FAO legal eagles. Dangerous vs Careless driving

bails87

So, whiling away the hours yesterday, I ended up on the CPS website.

Just over halfway down this page it says

Dangerous driving includes situations where the driver has of his or her own free will adopted a particular way of driving, and also where there is a substantial error of judgement, that, even if only for a short time, amounts to driving falling far below the required standard. If the driving that caused danger was taken as a deliberate decision this would be an aggravating feature of the offence. ......

The following examples of circumstances that are likely to be characterised as dangerous driving are derived from decided cases and the SGC Guideline 'Causing Death by Driving' (http://www.sentencing-guidelines.gov.uk/guidelines): ......
-overtaking which could not have been carried out safely;
....
-failing to have a proper and safe regard for vulnerable road users such as cyclists, motorcyclists, horse riders, the elderly and pedestrians.....

So why do so many cases involving cyclists end up as 'merely' careless driving? When failing to show regard for cyclists is specifically named as a circumstance is 'likely to be characterised as dangerous driving'?

As I have some personal interest in this, this passage has potential to be very satisfying...but we'll have to see how it turns out

Dangerous driving is an either way offence carrying a level 5 fine (£5000) and/or 6 months custody in the Magistrates Court; in the Crown Court the maximum penalty is 2 years' custody and/or an unlimited fine.

Wherever the case is heard, the Court must disqualify the driver from driving for at least a year and order an extended retest,

spen666

as a general rule dangerous driving usually involves prolonged bad driving rather than a split second one off decision.


This is a very general statement of the approach.

W1

It's also far easier for the CPS to secure a conviction on the "lesser" offence of careless. "Dangerous" requires someone's driving to fall far below the standard expected - most non-cyclists wouldn't consider a close-pass to be at that level of seriousness (for example).

DonDaddyD

Isn't intent/intention a factor as well?

The Rookie

Hitting a cyclist you don't see (until too late) is generally careless, hitting one you have seen and pass to close to may be enough for dangerous.....

Simon

bails87

The Beginner wrote:

Hitting a cyclist you don't see (until too late) is generally careless, hitting one you have seen and pass to close to may be enough for dangerous.....

Simon

Here's hoping.....

davis

bails I wouldn't be too surprised if the driving in your case is ...overlooked, and just the assault charge is taken up.

I'm not a lawyer, yada, yada, I don't know the details (and you shouldn't share them), your mileage may vary.

It might sicken me, but it just wouldn't surprise me.

keyser__soze

TBH you're lucky these days to get the police to take it seriously. When I got hit recently, hard enough to break the wing mirror off the car overtaking me, the police didn't bother pursuing it as I wasn't sufficiently injured to require hospitalization and the woman claimed she'd not touched me.

bails87

Yeah, I know, it may be a long shot, but I can hope. Hopefully the other actions will give them some incentive to also address the driving.

I had a very positive meeting with the police last night, so we'll see.