19 year old jailed for killing cyclist

[GrasB]

I'm not saying that she should not have been penalised. I just don't see the point of sending somebody like her to jail.

I agree jail probably isn't the most appropriate punishment for this crime & this person. There is however a difference between a punishment being harsh & appropriate. In terms of man slaughter, which is fundamentally what death by dangerous driving is, I don't see that the sentence as harsh.

 

[Crankarm]

The justice system is at a total loss as to how to adequately deal with offenders such as her. She should have been banned for 10 years, a proper 5 year prison sentence during which she should spend time cycling with other killer driver cons along the A66, A14 and A34 . When she is eventually released she should pay 50% of any wages she earns to the Evans family for a period of 5 years.

The punishment needs to be seen to be a deterrent given the large numbers of drivers on the roads who drive in a dangerous manner.

 

[gaz]

But what is true justice, she's not a violent criminal nor at risk of being a danger to others, is prison the best option? Liberty can be curtailed via electronic tagging and the person employed in seving the community, maybe via a charity.

Maybe two years assisting with grief counselling and an order to travel everywhere by bicycle might have been more fitting. If someone truly regrets an action then they'll punish themselves far more than anything we can do. If they don't then the dehumanising prison system is more likely to make them worse.

And this is the problem with the modern system, everyone has different opinions and views on justice that you can't please everyone.

At least a much longer driving ban is in order, thats my opinion.

 

[Crankarm]

Get real Crankarm ffs

Oh p* off Lee.

 

[MacB]

And this is the problem with the modern system, everyone has different opinions and views on justice that you can't please everyone.

At least a much longer driving ban is in order, thats my opinion.

Absolutely it's all up for debate but the terms justice, rehabilitation, revenge and punishment, do need to be understood. You could argue that a lack of justice begins with the ease of obtaining a driving licence and the minimal strictures placed on the operation of high speed machinery.

Finger pointing and 'hang em high' approaches are rather knee jerk and do nothing to tackle underlying issues.

 

[MartinC]

I don't think the prison sentence is harsh or unduly lenient. Killing a fellow human being by driving negligently is a serious matter which the justice system needs to mark significantly.

What's appalling to me is the law's attitude to driving standards. Anyone who's killed another road user through bad driving should only get their licence back (if at all) after a significant time and rigourous re-training and testing.

The attitude that because it happened in a time trial on a dual carriageway it's less blameworthy is an egregious example of road hog culture. You have an obligation to drive carefully and watch out for other road users on any road. Only motorways restrict the types of traffic permitted on them. A time trial simply means that your riding your bike alone on the road. Claiming that car drivers have the right to be dismissive of others lives on roads they unilaterally decide are appropriate for them alone is as wrong as the victims colleagues deciding that they have the right to avenge their comrade's death with a 9mm round.

 

[gaz]

What's appalling to me is the law's attitude to driving standards. Anyone who's killed another road user through bad driving should only get their licence back (if at all) after a significant time and rigourous re-training and testing.

As MacB said, shouldn't the test just be better and harder the first time round... it's far to easy to to pass imo, and from my experience you don't actually learn how to drive until you are in a car by your self!

 

[gaz]

The test if fairly tough and the failure rate quite high. The theory test has been extended and so has the HPT (I think).

I think you'll find that if you put a motorist in a car who has been driving for a number of years that they would fail the test due to bad habits and general laziness. I don't see how this complacency can be reduced by making the test harder the first time round people take thier test.

Has the practical test changed much in the past 5 years?

I know the theory test has been extended. but is it really that hard? i did my test 5 years ago, and got 34/35 in the theory test, and HP was around 80% correct.

the main theory test was easy in my mind, i didn't study for it or anything, just common sense. The HP is a great test, and i think that should be a big part of the test as it is (or should be) a major part of everyones day to day driving.

But when i say harder, i was more talking about expanding the practical aspect. To my knowledge there isn't anything about driving around cyclists in that exam or is it a must in the theory, thus someone could learn to drive, take there test and not have anything to do with cyclists.

It seams like that would be a great place to hit the young drivers that will be on the road.


And shouldn't the failure rate be high? we don't want to be handing them our like GCSE's *runs and ducks*

 

[2Loose]

The test if fairly tough and the failure rate quite high. The theory test has been extended and so has the HPT (I think).

When some new drivers and even driving instructors believe that cyclists should stay on the far leftcycle lanepavement, then the testing is definitely missing something despite being tough in certain areas.

 

[Crankarm]

The test if fairly tough and the failure rate quite high. The theory test has been extended and so has the HPT (I think).

I think you'll find that if you put a motorist in a car who has been driving for a number of years that they would fail the test due to bad habits and general laziness. I don't see how this complacency can be reduced by making the test harder the first time round people take thier test.

Evidence or pure suposition?

 

[Crankarm]

I don't think the prison sentence is harsh or unduly lenient. Killing a fellow human being by driving negligently is a serious matter which the justice system needs to mark significantly.

What's appalling to me is the law's attitude to driving standards. Anyone who's killed another road user through bad driving should only get their licence back (if at all) after a significant time and rigourous re-training and testing.

The attitude that because it happened in a time trial on a dual carriageway it's less blameworthy is an egregious example of road hog culture. You have an obligation to drive carefully and watch out for other road users on any road. Only motorways restrict the types of traffic permitted on them. A time trial simply means that your riding your bike alone on the road. Claiming that car drivers have the right to be dismissive of others lives on roads they unilaterally decide are appropriate for them alone is as wrong as the victims colleagues deciding that they have the right to avenge their comrade's death with a 9mm round.

Errr .......... who is claiming the 'rights' that you describe or did you make them up?

 

[Crankarm]

There's been a few programmes about it on the TV over the years.

Aghh ........... TV. So a reliable form of sampling of the driving population or just lining up some tired old motoring journos to give anecdotal evidence. It wouldn't be the Beeb by any chance would it? Which programmes ........

 

[Bad Company]

But what is true justice, she's not a violent criminal nor at risk of being a danger to others, is prison the best option? Liberty can be curtailed via electronic tagging and the person employed in seving the community, maybe via a charity.

Maybe two years assisting with grief counselling and an order to travel everywhere by bicycle might have been more fitting. If someone truly regrets an action then they'll punish themselves far more than anything we can do. If they don't then the dehumanising prison system is more likely to make them worse.

Good post - Not often I find myself in agreement with MacB.

For the benefit of Mr Paul I am not saying that she was right or that she should go unpunished. I am simply saying that imo a prison sentence is not appropriate.

 

[MacB]

Good post - Not often I find myself in agreement with MacB.

There's hope for you yet then, unlike Cranky who's a lost cause

 

[MacB]

Why not? He was legally riding on the road, and she was obliged to pay due care and attention. She didn't and didn't see him until she hit him from behind.

Your response is that the sentence is harsh because it's a 70mph road, and the suggestion that the bike shouldn't have been there.

What does the speed limit on the road have to do with it?

I'll repeat. Controlling a car carries a huge responsibility, something which a disappointing proportion of drivers either dismiss or have forgotten.

no, he's saying that a prison sentence isn't appropriate, that's very different to saying that the punishment is too harsh. For all you know he may harbour secret desires to see public flogging reinstated.