Should Driver like this face tougher sentencing and Lifetime Driving Ban

Well his driving ban should certainly be held over until he is released from prison, but it won't be.
I still believe that in cases like this, when a death is caused by another's willful actions, the charge should be manslaughter.
 
Scum. The end!!
 
:agree: . Although I've never really agreed with prison sentences. Slow and painful torture to the death sounds more like it to me.
 
Should have taken him straight back into custody until sentenced, contempt of court. :bat:

....agree with all above too!
 
viv1969 said:
Well his driving ban should certainly be held over until he is released from prison, but it won't be.
I still believe that in cases like this, when a death is caused by another's willful actions, the charge should be manslaughter.
Click to expand...

Probably, and I am no expert, the reason for this is to allow a motoring based punishment as well as a custodial sentence be applied. i.e. a disqualification from driving. He will serve 1/3rd to half that sentence so will have some period of disqualification after being released. Sentences for culpable homicide (I know of someone doing a 5yr stretch for culpable homicide which is man slaughter in E&W - his brief got it down from Murder) so the sentence for causing death via dangerous driving matches that of manslaughter/culpable homicide roughly.

The sentence is IMHO about right, some pillock up here axed (i.e murdered them with an axe) someone over a feud over a takeaway shop. They got seven years.

Sadly his conduct outside the court was lets be fair, pretty s***ty. I suspect he won't last in jail and he's lucky he didn't get a kicking off the aggreaved. Far better for him if he just left court quietly.

Personally, I will go against the grain here. The crime is one of non intent or lack of care/negligence/bad driving not deliberate murder. I feel the sentence is fine to be honest. If it were me or a family member killed I wouldn't want the person put away for life if thats how they went. It does no good. It serves no purpose. I also think the ban is fine if it is the 1st serious offence. Second serious offence like Dangerous/carelsss drive then yes, lifetime bans but we live in a modern society. People need the chance to redeem themselves. He poses no risk to public safety if he doesn't drive for a bit and learns from this mistake whilst off the road.
 
Last edited:
Jeez, where is that popcorn smiley when you need it! :runaway:
 
Last edited:
The 5 year stretch is about as much as camn be expected, and I suspect he'll serve 24 months. But I still believe the ban should only begin when he walks out of prison.
 
viv1969 said:
The 5 year stretch is about as much as camn be expected, and I suspect he'll serve 24 months. But I still believe the ban should only begin when he walks out of prison.
Click to expand...

I would concede that would make more sense, it's not like he can actually drive whilst in jail so the long disqualification is a bit of a red herring.
 
Last weekend we had an incident up here when two young men, each in an Audi, were (apparently) racing each other. They hit a third car, killing the young couple inside and thus orphaning a young child. The very least I'd expect would be a life ban after a lengthy prison term.
 
chadders said:
Last weekend we had an incident up here when two young men, each in an Audi, were (apparently) racing each other. They hit a third car, killing the young couple inside and thus orphaning a young child. The very least I'd expect would be a life ban after a lengthy prison term.
Click to expand...

But you do realise that's not what will actually happen.
 
A driver who knocked down and killed a five-year-old boy while travelling at twice the speed limit callously told the family: ‘‘S**t happens, life goes on.’
Click to expand...

Gulan Ahmed, defending Payne, said: “He is remorseful and sorry for what he did. He has two daughters himself and he puts himself in the position of the victims and tells me that he wishes he could turn back time and undo what he has done, but he can’t.
Click to expand...

:thinking:
 
said: “He is remorseful and sorry that he got caught. He has two daughters himself and he puts himself in the position of the victims and tells me that hey s*** happens, he wishes he could turn back time and undo what he has done, as losing his license is a real ball ache, but he can’t.
Click to expand...

fixed that for him
 
Although the sentence is proportionate in respect to other sentences, it's sad that murder/manslaughter/death by dangerous driving all carry such low average terms in prison.

There should be more mandatory sentencing - I can't think of a single instance involving a wrongful death (be it deliberately or through negligence) where I though the sentence was too harsh.
 
Jub Jub Maarohanye and Themba Tshabalala were convicted of murder and attempted murder in South Africa in 2012, following four deaths when they were street racing and crashed into a group of schoolboys at the roadside. They were sentenced to 20 years imprisonment, and their applications for leave to appeal were subsequently denied.

The court accepted that there was no direct intent, but applied the principle of dolus eventualis. That's Roman Dutch law - somewhat similar to Scots law - but I don't know if there's anything similar available in English law. Ruth?
 
MartynK said:
Jub Jub Maarohanye and Themba Tshabalala were convicted of murder and attempted murder in South Africa in 2012, following four deaths when they were street racing and crashed into a group of schoolboys at the roadside. They were sentenced to 20 years imprisonment, and their applications for leave to appeal were subsequently denied.

The court accepted that there was no direct intent, but applied the principle of dolus eventualis. That's Roman Dutch law - somewhat similar to Scots law - but I don't know if there's anything similar available in English law. Ruth?
Click to expand...

You are right regarding Scots law, there does not have to be an intent to kill to make it Murder as far as I'm aware.
 
MartynK said:
Jub Jub Maarohanye and Themba Tshabalala were convicted of murder and attempted murder in South Africa in 2012, following four deaths when they were street racing and crashed into a group of schoolboys at the roadside. They were sentenced to 20 years imprisonment, and their applications for leave to appeal were subsequently denied.

The court accepted that there was no direct intent, but applied the principle of dolus eventualis. That's Roman Dutch law - somewhat similar to Scots law - but I don't know if there's anything similar available in English law. Ruth?
Click to expand...

Under English & Welsh law, there has to be a clear intent to kill or cause grievous harm to establish a charge of murder.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ST4
Hmmmm..... after quite a few years of dealing with errant drivers and, more recently, with the deaths they cause I have to say that this sentence is about par for the course....as is his attitude.

To give two very recent examples of the attitude of drivers following some carnage they caused:-

On Sunday a man decides to drive along a 30mph bit of dual carriageway that goes through a tunnel round a bend and onto a flyover with traffic merging, at probably close to 80mph. He crashed into lots of things but fortunately no other cars or people. His car caught light and burnt out after depositing its oil all over the carriageway and he escaped with a 1cm cut to his forehead where his sunglasses broke on the airbag. A very large bit of east London was shut down for hours while cleanup and the damage he caused was sorted out.

The driver reacted by moaning about the loss of his tools that had been in the boot, and then said to me "Your mate said you were going to blame me for this. Why?" I was speechless. Then he asked me for a lift.

Yesterday a scooter rider with a provisional licence and a pillion decides to pop a wheelie as he came over a crest. He lost control as he landed it and took out a small boy who will thankfully live but won't be very well for a while. The scooter rider suffered a minor injury and his bike was damaged....this was all he cared about.

It is very rare for me to deal with someone for a driving offence who actually takes responsibility for their own actions. Stories like this in the papers make for sensational reading....but it's really just normal.
 
Wookee said:
Hmmmm..... after quite a few years of dealing with errant drivers and, more recently, with the deaths they cause I have to say that this sentence is about par for the course....as is his attitude.

To give two very recent examples of the attitude of drivers following some carnage they caused:-

On Sunday a man decides to drive along a 30mph bit of dual carriageway that goes through a tunnel round a bend and onto a flyover with traffic merging, at probably close to 80mph. He crashed into lots of things but fortunately no other cars or people. His car caught light and burnt out after depositing its oil all over the carriageway and he escaped with a 1cm cut to his forehead where his sunglasses broke on the airbag. A very large bit of east London was shut down for hours while cleanup and the damage he caused was sorted out.

The driver reacted by moaning about the loss of his tools that had been in the boot, and then said to me "Your mate said you were going to blame me for this. Why?" I was speechless. Then he asked me for a lift.

Yesterday a scooter rider with a provisional licence and a pillion decides to pop a wheelie as he came over a crest. He lost control as he landed it and took out a small boy who will thankfully live but won't be very well for a while. The scooter rider suffered a minor injury and his bike was damaged....this was all he cared about.

It is very rare for me to deal with someone for a driving offence who actually takes responsibility for their own actions. Stories like this in the papers make for sensational reading....but it's really just normal.
Click to expand...

I know that's what scare me we just take it for normal,if the courts were to crack down on behaved like this maybe something might change.
 
f1charlie said:
Should be strung up by his 'nads and lowered into a bear pit.
Click to expand...

So what should we do with the rapists, P****'s, murderers and armed robbers. Stone them to death, crucify them etc? There are a lot worse crimes than driving too fast and hitting someone unintentionally because you've been a berk at the wheel of a car.
 
ST4 said:
So what should we do with the rapists, P****'s, murderers and armed robbers. Stone them to death, crucify them etc? There are a lot worse crimes than driving too fast and hitting someone unintentionally because you've been a berk at the wheel of a car.
Click to expand...

"Should be strung up by his 'nads and lowered into a bear pit." at least. Maybe not armed robbers unless they injure someone.

I know you have history of speeding and maybe a little biased, but, look at the basics here, he drives double the speed limit in a presumably built up area (30mph zone) hit's and kills a child without even attempting to brake and has no remorse.
Most people are going to feel that the sentence he got is extremely light.

I know someone who's young child was killed on a zebra crossing by a van speeding with dodgy brakes, he blamed himself as he was holding his son's hand and he managed to break free from his father's grasp. The father was inconsolable for months, only the fact he had 2 other children kind of forced him to carry on.
 
I have to admit that driving at 2 x times the speed limit, IMO, should equate to intent.
 
viv1969 said:
I have to admit that driving at 2 x times the speed limit, IMO, should equate to intent.
Click to expand...

Driving on to the pavement to deliberately run someone over is intent. This isn't. The fact he didn't brake shows poor obersevstion and/or too high a speed to react to a hazard which he didn't know was there and couldn't react to in time.

Hence it's death by dangerous driving. The sentence sits in line with culpiple homicide and is, given how we sentence that crime and murder totally appropriate.
 
ST4 said:
Driving on to the pavement to deliberately run someone over is intent. This isn't. The fact he didn't brake shows poor obersevstion and/or too high a speed to react to a hazard which he didn't know was there and couldn't react to in time.

Hence it's death by dangerous driving. The sentence sits in line with culpiple homicide and is, given how we sentence that crime and murder totally appropriate.
Click to expand...

I'm not getting into an argument with you again Steve, about how big a n-jockey you have to be to be doing twice the limit regardless of circumstances.
We've agreed to disagree in the past, so let's do it again, shall we?
 
I'll agree to disagree but I was more trying to show intent in its rawest form.

A close friend of mine was ran over. He had an argument with someone. Guy got into his car drove at him, Will went up in the air and had a trip to hospital.

To me, that is intent...
 
Anything significantly above the limit should be classed as intent, a few mph above can be classed as an accident or speedometer calibration but twice the limit is beyond excusable.
 
Oh come on Steve......this is not Germany :rolleyes:
 
ST4 said:
So in Germany where the laws of physics are the same as they are here, they all intend to kill each other as they drive double our speed limit on their motorways? Seems odd.
Click to expand...

Not double their speed limit though is it...

It's all relative.
 
viv1969 said:
Oh come on Steve......this is not Germany :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

The laws of physics do not no country borders....the 1st rule of the law of Steve

Back on topic, I genuinely don't believe the driver in the original post set off in their high speed driving meaning to kill someone. I would hope if they could turn back time, they'd not have done what they did. I am almost certain they would not want this to happen.

Not like when the guy drove at my mate, he chose to do that, he actively decided to use his car as a weapon. Hence he should be in jail (he isn't as my mate lived).
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top