A different outcome from the norm.
news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/3670578.stm
Any chance of a similar result occuring over here?
|
The bumper sticker and the low-powered car are very nice ideas.
I don't think that either could be imposed under current UK law :(
|
I dont understand this. The guy was obviously a prat but what he wasn't was a killer. He didn't crash his car and kill somebody - the other driver did.
So why has he been jailed and been forced to take medication preventing him from drinking? It wasn't alcohol related?
He deserves a fine, hefty ban, low powered car and bumper sticker but given that he didn't actually crash into anything, I can't see why the rest of it is being imposed.
Neither could the Jury by the sounds of it.
|
It's called being an accessory. If he hadn't being racing, the crash may never have happened. So, he's partly responsible and deserves all he got.
Andy
|
He deserved being forced to take medication to prevent him drinking alcohol for a motoring offence not involving alcohol?
What next, banning somebody from driving if they are caught stealing from shops?
|
I'll bet that the Judge knew a lot more about the defendents background, and maybe a bit more about the circumstances surrounding the event, than the Jury did.
|
In that case why have a jury.?
--
Was mech1
|
In that case why have a jury.?
To decide guilt or innocence.
And then, if guilty, step aside for the Judge to decide the penalty. As he has done in this case, imaginatively and (it seems) justly.
This looks like a young lad who no common sense and no realisation of why what he was doing was stupid and reckless. The sentence will hopefully bring that home to him, without all the attendant problems of imprisonment.
|
Very impressed - US judges appear to have a lot of freedom to impose creative sentences like this.
How often in the UK do you read of the victim's family being happy with the sentence issued?
|
I hope this doesn't begin to happen here.
My view is that punishment should not be meted out in order to please the victim. While the victim has undoubtedly suffered as result of the crime, this also prevents them from seeing the case through unbiased eyes.
I would hope (unrealistically, of course!) for punishments that satisfy the requirements of humanity & society at large, rather than just pleasing the victim, or special interest vigilante group.
number_cruncher
|
|
Whilst I tend to agree, lets avoid the politics of the legal system in this country please.
|
Taking Mark's point about avoiding the politics, how's this for a question:
Should UK courts be allowed to impose any (or all) of the following penalties on those convicted of motoring evidence?
a) drive a low-powered car
b) carry a photo of an accident which the convict helped to cause
c) take daily medication that will make him sick if he drinks alcohol
d) carry a bumper sticker asking other motorists to call the probation officers if he drives recklessly
(all of the above were imposed in this case)
|
I'd be with a, c & d, though can see problems with enforcement.
On the wider points, this was a US case and the whole legal/sentencing thing will, subject to the defendant's constitutional rights vary across the States of the Union. Some States IIRC give the jury a role in sentence.
I'd also wager that, although the linked report does not say so, drink was involved somewhere in this defendant's antecedents.
|
I assmue you mean a "motoring offence" ;-) in which case:
a) yes
b) yes if the photo is attached to the car
c) yes if there was evidence that alcohol had been consumed prior to the offence
d) yes
These address the attitudes of the offender that enabled him to commit the ofence, particularly if it was a negligence offence rather than a mens rea offence. It also bears down equally on the offendr regardless of income/status etc.
Imagine the CEO convicted of dangerous driving while drunk - unable to sip the wine at his corporate bash and then offering the clients a lift in a Perodua Nipper!
Much hot air is spoken about re-educating offenders - this could actually achieve this.
|
Assuming enforcability, I'd tend to agree with them all.
They are relevant to the crime & force the perpetrator to think about what it is he's actually being punished for on a daily basis.
|
Imagine the CEO convicted of dangerous driving while drunk - unable to sip the wine at his corporate bash and then offering the clients a lift in a Perodua Nipper!
nice thought :)
Trying to imagine how this would work with a teetotal minicar driver who'd gone wild. Presumably she would be required to guzzle champagne and to drive an executive barge?
Much hot air is spoken about re-educating offenders - this could actually achieve this.
Agreed. It's hard to see any good resaon for objecting to those punishments.
|
