Skip to main content
Skip to main navigation
Skip to talk navigation

Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Saved Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

Flip

1 2 3

News

The father of Elizabeth Cooke has been charged with manslaughter

75 replies

wannaBe · 23/07/2008 22:15

here

Not sure what to think about this.

On the one hand I wonder what purpose can be served by bringing charges when he has already paid the ultimate price for his irresponsible actions.

But on the other what he did was irresponsible, and stupid, and maybe it's right that he should be made to take responsibility.

OP posts:

Report

cafebistro · 23/07/2008 22:22

Ive just read the headline. What is the full story? not living in UK at the moment.

LyraSilvertongue · 23/07/2008 22:28

I can't see what can be gained from prosecuting the grieving father.

Quattrocento · 23/07/2008 22:33

I remember the story vaguely - wasn't the child on a quadbike on the road when it was not legal to do so?

In reality, the law is too inconsistently applied on these issues. There have been many high profile cases of parents breaking local laws with pretty dire consequences (for instance the McCanns) who have not been charged.

It's every parent's worst nightmare. Would it not have been better left there?

cafebistro · 23/07/2008 22:36

Im sure nothing can make him feel any worse than he does already

differentID · 23/07/2008 22:37

Is he being made an example of?

BreeVanderCampLGJ · 23/07/2008 22:38

Difficult one. My money is on court case and lenient sentence.

ilovemydog · 23/07/2008 22:46

But what's the alternative? If he wasn't prosecuted, then this wouldn't be right either.

Am sure he's feeling dreadful, but issues such as remorse will be addressed at trial.

Poor man, but poor little girl, more importantly!

Wasn't it a Christmas present?

jimjamshaslefttheyurt · 23/07/2008 22:52

there was this case too where the father has been charged

DoubleBluff · 23/07/2008 22:55

because he was negligent.
He has paid the price, but there are laws in the land, that have to be abided by.
He put his child at risk.

differentID · 23/07/2008 22:56

The thing is that the law is the law. He broke the law and although he lost his daughter, it was as a result of his own bad judgement and illegal actions.
Maybe it will make people think before doing things this stupid and pleading ignorance of the law.

TheCrackFox · 24/07/2008 10:59

I would imagine that he will be given a lenient sentence, after all, he can't be suffering more than he is now.

I have a 7 year old DS and I can't imagine letting him go on a quad bike at all, never mind letting him loose with one on a road.

bossybritches · 24/07/2008 11:02

Hope to god they don't lock him up- he was stupid beyond belief but he will go on serving a sentence for that for the rest of his life, his family don't need further punishment.Our prisons are already overcrowded enough, save the cell for someone who REALLY need locking up.

bossybritches · 24/07/2008 11:02

Hope to god they don't lock him up- he was stupid beyond belief but he will go on serving a sentence for that for the rest of his life, his family don't need further punishment.Our prisons are already overcrowded enough, save the cell for someone who REALLY need locking up.

bossybritches · 24/07/2008 11:04

oops sorry

Blu · 24/07/2008 11:13

The law can't be simply ignored and over-ridden because of emotional feelings, though.
The law provides legal protection in addition to the feelings we have for our children.
If his illegal action had led to the death of someone else's child everyone would want him prosecuted - the law relates to the action, not the result - otherwise it would be a system based on vengeance.

But I agree that the punishment - if he is found guilty, and he may not be - should reflect his remorse and the torment he and the family must already endure.

Poor girl, poor family, poor man.

HonoriaGlossop · 24/07/2008 11:19

Agree with you, Blu

findtheriver · 24/07/2008 13:17

Agree Blu that the law needs to be upheld; it can't simply be ignored because of the emotional suffering of the father. He acted unlawfully. It's also worth remembering there is another victim here - the driver of the car involved. I remember at the time reading that the child was hit by a woman driving another vehicle. This woman did nothing wrong but has had to suffer the trauma of a police investigation and now has to live her life in the knowledge that through the stupidity of another person's actions, she was involved in the death of a child.

Hulababy · 24/07/2008 13:19

Agree with Blu

HonoriaGlossop · 24/07/2008 13:38

findtheriver that's so true. How must that woman feel

Upwind · 24/07/2008 13:42

Indeed Blu, but I hate the thought of the poor man going through a trial. Everyone occasionally does stupid things - not that exact thing, but still...

I also like to think that if I was driving the SUV that night, I would pay enough attention to my driving to avoid such a collision. Though of course that is just speculation.

cmotdibbler · 24/07/2008 13:44

Children have a right to be protected by their parents, and when they die because their parents fail to obey the laws (which are there to protect the child), they deserve to be punished.

HonoriaGlossop · 24/07/2008 13:47

I think it is so difficult Upwind but surely if the woman was at fault at all, she would have been charged with death by dangerous driving or at least driving without due care and attention? They will have looked at this in minute detail so I think we're safe to assume they have prosecuted the person at fault

Upwind · 24/07/2008 13:55

True Honoria, but real life is rarely so simple, black and white, he was wrong whe was right.

The woman could argue that she did not expect the children to be driving right behind their Dad, but I think you have to go slowly enough on lanes like that to be ready in case you encounter someone on a bicycle or a horse (I have come accross both). And if you are alert and at an appropriate speed then you should notice something like those buggies up ahead...

It does not mean she should necessarily be charged with anything, of course.

TheFallenMadonna · 24/07/2008 13:58

Upwind - I'm sure you would like to think that, but unfortunately sometimes no amount of attention to driving is enough to avoid an accident. I've been involved in an crash where I took action as soon as the incident happened, yet with reaction times and stopping distances, it just wasn't possible for my car to stop in time.

wannaBe · 24/07/2008 14:03

in the days after that accident the driver of the other car was absolutely ripped apart by the press. With talk of her being under the influence of alcohol etc And she was innocent.

Yet that little girl's father put her life at risk not once, but twice. Once by giving her a quad bike and letting her ride it on a road, and again by not taking her to hospital after she'd been hit by a car. Why would someone not seak medical treatment for a child who had been hit by a car?

I do think the law needs to be upheld here.

OP posts:

Flip

1 2 3

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.