bb
I'm still unconvinced that he did fall asleep - as was the off-duty copper that was following him. It didn't fit the facts.
He claims something went wrong with the Land-Rover; despite the so-called investigators saying that they found nothing wrong in the 1200 pieces they recovered, only a fool would state that it didn't happen with any degree of certainty.
There was still "reasonable doubt."
|
|
lets all be thankful she denied any wrong doing. Knowing our legal system, had she admitted guilt up front she'd have got a much reduced sentence and it was already too short IMHO.
|
They caused the death just as much as if they had shot them or clubbed them with a baseball bat. So why should the punishment be any less severe.
Absolutely not the case. You can not in all honesty say the girl went out with the intention of using the car as a weapon, that she went out intending to crash, intending to hurt or maim somone else.
This was a classic case of stupidity. Gross stupidity. Being stupid and dumb has never been a crime. Not yet.
------------------------------
TourVanMan TM < Ex RF >
|
They caused the death just as much as if they had shot them or clubbed them with a baseball bat. So why should the punishment be any less severe. Absolutely not the case. You can not in all honesty say the girl went out with the intention of using the car as a weapon that she went out intending to crash intending to hurt or maim somone else. This was a classic case of stupidity. Gross stupidity. Being stupid and dumb has never been a crime. Not yet. ------------------------------ TourVanMan TM < Ex RF >
The point I am trying to make is that there are some things that you can do whilst driving a car that are akin to manslaughter. The very definition of manslaughter is that you caused a death but did not mean to cause that death.
There have been recent cases where some scroat has punched an unfortunate victim to the ground whilst robbing them of a few quid or their mobile phone. They did not mean to kill them, they meant to disable them so they could rob them, but the person died anyway - manslaughter.
You get in a car and do something so stupid as to text whilst driving, effectively driving with your eyes shut, and you do so in the obvious knowledge that it is highly dangerous and can result in someone getting killed.
In the same way, someone who has a skinful does so in the knowledge that if they get in a car they can kill someone - they don't set out to do so, but their actions directly lead to that eventuality.
I am sorry but I can't see the difference, and if someone I was close to, god forbid, was ever the victim of such an action, and the person responsible walked away with a couple of years and a driving ban, just because the weapon used in the act was a car then I would probably never get over that.
|
The trouble is that
obvious knowledge that it is highly dangerous and can result in someone getting killed.
is second nature to us, its not to most teenagers. The thought of danger or death does not compute in the teen mind.
------------------------------
TourVanMan TM < Ex RF >
|
anyone who works in the criminal justice system will know that women do actually tend to receive lengthier custodial sentences than men and often for less serious offences...
(over the years I have been amazed at the sentences handed out to female shoplifters/ druggies ) whilst males who often have a longer criminal history will walk free
I put this down to several things:
Women will tend to admit their crimes hence attracting the wrath of the CPS / Courts etc, also they are not the 'mainstay' of big money defence firms simply because on the whole they lack the ability to go 'no comment..f_ck you' without bursting into tears and holding their hands up.
Prisons: clearly the female prison population has spare capacity.
Judges know it, defence barristers know it, hence soft targets exactly like this case!
|
|
|
To TVM's comment:
"is second nature to us, its not to most teenagers. The thought of danger or death does not compute in the teen mind."
Shouldn't be allowed to drive then.
|
|
|
|
There are some very unpleasant people about........fortunately very much in the minority, but enough of them to be a worry.
they seem to get away very lightly most of the time, which does not stop them doing what they do, gives no recompense to the wronged and does not serve justice in the slightest.
these people need constant lengthy prison sentences to prevent them continuing their lives of crime and to protect the rest of us.....anything less than prison is to them a 'let off'... and let's face it the average member of public considers anything less than prison a let off as well, (if we are talking about an 'oik' with a criminal history).
the texting girl is not of that group.
what she did deserves a noticeable punishment (for all the reasons stated above), but...because the really bad people get off noticeable punishments....when people like her do get one, it seems overly severe, when probably it isn't........it's the other sentences being excessively lenient that are the problem.
to the average person, a community order, fine, probation etc would be the end of the world.. with total shame......to an 'oik' it's another let off.....that is what needs addressing.
|
TVM, tyro, Westpig: OK.
Hang'em and flog'em brigade: not OK.
Moral philosophy: difficult.
Women's prisons
a) not as full as men's prisons
b) not as nasty as men's prisons (but quite nasty enough).
The girl should be banned from driving for life. Not the sort of thing she or anyone she knows will be able to forget. And quite sufficient under the circumstances.
I imagine the person must feel very bad about what she has done. And if she doesn't, prison won't change anything. Nothing will.
|
The girl should be banned from driving for life. >>
There's a whole raft of motoring-related offences that the average punter can stray into e.g. slightly wandering over a speed limit or inadvertently forgeting to tax/Mot/SORN the vehicle. But, using a mobile phone whilst driving is a deliberate and considered transgression of the law - and extremely stupid, particularly texting. The offence should carry a 10 year ban if caught and a lifetime ban if a death results. I don't want to pay to keep someone in prison just for being an idiot and too stupid to be allowed on on the road. Our prisons are full and the roads are overcrowded - the sensible answer is just too easy for our pathetic law makers.
Driving a car whilst banned (for whatever reason) should result in the loss of body parts!
|
Having read all of the above comments, I would like to add some of my own.
The sentence given in this case is entirely in line with the sentencing guidelines and it is society in general that has had an opportunity to input to these, albeit in a roundabout way via sentencing guidelines committees. The sentences for this offence has recently been updated and increased. The sentence in this case was identical to those given to other young drivers (mostly males) for the same offence in recent months.
I believe, also, there are other considerations than just thinking that only having to serve two years of a four year sentence is lenient. Because the sentence is greater than 2 1/2 years it will never be wiped from this girls? police record. She will always have it and will have to declare it on many occasions. It will affect her education, employment and earning opportunities for ever. 65% of employers will reject any applicant with a police record. Her credit rating will be adversely affected with consequential results.
Every quiet thinking minute for the rest of her life she will recall the knowledge that she caused the death of an innocent human being and that she is now a convicted criminal. A previous young offender recently interviewed said specifically about this point, that whilst prison was not an experience to be repeated, ?It?s the gremlins inside your head that really get you?.
One comment alluded to the fact that a YOI was a soft option. Read the Inspector of Prisons report to see the reality; see Portland YOI and others. These places have a bullying and abuse record greater than even the worst adult prisons. They are under funded and any decent young first offender will be frightened out of their lives. The occurrence of self harm in women?s? prisons is also very serious. 85% of young offenders will re-offend
In many respects, that four year sentence will turn out to be a lifetime.
On the subject of the imprisonment of young people, it pains me to see how, in this country, we lock up so many young people and for so long. This is not character building, as some people would advocate, but merely creates a new generation of re-offenders. Just look at the figures. No other European countries treat their kids like that. There must be a more selective and socially valuable way to punish and to teach young offenders than throwing them into a melting pot of miscreants, only to learn new crimes. Young offenders too have needs, hopes, fears and aspirations, as do all our children and they need attending to, however they have offended.
On the subject of young drivers, we have a responsibility also to protect them from them selves and their own ideas of invincibility. Some 25% of Death by Dangerous Driving convictions are for drivers under the age of 20. We have to educate them and make sure that they understand fully what?s at stake when they get behind the wheel of a car. Some good ideas have emerged this week on this subject and I support the idea of graduated licensing. I know some of my points will be contentious, but that?s the way I feel about this subject.
|
Michael, If you had seen how the Inspector of Prisons report was actually obtained you wouldnt be quoting it as factual or anything approaching reality.
Having spent over thirty years in a Managerial position in Prisons I have seen several carried out at close hand.
Just to illustrate one example. The Inspector himself (herself at present) turns up at the establishment on a Monday morning with his team of junior Governor grades.
He has drinks with the Governor and a stroll around leaving at lunchtime in his Chauffeur driven car.
During the week his henchman wander around asking Staff and prisoners their opinions on anything.
On the Friday the Inspector returns and has coffee in the boardroom with the Governor after listening to his teams report.
They all go away and spend the next few weeks creating a very hefty manual of all the things they have been told.
Some of their findings are hilarious and are a result of Staff and prisoners simply having aired their particular grevience or perhaps even having a wind up.
When the report is published it sounds very authentic when a stern Inspector of Prisons appears on TV announcing what he has found at prison X.
No difference to politicians. Take all you hear with a very large pinch of salt.
Prisons are very different in reality to what inexperienced people believe.
wemyss
|
Wemyss, Thank you for responding to my comments. Your response is gratefully received, and I appreciate your input. As you might have gathered I am passionate about the subject of the incarceration of young people, and their motoring skills, especially where these coincide. I am a recently retired 6th form tutor from a large secondary school, but still working part time within the education sector. I have spent many, many hours discussing subjects such as these within that environment.
Naturally, my views about prisons or YOIs have been gained largely from what I have read, including official reports. You do not actually say if my impression is generally better or worse than reality and I would appreciate your further comments on that point. If you are still active within the prison service and could arrange for me to see inside one (as a visitor of course), or know how I might go about this, you would have my sincere thanks. On this point I am being serious.
A recent book, written by a first offender and a professional man, imprisoned for 3 years for Death by Dangerous Driving, quotes his prison as being a place of medieval squalor and degradation. In his first 6 weeks he leaned, he says, to hoist, steal cars, buy drugs and how to take them and had been in considerable physical danger several times. On his way out of the prison a younster, just arriving for his sentence, asked him 'What's it like?'. This book has an introduction by a Chief Inspector of Prisons who states that it is 'a brave and important book'. You may have read it. Of course this is about one prison and not all are Victorian, although many have their roots in that era and are changing. Please enlighten me.
With regards, Michael
|
What if the story was this?
"A teenage driver who caused the death of a woman in a crash after drinking half a bottle of vodka at a friend's 21st birthday party has been sent to a young offenders' institute...
As it's been shown using a mobile is MORE dangerous than drink driving - when driving drunk you concentrate more, but your reactions are severly disabled which is why you crash, when using a mobile you don't concentrate on the driving - I think she deserved everything she received and possibly more.
Treat it like drink driving with the same punishments and the message might get through. Having a phone in your hand seems to be a requirement for most young drivers I see and sending texts whilst in slow moving queues must be part of the test as I see it every morning.
|
Michael, I admire your interest and concern but have been retired now for over 10 years and have no connections within the service as many of my old colleagues have also finished. In any case as an individual you would not be granted permission to visit unless you were part of an organised group such as Board of Visitors, Or perhaps some sporting league which play within Prisons.
My last visit to one was over two years ago when a friend retired and he escorted me on a tour of the Establishment.
This was a large open prison and it was more of a Gentleman?s country club than a Prison. It holds a large number of lifers many of whom work out. They have their own car park and private cars and their victims would be horrified to see their rooms with colour TVs and every facility you can imagine. Library, Playing fields, snooker rooms, excellent cuisine and just about everything you would be paying for normally.
I must disappoint you and state that I am rather right wing in these matters and hold no liberal views on rehabilitation which in my opinion is simply a business consisting of employing huge numbers of people in Prisons with no apparent success. You would be surprised at the number of these people in comparison to the front line Officers who have to pick up the pieces when it all goes wrong.
As regards books such as you describe, (Brave and Important ?) a great amount of literary licence is necessary to sell the book. In your described one of the first offender it is most unlikely that he would serve his sentence in a closed prison and would only have been received there from court, and would have been shortly transferred to an open prison. And as regards meeting a youngster on his way out this sounds strange. Discharges from all prisons are done early in the morning around 8.00am. Admissions are from the courts usually beginning late afternoon. Secure vehicles are driven into the prison with new arrivals. Discharges walk out through the gate.
Prisons in the sixties were ran as a well disciplined service for the benefit and safety of staff and inmate. The liberal brigade, EU, human rights, health and safety, changed the whole ethos of what prison meant and the consequences are there for all to see in the population explosion of 29000 in 1965 to around 75K ?. And remember that if the same sentencing procedures were in force today it would be around 100K.
regards
wemyss
|
i'm with wemyss on this one.......having spent 26 yrs trying to lock people up who range from the truly evil to the truly selfish.
being a member of public as well a lot of the time........i would dearly like to see rehabilitation AND punishment....
where i work the crime is commited by a fairly low number of people, the same old faces..yet it is a complete lottery to get them locked away and being locked away is the ONLY WAY to prevent them committing more crime in the short term
if there is a mid term or long term way of preventing them from re-offending then i'm yet to see it.......all the current ideas are laughed at by the yobs/crooks
to go back to the origins of this post, i agree the girl texting could probably benefit from more rehab than punishment, but she still needs some punishmenht, the crime committed should dictate it
|
Legalise drugs maybe Westpig ?
--
PU without his Mod Hard Hat on !
|
Legalise drugs maybe Westpig ? --
yes........that's a good one......i really don't know the answer to that, as i've seen close at hand a real horror story with cannabis usage and that's considered to be a more low key drug than others...(and the worry would be that more people might use it 'cos it's legal innit' and more available and/or cheaper)
yet if it wasn't a criminal offence to possess/use a controlled drug then an awful lot of its' usage by addicts could be dealt with via the NHS instead of the Old Bill/Courts....and if they're getting it on prescription they wouldn't need to steal/burgle......and there'd be the thought of if it isn't illegal there'd be some that wouldn't be so tempted as they're no longer giving two fingers to society.
are you sure you want to recommend something that might affect your income?.....:-)
|
Wemyss, thank you very much for your response to my comments which I found to be interesting, frank and worthy of debate. My purpose in mentioning prison establishments in the first place was purely in the context of the relatively short term imprisonment of young drivers. I just think the way we lock up so many of our young to be very sad, whereas other European countries seem to have alternative punishments and rehabilitation schemes. I can not accept the idea that even two years in prison is lenient for a first offence for an 18 or 19 year old driver, considering the long term consequences which will follow. This seems to me to be retribution and not punishment or rehabilitation. If you do not rehabilitate and educate and prepare for release then how do you reduce reoffending?
The book that I mentioned, should you wish to read it (not expensive from Amazon), is entitled ?Inside? and was written by John Hoskinson, a past Golf Professional from a Surrey Golf club. It is not an authoritative tome on the prison service but merely his refection of his time in prison, for Death by Dangerous Driving. The fact that Sir David Ramsbottom has written a fairly long introduction seems to give it some validity. Sir Stephen Tumin is quoted as saying ?It was an appalling experience that could happen to any of us?. With regard to your comment about time in an open prison, this person served his time in Brixton, Wandsworth and Coldingley, none lower than a ?C cat? prison I think. I appreciate that it has to be written to sell. If you like you can borrow my copy.
With regards, Michael
|
Michael,
Do you think the 'texting girl' should receive some punishment, as well as any rehabilitation? Do the relatives of someone killed prematurely and/or the rest of us as society in general not get a say in this?
My difficulty with rehabilitation is that the lower life forms that we have in our society do not recognise most of the non custodial options. They either utterly ignore them or treat them with the utmost contempt.
I agree texting girl was probably not of the same ilk and would not need the same degree of punishment as perhaps others do......but she did need some, imho.
|
Hello, Westpig. Yes, I do think that the young girl in question should be punished and I think that rehabilitation has to take place so that she can return to society after her ?punishment? and not re-offend. I?m just not sure that I agree with what society has deemed to be appropriate punishment in cases such as these or perhaps, more accurately, what society is actually able to deliver in terms of punishment and rehabilitation.
It is important to realise that I am writing about young drivers and their appalling record with regard to causing death by dangerous driving. Clearly what I write is gained from my research, from books, reports, discussions and other information that I can ?find?. Very few examples of factual input from offenders is available and I think only around 5% of the population ever see inside a prison. Society is kept well away from this subject. Even transcripts from courts are unavailable to the public.
I believe that the profile of a typical teenager imprisoned for death by dangerous driving is not the same today as that of your average criminal in a YOI. The young convicted driver is often a first offender, possibly employed, well behaved, decent and from a loving and stable family. These offenders at a young age have had there brains momentarily turn into a pork pie, during which they have made a tragic decision or taken some tragic action in their cars. They didn?t set out to kill. They just didn?t think it would happen to them.
Most of these kids are already in pieces before they have even left the court room or got on the prison bus. I strongly feel that putting them into a hardened YOI alongside a large percentage of violent offenders, drug offenders, sex offenders and the ?low life?, as you call them, is going to achieve anything positive. Society has to differentiate in my opinion. Maybe, a separate regime is needed for motoring offenders, as some other European countries do, I believe. In my opinion, the current method of punishment affects their whole life, even to denying them access to some professions and many other employment opportunities. Is this what society wishes to achieve? I can?t believe it does. Society certainly has to do something about young driver stupidity and their driving education.
Of course there are those that use cars for the repetitive furtherance of their criminal activities and I would leave those to you to deal with. However, the lower life forms, you mentioned, were not born lower life forms. Here, society, government, families and our education system to name a few have intervened and then failed to cope with the consequences.
On the subject of the involvement of the relatives of those killed. Yes, I believe they should have their say. One might argue that shortly after bereavement is not the best time for reasoned input, but I will leave that one aside. There have been some wonderful examples of the bereaved asking the judge for compassion in applying a prison sentence where perhaps long term friends have been together in a car and their son/daughter was killed. They have recognised the long term implications for the survivor.
With regards, Michael
|
Michael, Surrey.
I can't find the book on Amazon. Can you check the details?
|
findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m2242/is_1600_274/a...4
google to the rescue
------------------------------
TourVanMan TM < Ex RF >
|
Hi Tyro, ISBN Number is 0-75282-718-9 Published in 1998 Publisher is Orion. I got mine via amazon.co.uk. I just got a used copy £2 from an amazon associate bookseller but still via the Amazon site.
Happy reading, Michael
|
Thanks Michael & RF.
Happy reading? I take it that you are being ironic.
|
I agree texting girl was probably not of the same ilk and would not need the same degree of punishment as perhaps others do......but she did need some imho.
As much to send a signal to others as anything else. If people are seen to "get away" with this, it's not going to discourage people from using their phone whilst driving.
It's the same principle that explains why the present system of a small fine (and total lack of traffic police to enforce it) doesn't work.
Cheers
DP
--
04 Grand Scenic 1.9 dCi Dynamique
00 Mondeo 1.8TD LX
97 Ford Fiesta 1.4 16v Chicane (for sale)
|
clearly an emotive subject....I recall that driver who reached for a sweet, caused a fatal pile up and was jailed.
Ive currently have a courtesy car that must have the biggest 'invite 'to take ones attention off the road since the mobile was invented.
Nearly everything is controlled by a large touch screen, sat nav, climate control, the works.. In 4 days I still have trouble with working out what it does and the temptation to use it when driving is overwhelming.
This screen is like a magnet to take your eyes off the road, ive actually taken to leaving it on the intro blank screen as its just too much.
I think its that 'oh my where did the last 30 seconds of driving go' that most of us have experienced when simply adjusting a radio station.
|
> As much to send a signal to others as anything else
When I started my enginering apprentaship we did the manadatory helath and safety. With a twist. We were taken to a kind of H&S chamber of horrors. There one was shown eyeballs with nails in (floating in glass jars) pictures of scalped people (even a preserved scalp) mutilated fingers and hands in jars, film and pictures of rescuers cutting off bits of flesh to get someone out of machinery, pictures of lungs that were gassed, pictures of people burned and shriveled after contact with HVE.
You get the picture. Shocking to the extreme.
Teens need to get this kind of education , to show them that cars are leathal, to themselves and others. Most of them dont think or realise it.
Sticking someone in prison for thoughtlessness, just gets you another casualty, and another mouth to support on state benefit because they are unemployable, and an attitude thats passed on to offspring. In effect you are breeding criminals for the future, for the sake of a thoughless moment.
------------------------------
TourVanMan TM < Ex RF >
|
|
Well I'm with you on this TVM, but some people can't get rid of the idea that two wrongs make a right.
|
the sooner more people realise that a driving licence is a privilege and not a right, the better.
As my driving instructor used to say ' every time you get behind the wheel of a car treat it as if it were a loaded gun.'
|
Spot on TVM. I agree, for what it's worth, that prison does not do what it should in an ideal world. I just find it difficult to find another way of punishing people that works.
|
|
Ah, the good old days of the Factory Inspectorate museum (formerly Home Office Industrial Museum) on Horseferry Road. Nearly every day one or two apprentices fainted after they saw the horrors mentioned, particularly in the section with the preserved body parts of certain diseases, now thankfully rare, like "orf", anthrax, pustular dermatitis. When did you visit, TVM?
|
Thats the place Nortones., Went in 1973. Appaling tho it looked, I wondered how one caught anthrax in a machine shop.
Is it still there?
------------------------------
TourVanMan TM < Ex RF >
|
|
Anthrax - goat skins as hippy-wear, made into coats in tailoring, tanning processes, skin-dealing etc to which Factories Act applied. Museum sacrificed in late 70's I think - new Civil Service policy people who flooded in under umbrella of HSE didn't like nasty,vulgar, frightening industrial things:) Actually cost quite a lot to run, but was apparently useful as a resource for info re hazards, and for teaching etc. No matter, it was axed.
|
Sticking someone in prison for thoughtlessness just gets you another casualty and another mouth to support on state benefit because they are unemployable and an attitude thats passed on to offspring. In effect you are breeding criminals for the future for the sake of a thoughless moment.
Absolutely spot on.
|
Sticking someone in prison for thoughtlessness just gets you another casualty and another mouth to support on state benefit because they are unemployable and an attitude thats passed on to offspring.
I would normally agree with you, and I'm no fan at all of the current blame culture.
But someone is dead who wouldn't be if this woman hadn't used the phone 9 times in a 15 minute car journey. And picking up a phone and sending a text while driving involves taking a calculated risk. It has to.
Someone driving down the road who kills someone jumping out in front of them, or who mounts the kerb and kills someone as a result of a blowout or freak mechanical failure is one thing. To me, this is something very different. It is so obviously dangerous to text while driving, and to do it 9 times in 15 minutes shows a complete contempt for both the law, and the car as a potential weapon. The judge could do nothing else in my opinion.
I 100% agree that shock education should be compulsory for teens. A visit to an A&E department, for example.
Cheers
DP
--
04 Grand Scenic 1.9 dCi Dynamique
00 Mondeo 1.8TD LX
97 Ford Fiesta 1.4 16v Chicane (for sale)
|
...>>> It is so obviously dangerous to text while driving, and to do it 9 times in 15 minutes shows a complete contempt for both the law, and the car as a potential weapon...<<<<
Not forgetting the salient fact that she was travelling in the dark on an unlit road at 70mph in the rain!
|
Well guys, what would you want to happen if this was your teenaged son or daughter? Imprison them with the prospect of affecting their life long future, because they ignored the law or forgot the fact their car was a lethal weapon (remember they are teens)? Or what?
The girl in question apparently wanted to become an accountant. I doubt if that profession is open to her now. I'm not sure, maybe it will be, but her career propects will be seriously dented now. Other convicted youngsters have certainly found this to be the case.
Or should we find another way?
|
When you have done a number of years in law enforcement you go through different phases. To start with you're young, indignant, want to change the world and naively think you can make a real difference.
After a while a bit of reality kicks in, you calm down a bit, still try to help and change things, bit become used to setbacks.
Eventually you become a bit disillusioned, can't undertsand why others aren't as passionate as you are about the wrongs, but accept that they're not (because they don't know).
One thing though never changes......the thought that when you go home to the nice part of town, you are leaving behind the helpless to be abused by scum. It matters not to me that the 'scum' are like they are for a reason, they are still 'scum'. I feel so sorry for people who are stuck living next doot to that.......or are constantly burgled by that, or fear a visit to the local shop because of that or have lost a loved one because of that....
texting girl doesn't fit that criteria to me, but plenty do......the plenty that do should be hammered in my opinion, texting girl shouldn't (but should still receive a noticeable penalty).
I'm not intending on insulting anyone's liberal opinions, we're a democracy and thrive upon differing viewpoints.....but.....there are a vast number of people who have been left badly let down by our weak Criminal Justice System.....and it troubles me, because i can escape it; many, many decent folk can't.
|
texting girl doesn't fit that criteria to me but plenty do......the plenty that do should be hammered in my opinion texting girl shouldn't (but should still receive a noticeable penalty).
Like a life driving ban Westpig, or wouldn't that be noticeable? I think it would.
Anyway I believe that you speak, decently, with the voice of experience.
|
Texting while driving is more dangerous than speaking on the phone while driving because you need to look at the mobile when texting.
At least when you are talking on the phone you can see everything you need to.
|
texting girl doesn't fit that criteria to me but plenty do......the plenty that do should be hammered in my opinion texting girl shouldn't (but should still receive a noticeable penalty).
Well said westpig, thoroughly accept your comments.
Noticeable being the operative word here, I believe, and where I would like to see the differentiation.
|
There are no right answers here. She did something absolutely stupid and someone got killed.
There are some people that mean to do nasty things because that is the way they are. They do not care about the consequences or other people and would do it all over again if got them the result that they wanted.
Then there are some that cause accidents through stupidity and truly wish that they could change what happened. Rightly they should be punished but the punishment should not be as severe as someone who does not care about what they have done.
I hope the girl falls in to the latter group.
There is a fine line between criminal action and accident though. Some of the UK?s driving laws stem from a time when jury?s would not find a driver guilty of a fatal road accident because they knew that under the existing laws that the driver could be put away for life if, for example, man slaughter was proved.
Parliament then introduced laws specific to motoring, which reduced the sentences for causing a fatality.
It now seems that the government and the police have a new agenda against motorists that cause fatalities and wish to increase the level of sentences handed down. Stupidity should be countered by education though and not by example, unless the individual merits being made an example of.
|
Nice post Zippy123, I absolutely agree on the point about education. I know a lot of good work on driver education already goes on around the country. The ideas published last week to consider graduated licensing with intermediate restrictions, coupled with education, may just fit the bill for young drivers.
Stupidity seems to come with the psyche of a teenage driver and we have all been there. We are locking up a disproportionate number of young drivers as a result of their stupidity.
Let's hope that these proposed changes will be accepted by the government and introduced without undue delay and without being watered down.
|
>I'm not intending on insulting anyone's liberal opinions,
Westpig, some liberal opinions need insulting nowadays if it puts us on the road back to commonsense.
Kevin...
|
It is possible to be liberal and have commonsense. If you go back and read some of the posts, you will find that the commonality of worry (and liberals tend to worry) is that the commonsense "Stuff and nonsense bang 'em all up" mentality puts people in an environment that is not conducive to reform, in fact it is the complete opposite.
IMHO, if you lose the will to at least TRY to reform, then there is something very wrong. I totally agree with Westpig et al that yes there is an element of unhelpable scum. I hate to say it but there is. However, having assessed my rather ranty (it was Monday) contribution yesterday, I would tend to agree that there is definitely levels of criminal and crime, and they should be dealt with differently. I am not, heaven forfend, in favour of a system where the middle classes get treated differently purely because they have the wherewithal to help their children become accountants, solicitors or whatever this girl intended to be... what I AM in favour of is a punishment that fits the crime of a non-habitual offender.
I hope that this makes sense, and is a reasonable mix of liberal common-sense. Which is what is needed.
|
All I can add and this is not referring to the texting girl but a general observation.
Rehabilitation sounds fine and honourable in a decent persons mind. But they are seeing things from their own perceptions and unless they actually view the offenders in real life cannot begin to realise that in most cases there is absolutely no possibility of attaining this.
I suppose a similarity exists with a western nation trying to impose its system of democracy on a different culture.
With the majority of prisoners ! (And I emphasise the majority) one gets no remorse or regret. In fact they boast openly among themselves of their exploits and what damage or injury they have caused. They are not in general stupid and are always knowledgeable about their rights. The only time they put a different face on is when they appear before parole boards and Welfare Officers. Many is the time when I have heard them returning from such meetings and describing their tale of repentance and how they wish for a new beginning.
I?m sure Westpig could describe a similar happening when he takes them from Police cells to the magistrates court. Its suddenly a different person who appears in the dock.
Education only works when the recipient wants to absorb it. In most cases criminals already have their own values and have no wish to change to what others think is the norm. Rehabilitation in my experience only comes from within the offender himself and is not influenced by discussion groups, or any other Institutional aids.
A man who thinks I?m never going to come to prison again because whatever?..is rehabiltated. But its certainly not through anything we say or do.
The only tool I know to deter people from returning to prison is to make it unpleasant.
Cynical you may well say but its what my own experience tells me.
wemyss
|
Stevied, sorry I certainly did not intend, in my posts, to suggest a difference in treatment because some had the opportinity to move into a profession such as accountancy. It just so happened that the news item stated this girl wanted to do that and she worked for a bank. Presumably she doesn't any more.
My point intended to say that a sentence for that length of time (4 yrs) brought with it serious consequential side effects. One being that employment prospects were likely to be affected adversley for ever more. This is a long time for a 19yo. Some professions and many jobs will be out of reach for ever because of their terms of application. There is evidence for this.
Two of the key ingredients for re-offending are lack of employment and lack of anywhere to live. In the end, society may have to pick up the bill for these consequences in one way or another.
|
Wasn't taken that way, Michael! Just thinking aloud....
I agree prison shouldn't be a holiday camp, but I think that we need to examine each case individually. If a sentence is custodial, then it shouldn't be a one size fits all.
I am with westpig, it's easy to walk away "back to the nice side of town". Not everyone can. We can be as smug as we like, but we don't often have to put up with scum's actions. The poor, the old and the needy who live nearby have to. This is why I don't wish to condemn their offspring to more of the same because we as the "haves" just lock them up and think no more about it.
I am not saying I have all the answers, patently I don't. But if you don't think about things, things don't change do they?
|
My take is simple. You can try to help people if they want to be helped. But texting the number of times the girl did, and showing no remorse = a hopless attitudes.
Hopeless attitudes make hopeless citizens. So get them out of the way before they kill someone else is my view.
madf
|
Why is everyone going on about the 'unhelpable' toerag types we all know exist? This thread is about a young woman who clearly isn't one of those, but who should not be allowed to drive a car ever again.
She would be wasting valuable jail space while her life was being ruined.
|
Yep, Lud.. I think that succintly sums it up. I have googled and googled but can't find any references to her being "unrepentant". She denied using the phone shortly after the accident, she was probably scared out of her mind and a small part of her thought she might get away with it. That doesn't reflect well, but it was a gut reaction I think.
|
This may assist the deliberations from the victim's relatives perspective which IMHO has taken second place to the concerns applicable to the offender:-
Judge John Milford's sentencing comments
-------------------------------------------------
Sending texts behind the wheel was perilous...the use of your mobile caused this case to fall in the category of higher culpability...and had left the victim's family bereft...The victim had a successful career and every prospect of a long, active and happy retirement...
Victim's daughter's comments
-----------------------------------
My brother and I had the most difficult task that we have ever had to do in our entire lives when we travelled the short distance to mam and dads house in order to inform our father of mam's death...the death of the woman who was his wife, his best friend and lifetime companion and whom he had loved and shared his life with for 50 years...it will remain with me until my last breath, the impact on our father who was once a proud and strong man but is now broken, lost and his heart has been torn apart. I find it impossible to put into words the sense of pain and horror of losing my mother and the impact this has had on my life and the lives of my brother and father...mam and I were best friends and before she died I couldn't imagine a day going by without speaking to her at least five times...our mam has died through no fault of her own and her death was totally avoidable. It has been all the worse by the fact that BEGG (the offender) has shown no remorse nor expressed any sympathy towards us at all..
|
|
It's possible the offender had been legally advised to say nothing that might imply guilt. And of course to wait until after the court case is cynical and waiting too long. Lawyers don't always get it right.
|
>martin
Thanks
Based on the above I rest my case. NO remorse.
Note she went to a Young Offenders Institution ... not jail.
madf
|
madf, this is from the HM Prison Service website: (for 18-20 yr olds)
'Prison life for a young offender held in a Young Offenders Institution (or YOI) isn't that different to prison life for adult prisoners, however there are some differences in the way YOIs are run'.
As far as anyone can find out, the main differences seem to be the availability of education and interpersonal skills type of courses, anger management etc.
However, as mentioned previously, statistics suggest that bullying and abuse is worse in YOIs than adult prisons.
What we need to have is some well informed input from a past offender. The Brake organisation actually have a father and son team , I believe, who visit prisons, schools etc to talk about the dangers of being a young driver. The son actually spent 18 months in a YOI for Death by Dangerous Driving.
|
Some posts have implied that the presence of some concern for the offender denotes an unfeeling attitude to the crash victim. This is certainly not so I am sure in most cases.
It is also worth noting that those close to a crash victim very often feel an urge for retributive, eye-for-an-eye justice, and that this is entirely understandable to any normal person.
However that as the sole or main basis for justice was abandoned in this country centuries ago. Punishment or retribution or whatever you call it was taken out of the hands of the victims and placed in those of the judiciary, for obvious reasons.
|
Note she went to a Young Offenders Institution ... not jail. madf
I bet the inmates of Feltham are really happy its not called a Prison...........
------------------------------
TourVanMan TM < Ex RF >
|
Sorry, don't mean to detract from the current thread but I just noticed this.
In Today's Whitehaven News. Another Death By Dangerous Driving seemingly caused by taking his eyes off the road. This man is 54.
DEATH CRASH DRIVER WAS LOADING TAPE
A MAN accused of causing a double fatal road accident, in which a Frizington man died, was changing a music tape when the crash happened, a court has heard.
The jury at Preston Crown Court heard yesterday (Monday) that Sellafield worker Stuart Cree told a police officer he took his eyes off the road for a moment to change a music cassette tape when the accident happened.
|
considered some black humour by 'guessing' what the tape was......but decided to Mod myself
|
It was reported in tonights Evening Mail that this driver was sentenced to 12months jail for each offence of causing death by dangerous driving (to run concurrently), banned from driving for 4 years, and must re-sit an extended driving test.
The judge was reported to have said that it (the accident) was caused by more than momentary inattention.
So why the difference in punishments?
|
I can find no excuse for using a mobile phone whilst driving.
Nevertheless it is a concern when these discussions are based on misleading facts.
The barrister of Rachel Begg stated to the court that she was remorseful and this was acknowledged by Judge John Milford. The daughter of the victim immediately came out of the court and said to the press that no remorse was shown by this girl. What value is gained from contradicting the statements of the court other than to mislead the public and perhaps stir up hatred?
|
>The barrister of Rachel Begg stated to the court that she was remorseful and this was
> acknowledged by Judge John Milford.
Did Judge Milford see any evidence of her remorse and acknowledge this when passing sentence? If so it seems odd that the victim's family would immediately contradict him when speaking outside the court (assuming the press reported it in-context).
I'd want to see the transcript before coming down off the fence on this one. I have sympathy for both parties. It's an extremely sad affair that has, in all likelihood, destroyed two families.
What were the sentencing options open to Judge Milford?
Kevin...
|
Perhaps the victim's daughter was alluding to the fact that Begg never offered remorse or sympathy until such time that the usual mitigation was proffered by the defending barrister immediately prior to sentencing which does somewhat diminish the element of genuine concern?
|
I think Geordie1 secondguessing what the family are alluding to is muddying the water. Often in these cases the barristers hold the strings and although Rachel Begg demonstrated remorse, public announcement would be controlled by the barrister. A side issue this girl is still a human being so lets use some decorum and use her full name rather than just her surname in an attempt to devalue her existence
I agree with Kevin to sit on the fence. So far in the press I have seen that she was driving a VW Golf, a VW Polo and a Vauxhall, the accident took place on the 12th and the 16th November....I can go on with other points of confusion created by the press. So which aspects of the reporting of this case are true and which are sensationalisation to whip up the public and get them to come off the fence.
I am sure that people will disagree with me but I donot believe that Rachel Begg is wholly responsible as stated by the daughter of the victim. By the nature of teenager they will push their actions, often mimicing adults, to the limit. Rachel Begg and many others like her will have seen and still see adults regularly breaking the law and using mobile phones whilst driving. This gives the impression that the law is of no value and this is acceptable behaviour ~ because it is done regularly by adults! Crass stupidity on the behalf of Rachel Begg took the situation too far. Yes Rachel Begg failed society (as I stated in my previous message I can see no excuse for using a phone whilst driving), however society failed this girl and is failing many like her. We are all indirectly responsible (I am sure people will shout at this point) because we use phones and drive, we know somebody who uses a phone and drives and/or we have seen people use a phone and drive .... and we have done nothing about it! However now many people are happy to throw mud ~ typical. Society should be helping young people like Rachel Begg to fully understand where they failed and not just walking away.
|
>>I am sure that people will disagree with me but I do not believe that Rachel Begg is wholly responsible as stated by the daughter of the victim<<<
I most certainly do disagree with you 'TMC' but if we are into semantics perhaps I should address you more appropriately as 'Mr, Mrs or Miss TMC'
Barristers represent clients but it does not preclude the client from insisting that they wish to publically express their genuine remorse and sympathy prior to the mitigation being given before sentence is passed when the sentiment is more meaningfull to the relatives of the innocent victim.
It is apparent that you do not have major concerns for the relatives of the victim in this case and that you choose to undermine the press reporting via minor inaccuracies relevant to the vehicle make /model and date of the offence.
The comments of the victim's daughter, who is a solicitor, were largely based upon the content of her victim impact statement and her television interview post sentencing.
Sadly, you quote that you do not believe that Miss Begg is totally responsible for the fatal collision as stated by the victim's daughter, implying that 'society failed this girl'.
The facts:-
She is an adult who had 2 years driving experience
Using a mobile when driving
Sent / Rceived texts on 9 occasions within a 15 minute period
Drove on an unlit road at night in the rain
Drove at 70mph when texting and at the time of the fatal collision
Initially denied using her mobile at time of fatal collision
Perhaps you should arrange to meet with the victim's relatives and see if they agree with your observations.
|
Using someone's surname only is a form of disrespect.....i see no reason why anyone shouldn't show a mild form of disrespect to someone who has through her own stupidity and recklessness killed an innocent lady and who is now in jail.
|
>tmc
"we are all responsible"...
That's unfortuantely imo the kind of illogical thinking that makes people like that girl think (or not as the case may be) they can do anything they like and they are not responsible.
It's always soemone else's fault.
Cow excrement!:-)
madf
|
I think I will offer another ha?p?orth worth here, (there, that shows my age), at the risk of going round in circles.
I agree with Geordie1 and do not see how Rachel Begg can be anything but responsible. She ran into the back of the other car causing the accident and her level of culpability was recognised by the court accordingly, by her use of a mobile phone whilst driving.
As I said in an earlier posting, the sentence was exactly according to the sentencing guidelines, published and available for all to read. You can see identical examples on line, also involving other teenagers.
What saddens me more than anything is that this is yet another case of a young driver causing a death and getting locked up. A quarter of all Death by Dangerous Driving convictions are for drivers aged under 20. This is totally out of proportion to the driving population. In the process they have killed innocent victims, many of their friends and some of their own family members.
Many others have killed themselves too. This cannot be allowed to continue. If all of the skills required to drive safely on our roads today are unobtainable with our current driver training or if young drivers are unable to grasp the possible life changing consequences of getting behind the wheel of a car, then they have to be protected, by law, from their own deficiencies. This may be by enhanced education or by a graduated system of enforced restrictions as to how and when they may drive. I see yet more examples in the news today.
My other key bugbear, not widely accepted by others, I know, is that I believe as a society we lock up far too many of our kids (or other peoples? kids) and for too long, and unsuccessfully at that; and no, I don?t know the answer to this.
|
Michael,
While I agree with your diagnosis on DDD convictions and under twenties I'm not convinced that any amount of training will remedy the situation, at least so far as males are concerned. As a young man I fully understood the risks of hard driving, fell walking in dangerous conditions and sitting on the outside of a wall with a fifty foot drop below me. I was still prpepapred to take the risk 'cos it would not happen to me. Possibly if a mate next to me on the wall fell off I'd have changed my behaviour; but however similar the facts I don't think a similar incident in another street would have made the slightest differnce.
|
Bromptonaut, I know the feeling. I used to sit on a wall like that as a kid, train spotting. Frightening, when you think back about it.
I think the theory is that by restricting young drivers from taking part in certain driving activities (night driving, filling the car with their friends etc.), whilst giving extra training, you remove more chances of them killing people. If you can achieve that until the age of about 20 you will reduce their opportunity for stupidity, due to immaturity, by about 8% or so per year.
Countries that have introduced graduated schemes seem to have achieved quite significant reductions in young driver deaths, and candidates for imprisonment. Hence if they can?t sit on the wall, for long enough, they will eventually realise that sitting on it was not a good idea anyway and the risk is best avoided.
There are better qualified people taking part in this thread who might want to comment on my response.
|
Michael, I think your reasoning is correct in restricting young drivers as you describe.
From my home late at night in a small town I can hear these young people racing up and down nearby roads, and many accidents have occurred some with fatalities.
I do note however that on the A50 which is not very far away, a very large increase of young girls obviously on there way home from work in the late afternoon who drive at very high speeds in the outside lane many using mobile phones at the same time.
I do remember that when women first began to be drivers they were generally of the older group and were very cautious drivers.
However we now see as many young girls driving as young lads and rightly so. But they are equally as aggressive and risk takers as the boys which I find surprising This is only my own observation and a small snapshot of our roads and don?t know if others would agree.
At one time females were considered safer drivers by the insurance companies and I would be interested to know if this has changed.
wemyss
|
How about this, in the news yesterday? I posted an extract about this on Tuesday, where the man was fiddling with his tape player whilst driving.
?Stuart Cree, 54, was found guilty yesterday (Wednesday) of two charges of causing death by dangerous driving following a three-day trial at Carlisle Crown Court.?
This man killed 2 people, did not plead guilty but went to trial and he received a only 12 month sentence.
I appreciate there are differences between this case and that of Rachel Begg but not that many. Can it really justify a sentence of only one quarter of that given to the teenaged girl?
|
Michael...I am not aware of all the circumstances relevant to the case that you quote but on what you indicate it would appear that the offender Mr Cree was involved in a singular incident culminating in the fatal collision which rightfully deserved a custodial sentence. The case involving Ms Begg involved greater criminal culpability (as has been graphically outlined in this thread) and as per the sentencing comments of the trial judge, was a deciding factor for the increased custodial sentence.
|
I fully understand the issue of culpability Geordie1. I have written about it in previous posts, and that of mobiles. But 1/4 of the the sentence, when he doesn't plead guilty and kills twice the number of people?
I know we will can resolve this but it just seems out of proportion to me. More like let's make an example of the teenager and, as is evident, few of them are listening.
|
Michael...Within my role of law enforcement prior to my recent retirement, I had many occasions when I had a close working relationship with His Honour Judge Milford when he was then a barrister. Please be assured that he is not the type of person who would subscribe to dealing with offenders in the way that you depict. He is one of the most considerate, fair and astute advocates that I have ever worked with and his ultimate decision relevant to the sentence that he passed upon Ms Begg would have been reached following his most careful deliberation having due regard to all of the circumstances of the case.
The barrister representing Ms Begg would no doubt have lodged notice of appeal against the sentence if he considered it to be axcessive.
|
|
Geordie1, I appreciate your comments and bow to your knowledge and experience. My post was rather poorly worded and I did get out of bed the wrong side today. I appreciate that Ms Begg's sentence was within the guidelines. The gentlemen in question was rather fortunate then with his sentence at the front end of the scale.
|
|
|
|
