Pregnant woman spared jail for killing cyclist
Comments
-
Porgy wrote:it's such a pity you can't be logical like that when you talk about climate change.
we might have had an enjoyable discussion.
Ah, but Porgy, me ol' mucker, maybe I am, and maybe that's why the discussions aren't enjoyable ...
0 -
-
0
-
It`s obviously up to the court to hear the evidence and decide the reasons for fleeing the scene, if she`s a fleeing rapist then i`m sure that would come out in court.
Surely nobody could argue that she didn`t get off lightly.Smarter than the average bear.0 -
Its common now a days for people to flee the scene, or the old "drive round the corner and both of you jump out of the car" trick. The penalties for leaving the scene are pretty miniscule. Google it, there are lots of threads on motoring websites on how to get off drink driving on technicalities. Sad state of affairs
0 -
I think we're getting distracted. The court knew the full facts, but still decided on what I'm sure we'd all agree is a ridiculously (but not unusually) low sentence. I cannot follow the argument about the lack of dignity of giving birth in jail. Surely the child would be allowed out????
Can the jail sentence not start after she's had the child? Maybe that would be the way forward, if it's allowed. I'd like to see the CPS appeal the sentence, but I doubt they will.0 -
I normally remain calm when reading the news but this made my blood boil reading it again and on the BBC
"Kelly's car overturned on the dual carriageway and ended up on the central reservation. She left the scene after getting a lift from a stranger in a van, but gave herself up to the police seven hours later, the court heard.
Kelly told the officers she had bumped her head in the accident and was hysterical. She said she had suffered panic attacks in the past"
Lock her up in a mental institute then. Killing someone by dangerous driving is bad, leaving the scene is absolutely terrible. I hope for the rest of her life the guilt hits her hard.0 -
OldSkoolKona wrote:Its common now a days for people to flee the scene, or the old "drive round the corner and both of you jump out of the car" trick. The penalties for leaving the scene are pretty miniscule. Google it, there are lots of threads on motoring websites on how to get off drink driving on technicalities. Sad state of affairs
Max penalty for failing to stop or failing to report is only 6mths imprisonment.
IMHO formed out of years of advocacy in the criminal courts in defending such cases, the max penalty should be the same as that for causing death by dangerous driving. This would ensure there was no incentive / benefit to be gained by leaving the scene of an accidentWant to know the Spen666 behind the posts?
Then read MY BLOG @ http://www.pebennett.com
Twittering @spen_6660 -
As I always say, if you want to kill someone in this country, use a vehicle to do it.x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x
Commuting / Winter rides - Jamis Renegade Expert
Pootling / Offroad - All-City Macho Man Disc
Fast rides Cannondale SuperSix Ultegra0 -
spen666 wrote:OldSkoolKona wrote:Its common now a days for people to flee the scene, or the old "drive round the corner and both of you jump out of the car" trick. The penalties for leaving the scene are pretty miniscule. Google it, there are lots of threads on motoring websites on how to get off drink driving on technicalities. Sad state of affairs
Max penalty for failing to stop or failing to report is only 6mths imprisonment.
IMHO formed out of years of advocacy in the criminal courts in defending such cases, the max penalty should be the same as that for causing death by dangerous driving. This would ensure there was no incentive / benefit to be gained by leaving the scene of an accident
+1.
Spen - excuse my ignorance here, but how are leaving-the-scene cases tried? Magistrates' Court? Or always in the Crown Court?FCN 2-4.
"What happens when the hammer goes down, kids?"
"It stays down, Daddy."
"Exactly."0 -
cjcp wrote:spen666 wrote:OldSkoolKona wrote:Its common now a days for people to flee the scene, or the old "drive round the corner and both of you jump out of the car" trick. The penalties for leaving the scene are pretty miniscule. Google it, there are lots of threads on motoring websites on how to get off drink driving on technicalities. Sad state of affairs
Max penalty for failing to stop or failing to report is only 6mths imprisonment.
IMHO formed out of years of advocacy in the criminal courts in defending such cases, the max penalty should be the same as that for causing death by dangerous driving. This would ensure there was no incentive / benefit to be gained by leaving the scene of an accident
+1.
Spen - excuse my ignorance here, but how are leaving-the-scene cases tried? Magistrates' Court? Or always in the Crown Court?
Failing to stop and failing to report offences are summary only offences meaning they have to be tried in the Mags court UNLESS linked to an offence going to Crown Court when they can be sent to Crown Court
EXamples
If you are up for failing to stop and related no insurance only - casewill remain in Mags Court
If you also had say a death by dangerous driving which has to g oto Crown Court- then FTS and FTR can be sent to Crown Court, but max penalties are as in the MagsWant to know the Spen666 behind the posts?
Then read MY BLOG @ http://www.pebennett.com
Twittering @spen_6660 -
Ok. Ta.FCN 2-4.
"What happens when the hammer goes down, kids?"
"It stays down, Daddy."
"Exactly."0 -
It's pi55 poor though really isn't it. Another crim runs rings around the judicial system.
What with Range Rover woman claiming she must have fainted at the wheel having killed a cyclist and hit another vehicle, now another woman uses the fact that she has got preggers since committing her offences to gain a soft sentence. Prison would have been the safest place for her and her sprog during her pregnancy. I should imagine better medical supervision than on the outside. At least she wouldn't have been able to get behind the wheel again and kill any one else.Life is like a roll of toilet paper; long and useful, but always ends at the wrong moment. Anon.
Think how stupid the average person is.......
half of them are even more stupid than you first thought.0 -
Thought things here were bad, but that was just unreal! Read the headlines about halfway down on the same page of the article - a young lady was jailed for lying on her CV!! What sort of skewed logic is going on here??Visit Ireland - all of it! Cycle in Dublin and know fear!!
0 -
garrynolan wrote:Thought things here were bad, but that was just unreal! Read the headlines about halfway down on the same page of the article - a young lady was jailed for lying on her CV!! What sort of skewed logic is going on here??
Hmm, interesting that. I had a job in the NHS in a Capital Projects office, after I made a bullying complaint against my boss she alleged in front of a HR person that I must have made up my CV and plagiarised my folio of work (both incorrect) at interview stage.
Of course she is also an RIBA Chartered Architect, without being on the Register of Architects, which I would have thought was a requirement....I wonder what her own CV describes her as?
Must ask the ARB and the RIBA if being a chartered RIBA member in working in such a capacity requires registration, I hear there is a hefty fine for presenting yourself as an Architect when you're not!'Twas Mulga Bill, from Eaglehawk, that caught the cycling craze....0 -
Greg66 wrote:Pross wrote:In what way? If you have nothing to hide and it was a genuine accident (or driving without due care and attention) why would you flee the scene? In this case she stopped to pick up her handbag before leaving the scene - hardly the actions of someone panicking and not thinking of the consequences. In the event that you have an accident without causing injury and flee the scene I believe the punishment is very similar to that of drink driving. So, maybe not assume that the person had been drinking but make the punishment the same as if they had been. So your ducking stool comparison is utter bollocks to use your refined debating skills.
EDIT Forgot to add, refusing to give a sample for alcohol testing is classed as the same offence as failing an attempt IIRC so by fleeing the scene you are failing to provide a specimen.
Well, where do we start?
Maybe they fled the scene because they're a rapist on the run. Yeah, that would be it. So let's sentence them as if they were a rapist. Or a war criminal. Or had no motor insurance. Getting the complete absence of a link between fleeing the scene and being drunk now?
Second, your presumption that they've been drinking unless they can prove otherwise: how they going to prove other, exactly? They flee the scene, then head straight to the nearest A&E to have a blood test to prove they're under the limit. So you can truncate your presumption to "anyone who flees the scene was drunk". La-la land. This is where the ducking stool comes on. Anyone who floats must be made of wood, and so a witch. Get it now?
Third, refusing to provide a sample requires that you are asked to provide one. When exactly does the feeling person get asked to provide a sample in your world?
Fourth, you've backtracked: now it's equate the sentence for fleeing the scene with that of drink driving. Why assume that was the reason for fleeing though - see the first point above.
Muddled, muddled, muddled. :roll:
Thanks for this, Greg66. My impatience had stolen my eloquence and all that was left was ranting.Rules are for fools.0 -
So if you've been drinking then drove, had a collision, the last thing you would want to do would be to remain at the scene of an accident where a blood alcohol reading could be taken? From this ruling that would appear to be the most sensible course of action, simply run and hide for a few hours until you've sobered up, or maybe better got well and truly rotten drunk. How then are they going to prove via some test you were drunk at the time you killed someone?
Sure enough you might get charged for having left the scene of an accident, but you'd be swapping that for far more serious charges, which could in any case be dismissed by your expensive barrister as "shock", or "panic". You could even claim you thought you hit an animal as why you ddn't stop, SMIDSY (even if he came through the windscreen), or that the cyclist "swerved suddenly" as we're all known to do from time to time. Not my fault your honour, unless it can be conclusively be proved otherwise.
Debate all the fine points all you like, making a mockery of the law is what it is, and letting off scot free dangerous drivers through clever legal argument and reasoning leaves us all in danger when we're on the roads, including the clever lawyers I might add.'Twas Mulga Bill, from Eaglehawk, that caught the cycling craze....0 -
chuckcork wrote:garrynolan wrote:Thought things here were bad, but that was just unreal! Read the headlines about halfway down on the same page of the article - a young lady was jailed for lying on her CV!! What sort of skewed logic is going on here??
I may be wrong, but I imagine you can be a qualified architect but then need to renew your "practicing certificate" each your, but may not need to do this id working in the public sector. She'd still be an architect though.
Hmm, interesting that. I had a job in the NHS in a Capital Projects office, after I made a bullying complaint against my boss she alleged in front of a HR person that I must have made up my CV and plagiarised my folio of work (both incorrect) at interview stage.
Of course she is also an RIBA Chartered Architect, without being on the Register of Architects, which I would have thought was a requirement....I wonder what her own CV describes her as?
Must ask the ARB and the RIBA if being a chartered RIBA member in working in such a capacity requires registration, I hear there is a hefty fine for presenting yourself as an Architect when you're not!0 -
MatHammond wrote:I may be wrong, but I imagine you can be a qualified architect but then need to renew your "practicing certificate" each your, but may not need to do this id working in the public sector. She'd still be an architect though.
I don't know, but I'm asking the Architects Registration Board and the RIBA whether they see it as a requirement or a reach of the Architects Act.
Purely in the public interest, of course. Not at all becuase she's an arrogant b!tch who needs taking down a few rungs.'Twas Mulga Bill, from Eaglehawk, that caught the cycling craze....0 -
This also gives any woman with eggs in her a get out of jail free card. :roll:
Surely it is important not to take her pregnancy into account as this will simply encourage more women to get pregnant in order to get a non custodial sentence. Why can't the father look after the kid while she serves her sentence? I see nothing dignified in being conceived in order to get your mother off her deserved court sentence. :evil:0 -
spen666 wrote:OldSkoolKona wrote:Its common now a days for people to flee the scene, or the old "drive round the corner and both of you jump out of the car" trick. The penalties for leaving the scene are pretty miniscule. Google it, there are lots of threads on motoring websites on how to get off drink driving on technicalities. Sad state of affairs
Max penalty for failing to stop or failing to report is only 6mths imprisonment.
IMHO formed out of years of advocacy in the criminal courts in defending such cases, the max penalty should be the same as that for causing death by dangerous driving. This would ensure there was no incentive / benefit to be gained by leaving the scene of an accident
Thanks for putting that into less muddled words than mine, it's what I tried to say but apparently sounded like I was suggesting they should be tried as witches on the ducking stool
One other point - as her car was left at the scene how comes the police didn't pay her a visit before she handed herself in 7 hours later? Also, any idea why she wasn't charged with leaving the scene? The case should be appealed on the leniency of the sentence.0
