Re: Driver guilty of M6 family deaths

Graculus wrote:
Guilty, that is, of causing death by careless driving, not dagerous driving.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/7888653.stm

Hence only a 3 year sentence rather than a much longer one. Mind you, given that the judge said "This was one of the most serious offences of its kind," one wonders why he didn't go for something closer to the 5 year allowable maximum.

No doubt some will bleat on about how he's "got away with it", and it's all a motorists' conspiracy, but:
* They tried for death by dangerous, but much evidence was destroyed in the crash, and so unfortunately wasn't sufficient to make the case
* While there are almost certainly motorists amongst the jury (remember, it's them that come up with a verdict, not the judge), I am sure they are just as likely all to have families, and would never, ever wish this on their own families, and so would be predisposed to go for the more serious conviction, if they didn't have this thing called evidence to consider
* Just a short time ago, he couldn't even have been done for death by carless driving, and might have "got away" with even less.

Maybe he'll get the same treatment from his peers that's coming to the alleged Aussie arsonist who's now been named.


He was accused of using a laptop just before the crash but he denied it,
even though the laptop was on the seat next to him and the screen facing him.Had they been able to prove that he was using the laptop,I reckon he
would have probably got the full 5 year term.
.

Relevant Pages