To think this woman should've got more than an 18 month driving ban?

[FrameyMcFrame]

AIBU
My brother in law was injured in a car crash, the car was on the wrong side of the road and hit him full on. He had to be cut out of the car by the fire brigade. It turned out the woman driving was way over the alcohol limit.
DB in law was ok but very badly bruised and cut. He's been suffering flash backs and doesn't like to drive now, he also had to pull out of a marathon he was training for - and miss a month of work.

The case came to court and the woman got a fine and an 18 month ban. We are angry, it seems too lenient, she could've killed him. The police at the scene said he would've come off worse if he had been in a less safe car.
AIBU?

Completely agree, she should be in prison, your brother only survived due to luck Her actions where so irresponsible. Driving offences should be seen as assult with a deadly weapon, driving is a privilege not a right and those who endanger their fellow citizens should never drive again and face lengthy prison sentences. Road deaths and injuries are just accepted. The Croydon tram crash was a terrible tragedy but more people than died in that incident are killed on the roads every day.

Possibly outing, BIL was in a car crash in his late teens/ early 20s. He was speeding, not drunk, smashed into a car on a bend and he went to jail for a year. The other car they were injured badly.

Women using her phone and speeding knocked an elderly woman over and killed her, she just got a ban no custodial sentence!!

The justice system is a joke. I'm not saying my BIL didn't deserve his sentence but for someone to do something like that to your BIL and just get a ban is shocking.

My cousin was killed on a zebra crossing 20 years ago and I don't think the woman that did it even got that

Paulat2112 it is a total joke!

I think it's awful your BIL was put into prison for injuring someone for speeding but someone else KILLS another person for looking at their phone and just got a ban!

I think both required a custodial and actually I think the death one should have got longer!

O sorry and OP YADNBU! I'd be fuming!

I firmly believe that if you kill or cause a person serious life changing injuries to a person though dangerous driving you should never be able to hold a driving licence again.

HazelBite as the dirt part of the punishment in my opinion!

And to be driving drunk! There is absolutely 0 times in life that there is ever a need to drive drunk! It is totally inexcusable. The alcohol limit is a joke too it should be 0 tolerance.

**first not dirt (bloody phone!)

This happened to me couple of years ago. Head on smash other driver speeding round a bend on wrong side of the road. No action taken at all against the other driver.
I don't understand the sentencing around bad driving at all. Its no wonder driving standards are so poor, people can literally get away with killing someone.

Yes the sentence may be felt to be to lenient, but every sentence handed out has to to adhere to sentencing guidelines for whatever offence the prosecution have decided to prosecute for.

I don't know the ins and outs of course, but it may be that CPS agreed to prosecute a "lesser" offence with a much higher % chance of conviction (but lower sentencing), than lose a more serious charge and waste the time and money. And/or the defence agreed to a guilty plea for the lesser offence to avoid a costly trial.

But the point is, judges don't just sit around and pluck a sentence from thin air according to their mood. There are many excellent judgements on bailii.org where you can just feel the judge's anger at what they have been restricted to sizzling on the page. It initially sounds like a great job,. but I'd not be a judge for all the tea in China.

What was the charge? Because a drink driving offence, aggravated by a crash that caused injury would normally attract a higher sentence. She must have had extremely good mitigation, or as ShotsFired said, the CPS didn't think that a higher charge was appropriate.

It is shocking how leniently offfending car drivers get off with causing harm and death.

Can we specualte that this is because most prosecutors/judges/magistrates etc are also car drivers and the thought is 'there but for the grace of God..'.

This is why when someone kills someone else with a car the charge isn't manslaughter. For years post war, no jury would convict a fellow driver of manslaughter DESPITE the fact the offence was proven.

It's an indictment of just how much of a 'car is king' world we live in.

That's shocking. I agree she should be in jail.

YANBU, it's far too lenient

I despair with the law and drink driving.
A few years ago 18 year old girl killed by a speeding drink driver and her boyfriend seriously injured while crossing the road.......... 3 years and this was because the judge had his hands tied in terms of maximum sentencing.

That's the problem isn't it. It's not the judges handing out daft sentences cos they feel like it, it's the guidelines they have to work to that need looking at. It seems property is valued over human life.

I'm not sure what the charge was but I'll find out.
DBIL is seeing police later today about it.

I was reading today about a hit and run, the driver left the teenager in the road (with serious head injuries) and then went the pub.

He got a suspended sentence.

The law does need changing. In the US they have a Vehicular Manslaughter charge, as well as others, which can carry long sentences.

I concur. I think that road offences should carry far heavier penalties.

If you make the punishments too severe juries of drivers will not convict.