Woman given 60hours community service for killing cyclist

The Rookie

To clarify some legal points

Careless driving is where the standard of driving falls below that of a careful and competent driver (so most learners are careless drivers for some time before they improve).

Dangerous driving is where the standard of driving falls significantly below that of a careful and competent driver.

The names can be misleading as driving badly intentionally will be 'careless' while driving very badly carelessly is 'dangerous' driving.

The sentencing guidelines for causing death by careless at the lowest level are as follows for....
Careless or inconsiderate driving arising from momentary inattention with no aggravating factors
Medium level fine
Low level community order to high level community order

In this case the court would appear to have rated it at the lowest level and imposed that tariff, if the driving were worse than that the case would be sent to the crown court for a harsher punishment. the fact there was an accident and a fatality doesn't change the nature of the driving but the sentencing is harsher than the 3 points and fine that would be handed down had the cyclist (by pure chance) not been there.

Those are national sentencing guidelines, if you don't like them then speak to your MP, the courts themselves have to adhere to them or a successful appeal is very likely - or in other words don't blame the court for following the guidance they have to follow. The length of community order will have been reduced from 90hours based on the guilty plea discount of 1/3 (if she plead guilty at the first opportunity, the level of discount then reduces if she pleads guilty at a later stage).

stevewj

Any length of time a motorist who has killed another person spends in prison is not only a deterent but means they are not on the road for that length of time killing someone else. As for being on the phone/texting - take the car off them and auction it - money goes to fund for families of deceased. Take away licence for min 5 years and compulsory re-test before getting it back (with recommendation to driving centre to look for anything to fail them on).

The Rookie

Unfortunately that comes across as an ill thought out rant, additionally it sounds like you don't actually have the inclination to try and make any of that happen, so making it all rather meaningless.

slowbike

stevewj wrote:

Any length of time a motorist who has killed another person spends in prison is not only a deterent but means they are not on the road for that length of time killing someone else.

A driving ban should mean they're not on the road for that length of time too ...

stevewj wrote:

As for being on the phone/texting - take the car off them and auction it - money goes to fund for families of deceased.

Bit of a lottery - so a lad driving like he's in the touring car championships in his £500 car gets it confiscated and the family get the £500 (assuming it makes that at auction). The pensioner slips the foot of the clutch at the wrong time in their £25k merc gets that taken off them and the family get the £25k ...

stevewj wrote:

Take away licence for min 5 years and compulsory re-test before getting it back (with recommendation to driving centre to look for anything to fail them on).

Now we're getting close to what I could agree with - Yes, I think the length of the bans should be increased and professional lessons followed by a re-test before being allowed to drive again. Perhaps with another re-test a few years later.

darkhairedlord

Slowbike wrote:

The pensioner slips the foot of the clutch at the wrong time in their £25k merc

how many pensioners drive a £25k merc with a clutch?
more likely: "doddering old fool that shouldn't be behind the wheel and can no longer manage a manual transmission" gets confused and hits the accelerator by mistake thinking it's the clutch.

slowbike

darkhairedlord wrote:

Slowbike wrote:

The pensioner slips the foot of the clutch at the wrong time in their £25k merc

how many pensioners drive a £25k merc with a clutch?

Er - all those who drive £25k mercs ? ... automatics have clutchs too ... [phew - got myself out of that one! ]

darkhairedlord

Slowbike wrote:

darkhairedlord wrote:

Slowbike wrote:

The pensioner slips the foot of the clutch at the wrong time in their £25k merc

how many pensioners drive a £25k merc with a clutch?

Er - all those who drive £25k mercs ? ... automatics have clutchs too ... [phew - got myself out of that one! ]

if they can get their foot on it, no wonder they have so many accidents!

ForumNewbie

darkhairedlord wrote:

Slowbike wrote:

The pensioner slips the foot of the clutch at the wrong time in their £25k merc

how many pensioners drive a £25k merc with a clutch?
more likely: "doddering old fool that shouldn't be behind the wheel and can no longer manage a manual transmission" gets confused and hits the accelerator by mistake thinking it's the clutch.

Not a very nice description of elderly drivers.

Alex99

The Rookie wrote:

To clarify some legal points

Careless driving is where the standard of driving falls below that of a careful and competent driver (so most learners are careless drivers for some time before they improve).

Dangerous driving is where the standard of driving falls significantly below that of a careful and competent driver.

The names can be misleading as driving badly intentionally will be 'careless' while driving very badly carelessly is 'dangerous' driving.

The sentencing guidelines for causing death by careless at the lowest level are as follows for....
Careless or inconsiderate driving arising from momentary inattention with no aggravating factors
Medium level fine
Low level community order to high level community order

In this case the court would appear to have rated it at the lowest level and imposed that tariff, if the driving were worse than that the case would be sent to the crown court for a harsher punishment. the fact there was an accident and a fatality doesn't change the nature of the driving but the sentencing is harsher than the 3 points and fine that would be handed down had the cyclist (by pure chance) not been there.

Those are national sentencing guidelines, if you don't like them then speak to your MP, the courts themselves have to adhere to them or a successful appeal is very likely - or in other words don't blame the court for following the guidance they have to follow. The length of community order will have been reduced from 90hours based on the guilty plea discount of 1/3 (if she plead guilty at the first opportunity, the level of discount then reduces if she pleads guilty at a later stage).

I can see the logic behind this. At the same time I can't help but think that there needs to be something more to make that small % (that aren't naturally careful) be more careful around vulnerable road users. A deterent of a long, or lifetime ban for causing death doesn't seem unreasonable. I don't see a custodial sentence helping that much here, unless the driver in question is already banned and is therefore, likely to keep driving anyway.

darkhairedlord

ForumNewbie wrote:

darkhairedlord wrote:

Slowbike wrote:

The pensioner slips the foot of the clutch at the wrong time in their £25k merc

how many pensioners drive a £25k merc with a clutch?
more likely: "doddering old fool that shouldn't be behind the wheel and can no longer manage a manual transmission" gets confused and hits the accelerator by mistake thinking it's the clutch.

Not a very nice description of elderly drivers.

This not a dewcription of elderly drivers, it's a description of "The pensioner slips the foot of the clutch at the wrong time in their £25k merc"