Stiffer sentencing really is needed, especially when you read about cases like this:
https://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/midlands-news/insult-anthony-family-blast-porsche-18898052
Suspeneed sentence after killing a cyclist by dangerous driving, beggars belief.
Absolutely. I mean the collected wisdom of Cyclechat clearly has a better idea of the appropriate punishment in this specific case then a Crown Court Judge who only has 5 years of legal training plus a minimum 5-7 years of experience as a Barrister, who has to follow sentencing guidelines laid down by the UK Sentencing Council when dealing with a prosecution case for death by careless driving under a specific offence, and who has heard a detailed presentation of the facts, mitigations and defence and prosecution arguments.
Sentencing by newspaper headline seems an eminently sensible approach. I would suggest that we arrange for a joint letter to the Justice Secretary. It's a shame it isn't still Liz Truss as I am sure she would have absolutely gone for it.
Alternatively we could actually try to understand the sentence...
Firstly the defendant pled guilty to Causing Death by Careless Driving. This was the offence which the CPS decided to prosecute. They did *not* try to get him for causing death by dangerous driving for example. The Judge must first consider the starting point. The maximum starting point is 36 weeks to 3 years custody.
Then aggravating factors must be taken into account - the driver was speeding. Then mitigating factors - the driver pled guilty from the beginning. And those are just the ones we know about from the newspaper article.
So it looks like the Judge went probably for the middle starting point 36 weeks custody to 2 years + high level community order, and worked it out from there. They clearly felt it would be more productive for the defendant to have a suspended sentence and carry out community service than to be placed in prison. Again, we have no knowledge of how or why the Judge came to that decision.
So does the sentence beggar belief? No. Would "tougher sentencing" have made a difference?
The changes being considered are:-
Drivers who kill others after speeding, racing or using a phone could receive life sentences under new legislation.
Those who cause death by careless driving under the influence of drink or drugs could also get a life sentence.
He falls under "speeding". But without the specifics of the sentencing guidelines there is nothing to suggest that this man would have received a longer sentence. Would it have been helpful to send him to prison for life?
If he had known he could get a life sentence, would he have acted differently? Almost certainly not. I very much doubt that he was thinking of sentencing guidelines whilst he was driving. Would it deter others from doing the same if he had received a life sentence? Probably not. It would have cost the tax payer £63,000 per year to house him in prison. Given that he pled guilty and likely showed remorse, is there a rehabilitation effect of sending him to prison? Again, probably not.
So what's the actual point of sending him to prison for 25 years (1/3 off for pleading guilty, + parole after 2/3rds of remaining, so cost £700,000 ish)?
