Lady Justice Rafferty, Mr Justice MacKay and Judge Nicholas Loraine-Smith

[psmiffy]

I agree with some of the posters that a jail sentence would be inapproriate - however there should be a significant deterrent - "I took my eyes off the road for a moment to do this that or the other should be no excuse" - A non-negotiable 10year ban for people who admit this should be mandatory - people who plead not-guilty and are subsequently convicted should be banned for life with possibly a custodial sentence on top of that - If you are a driver it is a no-brainer that you should be looking where you are going at all times - drivers should be aware that there will be significant consequences and made to think about what they are doing

 

[sheddy]

OT, but do we know of any drivers who have been sentenced for texting in the UK ?

I see this activity every day, it can only be a matter of time before there is a fatality.
I guess unless the text has actually been sent there will be nothing on the phone record.

 

[growingvegetables]

Back to the report in the OP.

The guy wasn't sentenced to prison. He was given a sentence, of 30 weeks jail suspended for two years. Not exactly a punishment - just a (pretty stern) warning to be bloody careful. Rehabilitation? Maybe a chance for him show that he's rehabilitated himself.

 

[apollo179]

The driver admitted causing Russell Green's death by careless driving.
1 year ban and £1200 fine dosnt seem much of a punishment.

 

[CopperCyclist]

I agree with some of the posters that a jail sentence would be inapproriate - however there should be a significant deterrent - "I took my eyes off the road for a moment to do this that or the other should be no excuse" - A non-negotiable 10year ban for people who admit this should be mandatory - people who plead not-guilty and are subsequently convicted should be banned for life with possibly a custodial sentence on top of that - If you are a driver it is a no-brainer that you should be looking where you are going at all times - drivers should be aware that there will be significant consequences and made to think about what they are doing

I'm in favour of a reworking of the system. A one year ban, and then an extended requirement (5 years perhaps) to drive the rest of your life with a red 'P' plate which has the same restrict nets as an L-Plate (I.e. you need a competent driver with you), although you're allowed on motorways.

 

[Norm]

A jail sentence would, IMO, be entirely appropriate for doing something other than concentrating when operating 1.5 tonnes of lethal machinery.

I believe that anyone doing anything else which had such inherent dangers would be jailed immediately if they decided to do something other than concentrating which took the life of an innocent third party.

The important thing for me is that it was the driver's choice to do something else, it wasn't a distraction, it wasn't (IMO) a lapse in concentration, it was a conscious decision to play with the heater controls rather than drive.

It must be great to be the perfect driver. Never distracted by anything even for a few seconds.Constantly 100 % alert.Never tired .

Unfortunately that driver doesnt exist. I have been driving for over 30 years without hurting anyone but accept I am only an average driver and a certain amount of good luck has got me to where I am now.

How many of those who think this guy should be imprisoned can put their hands on their hearts and say they have never once made even a tiny mistake or had a momentary lack of concentration on the road ,if you dont drive then same question applies to when your cycling.

If I had a lapse in concentration (which this wasn't, it was a decision to avert his attention) which resulted in the death of a third party, then I don't think I would try to appease my own conscience with a "shoot happens" clause.

Fortunately, most people check there is little danger before they decide to change their focus.

Bottom line, for me, is that the driver decided to do something other than focus on the road and, as a direct result of that decision, someone died. That should be manslaughter, at the very least.

Jail would be a significant deterrent to the driver in this case, and would start to sent out a message that those who operate lethal weapons should operate them appropriately and not consider them to be an extension of their sitting rooms.

 

[rowan 46]

I don't necessarily have a problem with the guy not going to prison. As has been said by others we have all had lapses when on the road. But a couple of things this wasn't an accident in the sense of it was unpreventable or unforeseeable. It was negligence he chose to concentrate on his heater rather than his driving and it's not unreasonable to suggest that is not what you should be doing whilst driving. we have probably all twiddled whist cycling or driving and 99% of the time nothing happens but this time something did. The original court told him it was his fault and instead of facing up to his responsibility he went and appealed the case. He wasn't given a custodial sentence it was suspended he would have done no time if he kept his nose clean instead he showed no remorse and got the suspension quashed. I would have been so remorseful I would have taken the original sentence as my just deserts. It may be that the law got the sentence wrong, certainly the appeal judges thought so. however in my eyes it says something about the man that he appealed the case in the first place.

 

[CopperCyclist]

I would have been so remorseful I would have taken the original sentence as my just deserts. It may be that the law got the sentence wrong, certainly the appeal judges thought so. however in my eyes it says something about the man that he appealed the case in the first place.

+1

 

[Fiona N]

How do you know?

Because pilot error is just that - an error for which the pilot has to take responsibility. Difficult if he's killed himself with a 'momentary lapse of concentration' but then that's one of the things which concentrates a pilot's mind.

Somehow drivers seem to have a get-out-of -jail-free card because 'everyone has done it' but not everyone kills another person in the process possibly because they fiddle with the heater/radio/phone when there isn't other traffic around in implicit recognition that doing it while there is other traffic is endangering other people. If you don't want to take responsibility for not killing and injuring other people wjile driving - don't drive

 

[Fiona N]

I guess it depends on what you think the purpose of prison is.

....
It is clear that the public does not require protection from him.

...

?????


He's killed one person and feels victimised by his suspended sentence - he probably expected to get his license back too - so do you really think he won't risk doing the same thing again as soon as he's back driving. I don't.

 

[Hip Priest]

?????


He's killed one person and feels victimised by his suspended sentence - he probably expected to get his license back too - so do you really think he won't risk doing the same thing again as soon as he's back driving. I don't.

I didn't read any of that in the report. I think you're just filling in the gaps with conjecture.

 

[400bhp]

Because pilot error is just that - an error for which the pilot has to take responsibility. Difficult if he's killed himself with a 'momentary lapse of concentration' but then that's one of the things which concentrates a pilot's mind.

You've missed my point-has he some evidence that the courts wouldn't look at it as shoot happens.

 

[400bhp]

I would have been so remorseful I would have taken the original sentence as my just deserts. It may be that the law got the sentence wrong, certainly the appeal judges thought so. however in my eyes it says something about the man that he appealed the case in the first place.

That's easy to say sat behind a computer.

In reality, if we look deep enough into our souls, there are very very few who would take this stance.

Kudos if you do - you are a leader amongst men.

 

[lukesdad]

I do wonder if it had been a husband wife or child convicted the sentiment of some posters would change. The only way to stop this sort of thing is to stop everybody driving, thats EVERYBODY including YOU !

 

[growingvegetables]

I would have been so remorseful I would have taken the original sentence as my just deserts. It may be that the law got the sentence wrong, certainly the appeal judges thought so. however in my eyes it says something about the man that he appealed the case in the first place.

That's easy to say sat behind a computer.

In reality, if we look deep enough into our souls, there are very very few who would take this stance.

Kudos if you do - you are a leader amongst men.

What a desperately sad and scary comment. Common decency is now only easy behind a computer keyboard.