Who Would Have Decided Not To Bring A Charge Of Causing Death By Dangerous Driving Here?

[sandyRoe]

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/man-city-player-jailed-over-death-crash-150841367.html

[Buenchico]

The CPS must have decided that the case didn't meet the tests here:
http://www.cps.gov.uk/news/fact_sheets/dangerous_driving/

[sandyRoe]

"driving erratically," and at nearly twice the speed limit. You might think this was a suitable case to let the jury decide.

[bazwillrun]

Should have been charged with manslaughter.

if you drive a couple of tons of metal at the speed and way he was driving and do what he did, its quite ridiculous that its not treated as manslaughter

[bazwillrun]

Lets see if he gets sacked from his job or football clubs usually seem to do, offer him their full support and will stand by him etc etc blah blah.

[FredPuli43]

Baz, the legal reason it was not ever going to be manslaughter is the reason the offence of "death dangerous" was invented. Juries refused to convict of manslaughter, even though it is manslaughter. They took the view that it was the kind of thing that they themselves, or people like them would do, whereas manslaughter was what criminal types did, so they wouldn't convict. And "death- careless " seems to have been invented later to satisfy the public, and the family of the deceased, who got very upset when a jury didn't agree that the driving was dangerous yet it had killed someone.

Manslaughter in driving cases is reserved for such deliberate or extreme actions as to be as near as dammit to murder

As to this case, the CPS, assuming they didn't have death dangerous on the indictment and took a plea to the alternative of death careless, must have thought it always just fell short of dangerous. You can get 5 years jail for death careless anyway. They might have had death dangerous there but thought it was not so winnable that if a plea to the lesser offence was offered, they'd take it, saving a trial. It's a bit academic whether it's opened as a low death dangerous or a high death careless because the judge will pass the same sentence.

[jake-the-peg]

As I recall this is exactly why the offense of causing death by careless driving was brought in.

In the past you had cases a bit like this where the CPS did not feel confident of getting a conviction under causing death by dangerous driving or the most serios causing death by reckless driving.

It meant that people were walking away from such cases under trivial charges.

So the offense of causing death by careless or inconsiderate driving was brought in to plug the gap so to speak.

Do correct me if I've got that wrong anybody

[anotheoldgit]

/// "This, as offences go, was in the most serious category for causing death by careless driving.///

Causing the death of two people and the sentence was only 16 months in jail, most likely get out in under a year.

/// Prosecuting, Mark Kellet said that Meppen-Walter had only one previous conviction. ///

Only one??? Have they got that right was he the prosecutor or his defence?

How cheap is life?

[FredPuli43]

aog, is it your logic that two people being killed in one car in one collision, caused by one piece of bad driving, is twice as bad as one person being killed in it? So,had one survived, that wouldn't be as bad?

As ever, what sentence would you have imposed ?

[sandyRoe]

His previous conviction was for driving at twice the speed limit in a 30 MPH area. If he'd been convicted of causing death by dangerous driving a sentence nearer the top end of the scale would seem appropriate. 8 years, I'd say.