Safe Speed Forums

Pardon me whilst i have a rant.
http://www.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,2-20 ... 9,,00.html
no licence, so he would not have been able to spot that there was a POSSIBILITY that this kid would cross the road - so he would not have had any instinct to slow down, ( the prosecution said he did not have enough time to react) or take any action, buT no the prosecution says that he cannot be charged with killing.
add to this the fact that he was still hungover from the previous night.


Give this idiot a shot gun , loaded , no licence, NO formal gun training , let him kill someone and what happens.
ASK JAMES MARTIN. (His gun wasnt legal either!!)

THIS IS DEFINATELY A SPEED RELATED ACCIDENT - HE WAS GOING TOO FAST FOR THE CONDITIONS and his capabilities as a driver .

Now had he been a driver disqualified ( caught speeding PERHAPS)

WHAT SENTANCE WOULD HE HAVE BEEN GIVEN--- A LOT MORE THAN 2 MONTHS I'LL BET.

AND WHAT DID THE REDUCTION IN TRAFFIC POLICE HAVE TO DO WITH THIS - WHAT WERE HIS CHANCES OF GETTING STOPPED BEFORE HE DID SOME DAMAGE ----


WE'VE JUST FOUND OUT.

(MY (and i'll suggest the other users of this site) SYMPATHIES GO OUT TO THE PARENTS OF THIS KID, MURDERED BY POLITICAL CORRECTNESS)

This terrible tale, carried by other dailies today, goes beyond the issue of road safety. The attitude of the sister of the accused, that it could have happened to anyone simply defies rational argument and reasoned response.
Personally, I am emotionally exhausted by the onslaught that the tax paying respectable people of this dying country are currently suffering. I am in fact being drained of the will to be outraged, because one attrocity is simply surpassed by the next.

Deport the ***********, NOW.
He has no right to be in this country, the only reason he is still here is that some lawyer keeps appealing the deporting order, just how many times can they appeal?
Maybe he could take his sister with him, revoke her citizenship and deport her as well, the unfeeling cow.

_________________
Semper in excreta, nur quantitat variat.

Very sad.

But this Govt prefers to use its Legal and Policing resources on hundreds of thousands of minor traffic offences rather than:-

1. Only people with a right to live here do.
2. That the unlicenced dont drive.
3. That cases such as these end in a punitive punishment.

This is not an isolated case, there was another recently in Sussex of a young boy also killed by an unlicensed immigrant.

Child pedestrians deaths were running at 70 pa. These 2 incidents illustrate the real impact unlicenced drivers make on unnecessary deaths.

I also note that he was driving around 30mph and that was the Prosecution's excuse for being unable to convict with a higher punishment.

But the CPS choose to spread their time elsewhere................

This case underlines the need to give the courts greater sentencing powers for causing death when driving either unlicensed or disqualified, but when dangerous driving cannot be proved.

http://www.safespeed.org.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1738

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed

About sums up the speed culture, it is ok to kill as long as you complete it under the speed limit

_________________
Steve

I have to disagree with speed being the issue.

The driver was drunk according to the article, that may be just a grabbing headline

The driver has never been trained in how to perform an emergency stop, thus increasing the impact speed.

It is not the speed at the issue, surely it is an unqualified, drunk driver!

_________________
Steve

Eight weeks is laughable, but I wish the tabloids would stop treating this as an immigration issue and start treating it as a road safety issue. We've got our own unlicensed and uninsured chavs and chavettes who have got even lighter sentences, presumably because they didn't manage to actually kill anyone . Perhaps when they manage it they'll just get a few weeks as well . What's important is how to prevent any sort of unqualified pisshead getting behind the wheel, immigration status, residency and citizenship notwithstanding. Don't get me wrong, I don't know wtf someone who's been knocked back four times by the Home Office was doing here, let alone how he ended up on the road. But let's be honest here, it wouldn't have made any difference if he'd been driving on a Zambian driving license while he was here on a tourist visa - his driving wouldn't be any better but he'd be legal and the boy would still be dead.

Look at this page on the DVLA site:


To me that sounds barking mad. The ability of foreign nationals to drive legally on our roads is determined by a combination of their visa and the bloody calendar , and their safety while they're driving is determined by how appropriate the test and driver training is in their country of origin. If I've read that right, my brother and I could come from the imaginary Fatgitland where the driving test consists of correctly identifying the driver's door on five randomly chosen cars, and then being able to drive in a 100 foot diameter circle and get back to where we started +/- 10 feet. Then we could come to the UK, one as an illegal and one on a visitor visa, both drive as badly as each other with nothing remotely like the knowledge or training a UK driver would have had (and IMO even that's insufficient these days), but one of us would actually be doing so legally for a whole ing year. Is it me or is that mental?

_________________
Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler - Einstein

Although having said that it baffles me why the current charge of "causing death by careless driving when under the influence of drink or drugs" could not be used, which carries a maximum prison sentence of 14 years.

No need to prove dangerous driving there - if a death has resulted, it's effectively up to the accused to prove he wasn't careless.

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed

BMWK12 - a trained driver sees a kid, instinct and training kicks in and we slow , to stop if necessary - WHY - PART OF OUR TRAINING.

I QUOTE "About sums up the speed culture, it is ok to kill as long as you complete it under the speed limit " - SO THEREFORE HE WAS SPEEDING - HE COULD NOT STOP IN THE DISTANCE HE COULD SEE TO BE CLEAR.

But basicaly as others have said - the courts need more powers.

Q- for our BIB/ LEGAL EAGLES - WHAT IS SENTANCE FOR DRIVING WHILST DISQUALIFIED, KNOW ITS USUALLY A CUSTODIAL ONE.

Anyone in Central TV area see tonight ( tues 19 april) news ,re yet another failed immigrant, no licence etc/etc killing a driver and passenger from Rugby area with van on wrong side of road at quoted speed of 80mph.
He got 5 years ( probably out in 2), to remain in uk???
Least its an improvement on 8 weeks.

Have to get more info on web site - looks like a follow up story - can't find it.

And to think that David Simmonite got 16 weeks inside for giving the wrong name for the driver after receiving an NIP in order to prevent his daughter getting 3 points.
Fisherman, you understand these things, can you explain it as it doesn't make much sense to me in that trying to avoid 3 points and 60 quid is twice as bad as killing someone?
What's the priorities here. Oh, maybe trying to deny the gov't their £60 is worse than causing death.

Why are immigration issues being brought into this? What's it got to do with anything?

I'm sorry but I'm getting sick of hearing these immigration issues, which to me border on fascism.

No, we don't want them to come here and drive dangerously, we don't want them to come here and stab our police officers to death, and we don't want them to come here to blow us up. Obviously, if they come here they have to keep to the law like the rest of us.

A few weeks ago I was discussing the case that started this thread with someone who had witnessed the court proceedings.

Apparently, while the accused had been an unlicenced driver in the UK, he did have a foreign driving licence (Zambian, IIRC)

Also, the court was unable to find anything objectionable in his manner of driving, and the blame for the accident lay pretty much entirely with the child, who had run out suddenly into the road.

Therefore, while the case undoubtedly gave ammunition to racists, the facts just did not justify a long custodial sentence.

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed

Absolute maximum is 6 months imprisonment.

You will only serve half of this by default providing you do not get in to any further trouble in prison, and you can be out in even less than 3 months if you agree to be tagged.

_________________
What makes you think I'm drunk officer, have I got a fat bird with me?

My emboldening..

That is not in fact the case Peter, the careless driving aspect of the offence also needs to be proved by the prosecution, it is simply not enough to use the death as proof of carelessness. but I think the point you are making is that 'careless' has a significantly different level of driving standard (or lack of it) than 'dangerous'.

That said, I'd much rather see Sec 3A RTA offence expanded.
Currently the offence is Causing death by careless driving while under the influence of drink or drugs, and the max custodial is 14 years.
This should be IMHO expanded to also include* Causing death by careless driving while knowingly driving illegally, which would include

driving while disqualified,
driving other than in accordance with a driving licence,
driving while knowingly uninsured,
driving while in the commission of an arrestable criminal act.

I believe that this would distinguish between those whose careless driving unfortunately kills someone but under normal circs is a legal driver, and those who knowingly take to the road illegally, and then kill someone by careless driving.

*edited to clarify

_________________
Fixed ideas are like cramp, for instance in the foot, yet the best remedy is to step on them.

Ian

8 weeks in jail for killing somebody

i bet the sentence is higher for driving 10 yards for not having a license due to totting up 12 points from hidden speed cameras, going 3 mph over the limit caught 4 times in 3 years then drive 10 yards equals big jail sentence

And the point from Peter E


I've lived in a number of other countries both under the British system of justice and Spanish justice (also driven in >20). The treatment that would have been given to me in the circumstances of the case above =
1. First guilty of being there illegally.
2. Jailed immediately.
3. Then either deported or tried and given a long prison sentence.
4. Any local belongings/assets taken over to pay compensation/fines.
5. No Bail, No Legal Aid and certainly No Social welfare payments.

The other countries take the line that if you dont have a right to live there you are in breach of their laws and they will deport/prosecute you and will try and get compensation/fines from your assets. Anyone employing that person would also get heavily fined or worse.

Here we have a driver not trained to UK standards, he was under the influence of drink. He has therefore acted without care and attention and not in accordance with the law. The fact that our judicial system is unable to jail or deport him for this does make us unique from the other countries I know. One does wonder how much CPS and police effort went in instead of the waste of minor speeding cases.

But the principle for living in any country should be "when in Rome do as the Romans". This the driver did not do. He should not have been driving here at all.

Nothing I have said above could be considered rascist. Please consider the views of Trevor Phillips when he talks about the need for a single culture and following the rule of law. We need to place responsibilities along side rights or we will end up with a divided society.

To quote Trevor Phillips


I think what Trevor Phillips would like to see is an integration of all ethnic groups into this nation's economic social and cultural framework, but recognises that this is not possible without tolerance and acceptability.

Phillips also said


I think that Britain prides itself in its sense of tolerance and fair play. Unfortunately in recent years with the explosion of economic immigrants entering the country under the asylum banner, the systems in place have been overloaded, and have burst at the edges. This is something which needs to be addressed, but I don't think that these occasional horror stories about the driving abilities of illegal immigrants help maintain a balanced view on how best to deal with the problem.

They are individual driving offences and must be seen as that, and that alone.

All IMO.

_________________
Fixed ideas are like cramp, for instance in the foot, yet the best remedy is to step on them.

Ian

I dont think you are alone - the two issues of driving behaviour and immigration are separate.

I was'nt sure about increasing sentencing for death caused while driving knowingly uninsured.

Insurance does not affect driving ability or mitigate it, and the last point should cover it if the circumstances required it.

_________________
Time to take responsibility for our actions.. and don't be afraid of speaking out!