A place to record lenient sentencing for motorvehicle....

Jdsk
Posts: 24636
Joined: 5 Mar 2019, 5:42pm

Re: A place to record lenient sentencing for motorvehicle....

Post by Jdsk »

DaveGos wrote:https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-54141729
May just result in juries not convicting , who knows...

That effect should always be considered, and I'm reasonably convinced that it was one of the factors that led to the end of judicial killing in the UK.

But I think that it's unlikely that increasing the maximum sentence for the "causing death" offences will do this in practice. Sentences aren't usually discussed with juries, although what happens when they retire is anyone's guess.

Jonathan
thirdcrank
Posts: 36776
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: A place to record lenient sentencing for motorvehicle....

Post by thirdcrank »



To be precise, that commentary was published before the White Paper. Does that matter? Only to the extent that the release of the White Paper was spun, so that the headlines emphasised how tough it all was.
fastpedaller
Posts: 3435
Joined: 10 Jul 2014, 1:12pm
Location: Norfolk

Re: A place to record lenient sentencing for motorvehicle....

Post by fastpedaller »

Local to me.....
129 MPH in a 30MPH limit, and just a 2 year bad and a few quid/few hours litter picking with criminals. Judge said it was a miracle nobody was killed, and yet this is the outcome. Judicial need to grow some, otherwise this sort of stupidity will continue!

https://www.edp24.co.uk/news/crime/josh ... ne-6600976
thirdcrank
Posts: 36776
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: A place to record lenient sentencing for motorvehicle....

Post by thirdcrank »

fastpedaller wrote:Local to me.....
129 MPH in a 30MPH limit, and just a 2 year bad and a few quid/few hours litter picking with criminals. Judge said it was a miracle nobody was killed, and yet this is the outcome. Judicial need to grow some, otherwise this sort of stupidity will continue!


From the link
As well as being banned from driving for 24 months, he was ordered to take an extended test, pay £105 in costs, £95 victim surcharge and complete 250 hours of unpaid work within 12 months.


Without the judge's sentencing remarks, we don't know how the sentencing guidelines were applied but 250 hours is hardly a few.

We've had previous cases mentioned on here when somebody doing mach 1 was charged only with speeding and received a 56 day ban which is the max for speeding. At least, the defendant here has been correctly charged with dangerous driving enabling the judge to apply the correct guidelines.
Oldjohnw
Posts: 7764
Joined: 16 Oct 2018, 4:23am
Location: South Warwickshire

Re: A place to record lenient sentencing for motorvehicle....

Post by Oldjohnw »

Sometimes people think that judges have absolute discretion to administer any sentence they wish.
John
User avatar
Ride-sleep-repeat
Posts: 382
Joined: 24 Nov 2020, 11:58am

Re: A place to record lenient sentencing for motorvehicle....

Post by Ride-sleep-repeat »

thirdcrank wrote:
fastpedaller wrote:Local to me.....
129 MPH in a 30MPH limit, and just a 2 year bad and a few quid/few hours litter picking with criminals. Judge said it was a miracle nobody was killed, and yet this is the outcome. Judicial need to grow some, otherwise this sort of stupidity will continue!


From the link
As well as being banned from driving for 24 months, he was ordered to take an extended test, pay £105 in costs, £95 victim surcharge and complete 250 hours of unpaid work within 12 months.


Without the judge's sentencing remarks, we don't know how the sentencing guidelines were applied but 250 hours is hardly a few.

We've had previous cases mentioned on here when somebody doing mach 1 was charged only with speeding and received a 56 day ban which is the max for speeding. At least, the defendant here has been correctly charged with dangerous driving enabling the judge to apply the correct guidelines.

Prison was never going to be an option in this case but if you break down his punishment it's not as light as it seems.
He's banned for 24 months and has to take an extended retest.This could add another 6 months onto the ban and will incur added costs(lessons/test etc)
250hrs of Community service.Usually,if the person is working,this has to be done on Saturday.So if he does Saturdays and it's classed as 8hrs(mine was only 6hrs back in 1997) that means he will have to give up 31.25 Saturdays in 12 months.As he can't drive he will have to use other means to get to the unpaid work.Depending on where or how far this is from where he lives will define how much financially he's out of pocket.
The 'victim surcharge' is just tech speak for a fine.As they can't fine a person and give Community service they get around it with 'victim surcharge' even though there was no actual victim.
I think if anything the sentence was a bit harsh.24 month ban/extended retest and 100hrs or a fine would have been sufficient.

From personal experience I would have rather had a massive fine than the 240hrs Community service I had to do!Well it was actually like a massive fine because it cost me a fortune in lost earnings and Taxi fares but losing almost every Saturday for a year was the worst part!
mikeymo
Posts: 2299
Joined: 27 Sep 2016, 6:23pm

Re: A place to record lenient sentencing for motorvehicle....

Post by mikeymo »

Jdsk wrote:
DaveGos wrote:https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-54141729
May just result in juries not convicting , who knows...

That effect should always be considered, and I'm reasonably convinced that it was one of the factors that led to the end of judicial killing in the UK.

But I think that it's unlikely that increasing the maximum sentence for the "causing death" offences will do this in practice. Sentences aren't usually discussed with juries, although what happens when they retire is anyone's guess.

Jonathan


I've been on three. We never discussed potential sentences, I don't think any of us knew what they might be.

When we returned a guilty verdict for one crime, the judge said to the defending barrister something like - "does your client wish to offer any mitigation".

Defense counsel said "no".

At which point the judge said - "your client does realise there is a mandatory 7 year sentence for this third offence, doesn't he?"

At which point some of my fellow jurors visibly paled, shocked to realise how long the sentence would be. Though quite why the judge asked the question I'm not sure, as the sentence was mandatory. I suppose it was minimum.

When we went back to the jury room to collect personal belongings there was some brief - "I didn't think it would be that long" type comments. We'd spent a long time deliberating on that case, going from heavily not guilty to majority guilty. Not quite 12 Angry Men, but a bit like it. If the potential sentencing had been known before hand I'm not sure we would have returned a guilty verdict.

So very "harsh" sentences, especially custodial ones, for crimes that some people think are terrible, and those harsh sentences being widely known about, may very well risk fewer convictions, if juries know what will happen if they convict.
thirdcrank
Posts: 36776
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: A place to record lenient sentencing for motorvehicle....

Post by thirdcrank »

@ Ride-sleep-repeat

Thanks for that insight which makes the point that this wasn't some sort of slap-on-the-wrist very well.

@ mikeymo

When I first saw your post, I thought you were quoting an old post of mine outlining my experience as a jury foreman. When I had delivered a string of GUILTY verdicts the judge addressed us along the lines that he knew we would want to know the sentence he would pass. He said that sentence would be passed at a later hearing. When he got to "Your verdicts today mean the defendant will go to prison for seven years, in addition to any sentence I pass" there were loud groans from several fellow jurors and the woman next to me slumped against me as though she was close to fainting.
mikeymo
Posts: 2299
Joined: 27 Sep 2016, 6:23pm

Re: A place to record lenient sentencing for motorvehicle....

Post by mikeymo »

thirdcrank wrote:When I first saw your post, I thought you were quoting an old post of mine outlining my experience as a jury foreman.


I didn't think you were allowed to sit on juries? Or was that after retirement?

My sister is a member of judiciary, and I don't think she can sit on juries.
thirdcrank
Posts: 36776
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: A place to record lenient sentencing for motorvehicle....

Post by thirdcrank »

mikeymo wrote:... I didn't think you were allowed to sit on juries? Or was that after retirement?

My sister is a member of judiciary, and I don't think she can sit on juries.


The law was fundamentally changed when somebody twigged that (a) sitting on a jury was virtually voluntary (b) peremptory challenges meant defendants, especially if there several jointly-charged could almost hand-pick their own dozen by objecting to anybody appearing to fit the stereotype of bourgeois / literate / law-abiding /whatever. Not only twigged but decided to act.

My personal belief is that a series of governments have sought to curtail the right of trial by jury and the more people who are thoroughly mucked about by the system, the less the advocacy from the learned friends will sway public opinion.

The changes removed most bans on jury service (eg just about everybody involved in the legal system) and replaced exemptions with very limited deferrals, so no getting out of it just because your one-man business would fold without you. AIUI, it would now be possible for a trial presided over by a recorder to have the Lord Chief Justice on the jury. That's statistically unlikely, but serving police officers are eligible for jury service. In my own case, I was concerned that I would know a defendant or one of the police witnesses but it was not the case.

I was lucky to be selected for a trial quite early in my fortnight and after that, when the admin person from the Lord Chancellor's Department came round looking for people to release, I was on the bus home before my less alert fellow potential jury members had realised what was on offer

================================================================================

PS I can see plenty of reasons not to have police on juries and I think I've posted before that the (FWIW black) defendant might not have been impressed with the knowledge that the grey-haired, white BOF pronouncing a series of guilty verdicts was in receipt of a police pension. I can only say that I didn't ask to be there but I took the oath to deliver a true verdict on the evidence and that's just what I did to the very best of my ability.
reohn2
Posts: 45158
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: A place to record lenient sentencing for motorvehicle....

Post by reohn2 »

-----------------------------------------------------------
"All we are not stares back at what we are"
W H Auden
Bonefishblues
Posts: 11010
Joined: 7 Jul 2014, 9:45pm
Location: Near Bicester Oxon

Re: A place to record lenient sentencing for motorvehicle....

Post by Bonefishblues »

Good lord...

https://twitter.com/dorsetpolice/status ... 1512220672

Comments about this instance of lenient sentencing seem to have metamorphosed into another thread.
ChrisButch
Posts: 1188
Joined: 24 Feb 2009, 12:10pm

Re: A place to record lenient sentencing for motorvehicle....

Post by ChrisButch »

£400 fine for deliberate knock off (raised fist seen by following motorist), left scene, life-changing injuries. Guilty plea to 'careless' accepted, 'dangerous' charge dropped. Budleigh Salterton:

https://www.devonlive.com/news/devon-news/road-rage-driver-81-raised-4927367
Post Reply