Justice?

[John Galt]

12 weeks for child killer

A man ran over and killed a young child - no insurance, no licence etc. The jail term deemed to be appropriate - 12 weeks

[expat]

12 weeks for child killer

A man ran over and killed a young child - no insurance, no licence etc. The jail term deemed to be appropriate - 12 weeks

The punishment for a crime depends on the crime. The crimes of driving without insurance or licence have nothing to do with the fact that the child died.

The crime that caused the child's death, according to the charge, was careless driving, not reckless driving (which is more serious) or dangerous driving (which is quite a bit more serious). Which crime he committed depends on what he did, not what happened as a result.

For example, if he had driven along the road, beside an otherwise law-abiding citizen who had driven exactly the same way, but had not hit anybody, they would both have committed exactly the same crime, and would be liable to receive exactly the same punishment.

Tantrum is exactly what you're having here, I'm afraid.

[NoddY]

Levi Bleasdale from Burnley probably wasn't middle class, so her little life wasn't worth as much. And we can't go upsetting our maid's relations and them lot so we're not going to refer it to the Crown Court. Sorry peeps!

[sasguru]

The punishment for a crime depends on the crime. The crimes of driving without insurance or licence have nothing to do with the fact that the child died.

The crime that caused the child's death, according to the charge, was careless driving, not reckless driving (which is more serious) or dangerous driving (which is quite a bit more serious). Which crime he committed depends on what he did, not what happened as a result.

For example, if he had driven along the road, beside an otherwise law-abiding citizen who had driven exactly the same way, but had not hit anybody, they would both have committed exactly the same crime, and would be liable to receive exactly the same punishment.

Tantrum is exactly what you're having here, I'm afraid.

Good grief, expat. You're in danger of causing an outbreak of logic to break out on this forum.

I was going to add that I certainly don't support increasing the sentence for careless driving, as I'm guessing most of us have been guilty of it at one time or another.
However perhaps careless driving without insurance etc. ought to go up a bracket or two in severity of punishment.

[Not So Wise]

As expat said, no insurance or licence is immaterial here (except for the seperate criminal offences that they are)

The age of the child also has no meaning (If age can play into things why not gender, religion or skin color?)

The travesty here is that "failing to report an accident" aka hit and run can have such a small sentence imposed.

Not that the papers care, young, female and white victum? Hang him high!!!

[zathras]

The punishment for a crime depends on the crime. The crimes of driving without insurance or licence have nothing to do with the fact that the child died.

The crime that caused the child's death, according to the charge, was careless driving, not reckless driving (which is more serious) or dangerous driving (which is quite a bit more serious). Which crime he committed depends on what he did, not what happened as a result.

For example, if he had driven along the road, beside an otherwise law-abiding citizen who had driven exactly the same way, but had not hit anybody, they would both have committed exactly the same crime, and would be liable to receive exactly the same punishment.

Tantrum is exactly what you're having here, I'm afraid.

None of which changes that the sentence for what he did was too short. He was on Parole so he should be going back on the original crime and complete that sentence. Then there is the handling charge. It should be a lot more than what he got. 4 weeks. It's not recorded if the Police made an effort to find out if he stole the car or knows who did. I also think he should have been charged with causing the death of the girl in the first place.

[BlasterBates]

Ok so he's got no insurance, so basically he'll spend the rest of his life paying up.

[eternalnomad]

The guy was not just some innocent motorist who was unfortunate to kill a predestrian, lets examine the facts for a moment.....

He had no license (and therfore no right to drive on the road)
He had stolen the car (which in its own right should carry a hefty sentence)
He had no insurance
He didnt even have the humanity to stop at the scene to check if the little girl was OK

12 weeks is a piss-poor punishment (and therefore deterrent) for other would be car thiefs

The guys should be facing a minimum of 12 months (actual prison time) for what he has done.

Expat - out of interest, do you have any children ?

[BoredBloke]

A while ago there was one of these TV crews with the traffic cops type programs on. They had one instance of the coppers following a tracker on a car. They ended up on a farm where they discovered a wrecked car of exactly the same type as the car with the tracker on it. They then found the stolen car. Obviously the car was knicked to order. What did he get for his actions? £200 fine. How is a £200 fine going to deter somebody from doing this.

[eternalnomad]

"TOUGH ON CRIME, TOUGH ON THE CAUSES OF CRIME"

Those famous words from Tony B-Liar himself