that costs dearly, but this guy looks and sounds like he’s not lost a moments sleep over this poor woman’s death and the destruction to her loved ones, he’s probably still only caring about himself.

Is he more or less likely to rehabilitate into society (getting a job etc) in his mid 50s if he is unable to drive?  as he ages and needs health services etc are you happy for the state to transport him to appointments etc just so he can never drive?

you have highlighted the exact problem with our car-centric society – (most) people seem to think driving is an absolute god given right and trumps everything else, including safety. To answer your question, yes, I am perfectly happy for offenders to be flung under the bus so to speak and be unable to do certain jobs, drive to appointments, etc. Boo-hoo. You seem to have totally forgotten that someone is dead and multiple peoples lives completely ruined already?

There are no lasting consequences to terrible driving that wrecks lives which IMO is the main reason why it’s completely normalised in society & so many people are happy to do it.

If there were lifetime bans, 3 strikes you’re out for speeding etc, maybe people would actually think more carefully about how they drive.

Crikey. Sentencing for death by dangerous driving is more complex than I’d thought. Reads like the stars aligned for this particular conviction. Heartbreaking for families when (all too often it seems) it doesn’t.

If there were lifetime bans,

Lifetime bans are legally possible right now – they just would need an incredibly compelling reason why someone should never be trusted to drive a car ever again.

To answer your question, yes, I am perfectly happy for offenders to be flung under the bus so to speak and be unable to do certain jobs, drive to appointments, etc. Boo-hoo.

Thats OK – so long as you understand that in our vaguely civilised society its you and me who pick up the tab for sending people to jail, for the fact that people who come out of jail often struggle to find work, for getting less mobile people without their own transport to hospital appointments etc.

You seem to have totally forgotten that someone is dead and multiple peoples lives completely ruined already?

No I haven’t.  But I also have no idea if he has a wife, children etc – and what impact his sentence will have on others.  That doesn’t mean I think he should get away with it but if he can convince a driving examiner in 2040 that he’s fit to drive again I don’t see what it achieved today to prevent that.  He seems like a callous prick, but I’m pretty certain that as he pushed the accelerator down he wasn’t thinking, even subconsciously, that he’d only lose his license for 10 years so don’t believe a lifetime ban would make any deterrent effect.  People don’t expect to have accidents (because 99% of the time when they drive shit they get away with it), and don’t expect to get prosecuted even if they do.

There are no lasting consequences to terrible driving that wrecks lives which IMO is the main reason why it’s completely normalised in society & so many people are happy to do it.

Even if you think he’s got off lightly there’s no doubt that it will have lasting consequences.  Nobody goes to jail for 4-5 years and doesn’t end up with a different life than they would have had.  Nobody then spends the next 5-6 years on license and 10+ yrs banned from driving without having their options and life choices limited. That is quite right – he should – but if you want safer roads everyone else who’s ever driven like a dick on that road needs a really severe consequence.  I frequently say it on threads like this – if the aim is to improve driving standards picking on the tiny number who got unlucky and killed someone is not the way – we need to focus policing and prosecution resource on the ones who get lucky and had no pedestrians / cyclists etc in their path.  Those of you who live in England and Wales have elected police and crime commissioners… they will never stand on a a “war against the motorist” agenda but perhaps you should go and see them and ask them why not given far more likely to die from motorists than murderers.

There are lasting consequences to terrible driving that wrecks lives which IMO is the main reason why it’s completely normalised in society & so many people are happy to do it.

Agreed. There was an accident locally a couple of weeks ago which closed a main road for around 12 hours. The surface of the road had been removed and had a gravelly top ready for resurfacing, temp speed limit of 10mph. Somehow, the car managed to end up on its roof on the adjoining cycle-path at 6am. The driver was airlifted out, the local lanes were snarled up for hours because they are all narrow and although not completely cut off the villages on that coast aren’t easy to get to without using that road so businesses suffered, locals were stuck, etc.

The driver was 20ish, personal plate, premium car bought by daddy, known to my kids. I’ve almost literally bumped into him when he made a dangerous overtake on me, and I’ve seen him drive incredibly poorly several times.

My first thought when I heard about who was driving was ‘he’s lucky he didn’t wipe anyone else out and at least he’ll be off the road for a while, pity it isn’t for longer’ which isn’t a nice thought but I’d rather people like this aren’t anywhere near me or my family when we are on the roads.

I don’t see why the charge can’t be manslaughter in the more egregious cases such as this

Manslaughter hasn’t been considered since the 1970s, I think.

Max penalty for causing death by dangerous driving is life (offences after 6/2022), which is the same as manslaughter

Things have moved on; there are now many more driving offences where death has been caused and the penalties have increased. Having experienced both, the Road Traffic Act 1988 was a huge improvement on the 1972 Act

There was that terrible crash recently that wiped out a family of four & a married couple on a motorbike. The last I heard was that the driver of a grey Porsche had been arrested, then the story got lost in all the noise of the Southport stabbings and rioting.

The inquest opened and adjourned the other day. The Motorcycle was overtaking when it collided with the car head on. I’m presuming it was overtaking the Porsche but it will all come out ‘in the wash’

Though for some reason it’s the first time I’ve noticed someone suggest a compulsory black box for motoring offences,  which I think is an excellent idea

Agreed, though I don’t know where people with 9+ points get insurance without either a black box or paying horrific premiums.

The inquest opened and adjourned the other day.

I don’t know why Coroners seem to be reluctant to issue a section 28 notice to Highways depts when eg. the road layout facilitates a far higher speed than the posted limit.

Prison time aside, I’ve no idea why he’s ever allowed to drive again.

I don’t yearn for longer sentences, it’s enormously costly to keep people locked away

a lifetime driving ban would remove this threat from the roads, and having to get the bus to work would harm his future employability far less than five years inside.

if folk realised they may actually never drive again, and all the attendant limitations, they might take getting caught speeding seriously.

I’m presuming it was overtaking the Porsche

It could also be the 2 are considered to have been racing. If so, you’re as liable as the crasher when someone dies

…a lifetime driving ban would remove this threat from the roads…

…if folk realised they may actually never drive again, and all the attendant limitations, they might take getting caught speeding seriously.

Lots won’t, removal of the filter that makes speeding acceptable is the same one in some folk that makes driving whilst disqual acceptable. “Disqualified drivers are often prolific repeat offenders. 50 per cent of those convicted already have a conviction for disqualified driving and one in eight have five or more” https://www.roadsafetytrust.org.uk/news/lincolnshire-police-trial-electronic-monitoring-of-disqualified-drivers

What you need to be able to do is catch people every time and then mete out swift justice, hence the current action on rioters. A doormat full of camera fines at the previous keepers address achieves little; hopefully the Lincs scheme ^^ will be more successful

Those of you who live in England and Wales have elected police and crime commissioners… they will never stand on a a “war against the motorist” agenda but perhaps you should go and see them and ask them why not given far more likely to die from motorists than murderers.

I strongly recommend this having done it, they really squirm. If it’s a public meeting those around you will nod in agreement,  because obviously it couldn’t possibly be them or their family causing the problem.

While I’m no fan of PCCs, at least the previous one held regular public meetings for this kind of thing.