Are Lives So Cheap These Days?

[anotheoldgit]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3450945/Speeding-motorist-killed-pregnant-woman-unborn-child-serve-just-SIX-MONTHS-jail-admitting-careless-driving.html

/// 'I have read letters from yourself, your father and others.

'The combination of these documents paint a picture of a young man who is decent, law-abiding and sensitive.

'I accept your remorse is not based on the predicament you are in here today, but it's because of a genuine and deep-seated sadness for what happened.

'You appear to be genuinely very sorry for what happened.' ///

Ah yes, tell me another one.

[mikey4444]

Now I understand Andy...thank you.

[andy-hughes]

My pleasure Mikey.

[Svejk]

I'm glad someone understands it???

[-Talbot-]

Still bizarre IMO

[hc4361]

Does anyone know the speed he was driving at? All I can find is 'not excessively above the 30mph speed limit'

[andy-hughes]

hc4361 - //Does anyone know the speed he was driving at? All I can find is 'not excessively above the 30mph speed limit' //

I wold guess that anything recorded under the next applicable limit - which would be 40, would be seen as 'not excessive' in legal terms.

If that is accurate, the anything up to 39 mph is going to be classed as not excessive.

Hopefully NewJudge will clarify for us.

[andy-hughes]

Svejk - //I'm glad someone understands it??? //

My point is this - everyone run down on a pavement is an innocent victim.

But to refer to an 'innocent pregnant woman' - when no-one would imagine she is in any way to blame - is to infer that her death is in some way more of a tragic loss than someone else (not debated by the Mail obviously).

The idea is to ratchet up the perceived notion of malice on the part of the driver, which is patently nonsense.

Unless a driver deliberately runs over a pedestrian, then the scenario is an accident.

Yes, other factors are involved - but the implied malice is not valid, and that is my issue.

I am not suggesting that the diver was not in the wrong, or that he does not deserved to be punished, merely that colouring the description for the pleasure of a finger-pointing readership is bad journalism.

I hope that clears up any misunderstanding.

[anaxcrosswords]

'Colouring' being the pertinent word, Andy.

[jno]

as far as I can see, causing death with a motor vehicle has always attracted lower sentences than causing death with a weapon. It isn't just parliament; judge and juries show the same tendencies. It's probably because most people drive (whereas most people don't carry a gun), so they all feel a bit "There but for the grace of God..."

[anotheoldgit]

andy-hughes

/// But to refer to an 'innocent pregnant woman' - when no-one would imagine she is in any way to blame - is to infer that her death is in some way more of a tragic loss than someone else (not debated by the Mail obviously). ///

No not debated or in anyway described as an 'innocent pregnant woman' by the Mail.


So could I politely ask you to refrain from your constant digs at the Daily Mail, and it's readership? They are getting rather boring and add nothing to the debate.

Not only was this poor pregnant woman killed on her way home from dropping her child off at nursery but another woman and two children were also injured in the crash, leaving one of the children in a wheel chair for seven months.

I have a multitude of names to call this person, but I will refrain from doing so, I will just leave it to some's imagination to guess what they might be.

[EDDIE51]

jno , there are cases where a person was convicted of murder by using a car as a weapon. These are few though, the difficulty is in proving that the car was actually used as a murder weapon rather than just causing a fatal accident.

[EDDIE51]

^^ Here is a case where a car was used to murder someone
http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/bodybuilder-deliberately-used-his-car-weapon-kill-his-love-rival-1533529
He got 'life' with a 25 year tariff .

[ummmm]

People speed on a daily basis. No one can foresee or expects something so tragic to happen.

[ummmm]

Eddie....I witnessed someone trying to hit someone with a car. Really scary stuff. If it wasn't for a lamp post on the pavement they would have got them.

[naomi24]

andy-hughes, //But to refer to an 'innocent pregnant woman' - when no-one would imagine she is in any way to blame - is to infer that her death is in some way more of a tragic loss than someone else //

I don't think anyone is inferring that her death is more of a tragic loss than the death of someone else in similar circumstances. All are tragic losses.

[Prudie]

Apart from going a bit too fast (we don't know by how much) as many of us do on a daily basis and not reacting well I can't see that this was more than a dreadful accident. He wasn't drunk or high, it wasn't pre-meditated. If he'd just hit a lamp-post he probably wouldn't have even been charged with anything.

[ummmm]

Precisely Prudie.

And at a guess I would think it was truly genuine remorse.

My grandad was knocked over. It devastated the driver.

[douglas9401]

Not so much a defence as a catalogue of BS.

[anneasquith]

But he did not hit a lamppost. I believe this family have the right to be angry,