Disgusting Result

[Shadowfax]

I was just reading this thread and was not logged in at the time, hence adverts top and bottom. The top one was for court based solicitors to defend speeding drivers ! At the bottom cheap insurance for banned drivers ! Hmm.

 

[spen666]

You are still failing to understand the legal meaning of 'Good Character' so email Spen666. I am sure he will spell it out for you as I have tried to do.

For the rest of your rant, l leave it to you.

I'm not sure I disagree at all with Pale Rider

I'm not sure I disagree with much of what you post either, but must just comment on this

..... Some one without a criminal record is considered to be a person of 'good character' and is given credit for this. However, how much credit is dependent on the severity of the offence they are about to be convicted of, their conduct in court and whether having pleaded NG as is their right when they clearly were guilty and should have pleaded so, to have put victims and witnesses to give evidence may counteract any benefit a good character might have had on reducing sentence. ....

The amount of credit someone gets relates (in the normal legal sense) to how much of a reduction they get in their sentence depending on at what stage they entereda guilty plea. For an early guilty plea, this can be up to 30% discount.

The conduct of the defendant, the behaviour in court, the seriousness of the offending go to the tariff (ie sentence length), then when this is decided, the discount (credit) for good character is applied.

Its not easy to explain in a couple of lines and I am sure you were trying to say something similar

 

[MattyKo]

Although there should not be any "hard and fast" rules regarding the penal sentences issued, following the death of someone on our roads.

Incidences of drivers causing the death of cyclists or pedestrians (as has always been my contention on this site) should in my opinion result in a custodial sentence. Only then will there be the necessary sea change on drivers minds of the consequences such accidents can have upon cyclists and pedestrians. Lots of road deaths are caused because drivers are virtually flying around the road, with little consideration the effects that piece of metal shall have upon those around then, in the event of that vehicle marginally coming into contact with a cyclists or pedestrian.

Whilst the government shouts about the reduction in road casualties, I do not think that this is because motorists are been threaten with or held in custody. Cyclists are the road user group which has seen an increase in the number of deaths annually - the government attributes this to an increase in the number of cyclists out riding.

 

[Cycling Dan]

Why bother putting her in jail or suspended sentences, deporting her would be a better option. That way she is sure as hell is not going to be doing anything like that again in this country.

 

[Cycling Dan]

He added: “I have never seen an expression of regret from her.”

Mr Williams said: “She may not have expressed remorse during the trial but to people known to her and a third party she has expressed remorse.

“She has suffered sleepless nights and cannot get the moment of the collision out of her mind

What a poor thing, sleepless nights....... they are likely because the car was expensive to repair and she is worrying how she is going to pay for it.Or she has had to claim on her insurance and thinks her premiums are going to sky rocket. It will have nothing to do with the cyclist being killed. She would have expressed something in court if she was sorry considering in court they are talking about the event is self which must surely stir up some sort of emotion of remorse if any was there.
Just on the fact she has never said sorry and insist the lights were green is enough for me to consider that she feels the cyclist was in the wrong and his death was the sole result of his own doing supporting that she has nothing to be remorseful about. So how this judge worked out she had any inch of remorse and reduced the sentence accordingly is rocket science to me.

 

[Shadowfax]

He added: “I have never seen an expression of regret from her.”

Mr Williams said: “She may not have expressed remorse during the trial but to people known to her and a third party she has expressed remorse.

“She has suffered sleepless nights and cannot get the moment of the collision out of her mind

What a poor thing, sleepless nights....... they are likely because the car was expensive to repair and she is worrying how she is going to pay for it.Or she has had to claim on her insurance and thinks her premiums are going to sky rocket. It will have nothing to do with the cyclist being killed. She would have expressed something in court if she was sorry considering in court they are talking about the event is self which must surely stir up some sort of emotion of remorse if any was there.
Just on the fact she has never said sorry and insist the lights were green is enough for me to consider that she feels the cyclist was in the wrong and his death was the sole result of his own doing supporting that she has nothing to be remorseful about. So how this judge worked out she had any inch of remorse and reduced the sentence accordingly is rocket science to me.

After reading some of your posts I reckon the A,B,C is rocket science to you ?

 

[Cycling Dan]

After reading some of your posts I reckon the A,B,C is rocket science to you ?

You clearly haven't seen the rest

 

[Shadowfax]

Thankfully.
Smile.

 

[MattyKo]

Unfortunately, this is really how these matters are determined maintaining "no claims bonus" on your insurance premium.

With no consideration of the actual occurrences on the roads.