Soldato
- Joined
- 19 Oct 2010
- Posts
- 3,716
Yep.
3 years, 10 months.
- Thread starter Dis86
- Start date
Soldato
- Joined
- 20 Feb 2004
- Posts
- 4,048
- Location
- Blyth, Northumberland
CPS at fault on this one, he was charged with death by careless driving not the obviously more appropriate death by dangerous driving that carries a heavier sentence.
Gauranga!
Associate
- Joined
- 7 Mar 2015
- Posts
- 1,126
- Location
- London
Should have been life.
Rather the CPS ought to have actually used the death by dangerous driving charge in the first place
How much evidence do you need that he was a dangerous driver
Using a phone
Dangerous overtaking
Speeding
Under the influence
Reversing over a victim
Fleeing the scene
Uninsured vehicle
Lying to police
I'm just saying how it is, as I see it. I don't agree with it.
The Law is an ass, as they say.
Last edited:
I know, but surely the CPS can use that evidence and not minimise the crime
Poor girl 
My mates little brother was killed whilst crossing the road, the lady that done it, left the scene after hitting him, went to her hairdressers appointment and was caught a couple of days after, she had no licence, no insurance and after the police dragged the investigation on for a couple of years they let her off with insufficient evidence, his family are trying to get changes to the law and have been in the news about it all...
Something seriously wrong with our justice system!!
My mates little brother was killed whilst crossing the road, the lady that done it, left the scene after hitting him, went to her hairdressers appointment and was caught a couple of days after, she had no licence, no insurance and after the police dragged the investigation on for a couple of years they let her off with insufficient evidence, his family are trying to get changes to the law and have been in the news about it all...
Something seriously wrong with our justice system!!
Well, no that's not how it works, unfortunatly.
The cps just want to ensure a conviction so they'll go for the easiest charges to prove. Its pathetic.
The CPS want to pull their finger out and do the job properly for victims.
The pigs will only put forward a charge to the CPS that they think they can easily nail someone on.
Because they know the CPS will bat it back if it's hammed up and has a low chance of conviction, so it's a case of grabbing the low hanging fruit rather than doing justice.
Last edited:
Isn't this same as so many crimes now?
Even the kids (older teens) round here don't get any punishment for stealing, criminal damage, and assault.
Just couple of days ago they were throwing stones at cars at the local tesco. They are basically immune to repercussions. Pathetic.
Even the kids (older teens) round here don't get any punishment for stealing, criminal damage, and assault.
Just couple of days ago they were throwing stones at cars at the local tesco. They are basically immune to repercussions. Pathetic.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 11 Sep 2013
- Posts
- 12,855
Hence the suggestion of Frankland...
I bet you could charge him with most of those as separate offences and put him away for a combined stretch of 10-20 years...
I don't see why a lot of sentences have to run concurrently, is it just to free up a bit of space in the prisons?