Safe Speed Forums

A case where an unlicensed driver in a stolen car killed a young girl but was only given 12 weeks for "Careless" started me thinking.

Could a prima facie case of "careless" be automatically upgraded to "dangerous" where there are aggravating factors like the above? The burden of proof would be the same as for careless driving but the sentence potentially larger.

This would avoid creating the new catch-all law proposed recently.

_________________
Malcolm W.
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not represent the views of Safespeed.

The guy who stole the same girl's teddy from her memorial got 8 months!

Great is our legal system.

[devil's advocate mode on]

I don't know the facts of the case, but I do not believe that being unlicenced and in a stolen car automatically constitutes dangerous or careless driving.
It could have been that he was driving quite safely, and the girl ran out right in front of him from behind a parked van, for example.
The fact that he was unlicenced and driving a stolen car should have been treated as separate cases to the main charge, punished separately and not used as aggravating factors - unless, of course, there was a material connection (for example, if he was being chased by the police)
If we go down that road then, should you have an accident, the fact that you were exceeding the speed limit by just one mph could be used as an aggravating factor, and result in a much harsher punishment than is deserved.

[devil's advocate mode off]

_________________
Only when ideology, prejudice and dogma are set aside does the truth emerge - Kepler

A solution for these sorts of cases is written into the Road Safety bill currently going through Parliament.

In addition to the very worrying 'causing death by careless driving' proposal there is also something similar to 'causing death while driving illegally'. I'll dig it out.

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

Worrying because its a long term, or not long enough?

I first read this and thought, what an incredibly short term.
With licences and the the car aside this is still manslaughter.
I am sure that carries a much heavier term than 12 weeks.

But, in the 1980's, drink drivers were treated so lightly,
because of their "diminished responibility" (they were drunk)
they got literally let off in some cases, but this is one thing that
I am glad has changed for the better. Still there is that diminished
responsibility though with alcohol? They should ban alcohol though
I think. Sorry, another one of my lead balloons there.