Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To think this is unreasonable and this judge knowingly scentenced this man to death

866 replies

Sootyandsweep2019 · 29/12/2019 10:07

Just read a heartbreaking story in the paper about an 87 year old man, who given a 27 month prison sentence after he killed someone in a car accident. The judge was warned at the time by the man's doctors that this was highly likely to lead to his death; but went ahead and did it anyway. As predicted, he died nine days later. This was not murder, this was not malicious; it was a complete, tragic accident.

By all means ban him from driving if he was a danger, look at tightening the driving regulations around older drivers.

But our obsession with "making people pay," for genuine accidents has led to this utter tragedy .

The poor man must have been terrified. I really think this particular judge/ case needs urgent investigation; and we need a wider look at whether prison is always an appropriate response to car accident s like this.

Sadly I don't expect the judge/ CPS/ solicitors etc. Feel guilty at all.

OP posts:
Mutinerie · 31/12/2019 09:49

This is sad and while I don't believe you are being unreasonable to feel sorry for him, driving when you are 87 is as bad or worse than driving when you are drunk. So he does have responsibility for what happened, it wasn't an 'innocent' accident. And I wouldn't be surprised if there weren't circumstances that pushed the judge to make the decision they did.

I can't remember the exact statistics, but I remember reading that in the US of all non-alcohol related accedents something like over 90% of them are caused by drivers under 18 or over 75. If they changed the legal driving age to 18 to 75, many lives could be saved.

Mutinerie · 31/12/2019 09:56

Oh @brokensouls76 your story is so sad. I am a cyclist, been hit by cars so often, even on purpose. So I am very, very much primed to take the cyclist's side, but honestly if what you say is true I can't see how any real blame can be yours, and you have paid a very heavy price.

LouH1981 · 31/12/2019 10:22

Defence solicitor here. Don’t know a great deal about the details but my first thoughts are there are sentencing guidelines that the Judge is obliged to follow.
It’s terribly tragic that the gentleman died in custody but Judge has to consider all elements including public interest. I’m sure if his solicitors has felt that the sentence was ‘manifestly excessive’ then they would have appealed.
Do we know whether prison itself was the cause of death or it would likely have happened anyway? Truly sad set of circumstances for all involved.
Don’t get bogged down with what you read in the papers, it’s rarely an accurate view of the actual facts with usually some areas sensationalised to sell papers.

beautifulstranger101 · 31/12/2019 10:26

Don’t know a great deal about the details but my first thoughts are there are sentencing guidelines that the Judge is obliged to follow

Exactly. I dont know why anyone would think the judge should have gone against rules purely because of the man's chronological age. That would be ageism in reverse surely? You can't demand equal treatment for older people but then ask to rescind it when it suits you. I am gobsmacked at this ridiculous suggestion.

Lordfrontpaw · 31/12/2019 10:36

There was a paaedophile case in Scotland where the man was let off Scot free (he was found guilty) because he ‘had a good future ahead of him’. What guidelines say that’s ok?

KaptainKaveman · 31/12/2019 10:47

As usual the OP has disappeared from their own thread, probably too ashamed to comment further.

Original poster
Sootyandsweep2019 · 31/12/2019 11:29

@LouH1981. His defence team were appealing the sentence
Due to the excessive nature of the sentence, they asked for permission for him to be bailed pending that appeal, permit was refused. They were still in the process of appealing, u fortunately it was too late for the poor man as he died in custody nine days later.

OP posts:
CareOfPunts · 31/12/2019 11:34

Given the circumstances of what a PP received a 3.5 year sentence for, I wonder on what basis 18 months for this one could be considered “manifestly excessive”. Of course just because his lawyer said it was, that being his job and all, doesn’t mean it actually was.

You’re a very strange person OP.

Dontdisturbmenow · 31/12/2019 11:36

Don’t get bogged down with what you read in the papers, it’s rarely an accurate view of the actual facts with usually some areas sensationalised to sell papers

This is the most sensible thing I've read on MN so far. How people build such strong views and opinions just based on what they read on the papers is horrifying. The papers are written to get exactly the reaction that they are getting, it is the purpose of them to write the article. There will unlikely be a lot more to the story than what was shared. For one, in relation to him feeling no remorse. How can a newspaper truly know how remorseful he felt?

Do we know though the true cause of his death?

Original poster
Sootyandsweep2019 · 31/12/2019 11:38

@Careofpunts it was a 27 month sentence.

OP posts:
Hushhush89 · 31/12/2019 11:52

Poor man..... Really OP....

He shouldn't have been driving, I don't understand how anyone could confuse what pedal they are pressing. Why should he have been bailed?? He got what he deserved... Bet if it was an 18yr old that done this you wouldn't be feeling sorry for him then

beautifulstranger101 · 31/12/2019 11:54

it was a 27 month sentence

It wasnt enough. He killed a woman and permanently disabled another woman. He almost narrowly missed killing a man and a child.
27 months is a pathetic sentence for that amount of damage. He should have got more.

CareOfPunts · 31/12/2019 12:05

Sorry, 27 months. Still not that long for killing someone. Even if he’d won an appeal I doubt it would have been reduced to zero jail time.

SupportingSally · 31/12/2019 12:29

Actually I would feel just as sorry for an 18 year old. There was another case I was involved in where there was an 18yo girl. She had gone to a party with 3 friends, one of whom was the designated driver. The designated driver got drunk so this girl said she would drive the others home as she had drunk the least. On the way home, another car drove into them. It was accepted all round that the crash was not her fault. One of her passengers were killed. Driving whilst over the limit is automatically dangerous driving with a mandatory prison sentence if someone is killed. Instead of taking up her place at Durham University, this girl spent 2.5 years in prison. The judge was in tears when sentencing her. Yes, someone was killed but her “fault” was limited to driving (well, by all accounts) whilst just over the limit. Unless you believe that everyone breathalysed and found to be over the limit should go to prison, then you have to feel for her. These mandatory sentences are nuts. You should punish the intentional act, not the random outcome. Either everyone driving over the limit should go to jail, or not. Don’t just pick those with random results when that is pure chance. Personally, I think everyone found driving over the limit, or whilst on their mobile, should have a really really heavy fine if it is a first offence. Say £10,000. Maybe jail for a second or third offence. In the meantime, be aware that if you step into a car and have made or accepted a single call on your journey, or are 1 mcg over the drink limit, and someone steps out in front of you and is killed or seriously injured then you WILL go to prison whether or not it was your fault. Or your son or daughter.

EmmaGrundyForPM · 31/12/2019 12:37

I don't believe that prison is the answer for many offences. but in this case we are talking about causing death by dangerous driving. The sentence seems fair from what I've read.

user1471449295 · 31/12/2019 12:43

27 months is not enough. The poor families of the victims.
Very strange and offensive thread op. Regardless of age, if you break the law and/or kill/maim, you face the consequences. I feel the sentence was lenient

Hushhush89 · 31/12/2019 12:46

SupportingSally, I was asking if the OP would feel sorry if it was an 18 yr old and not an old man that killed 1 and ruined another's life.... To me she feels sorry for him because of his age

Nicknacky · 31/12/2019 12:48

SupportingSally Driving over the prescribed limit is not automatically dangerous driving at all even in the event of a death. It is very possibly (and likely) that her driving was dangerous as well as the others.

She deserved prison.

Lizzie0869 · 31/12/2019 13:16

I have no sympathy, sorry. The victims are the woman who died and the woman with life changing injuries; this man also narrowly avoided hitting a father and child. And the families of the victims will have gone through hell; my FIL died in a car accident (which genuinely was an accident) and it destroyed the family.

What I find really appalling is that the man displayed no remorse; car drivers who have killed a member of the public struggle to live with the guilt afterwards.

The fact that he died 9 days afterwards is sad, but the only one to blame for that was himself.

Scarletoharaseyebrows · 31/12/2019 13:19

Hitting a "ripe old age" doesn't automatically make you a sweet old person to feel sorry for. He should have known better and, for all we know, he may have always been a horrid person! Getting old isn't an immediate pass to be pitied.

midnightmisssuki · 31/12/2019 13:23

Nah - he killed someone. He should face the consequences, no matter what age he is (obviously of a sentencing age) He didnt even show any remorse!

Ugzbugz · 31/12/2019 13:57

Just watching a police traffic programme today and a man was pulled over of 82 with an expired licence, no MOT as apparently he couldnt afford it and no insurance and the policeman was really soft with him, the car was taken and crushed but if he was 21 he would have been ripped apart. Old people seem to think rules dont apply to them.

Enko · 31/12/2019 14:46

@Sootyandsweep2019 Do you feel anything at all for the victims of this? As you seem to focus on how bad you feel for the man in question but at no point do you mention the victims?

trappedsincesundaymorn · 31/12/2019 14:50

I asked the same question yesterday, as yet I've not got an answer, so I'm guessing the OP doesn't give a fat rats crack tbh

beautifulstranger101 · 31/12/2019 14:54

Hitting a "ripe old age" doesn't automatically make you a sweet old person to feel sorry for

This. I dont know why some people seem to think that when you hit 65 and over you morph into a sweet little tv granny who spends all her time baking gingerbread men or a sweet old grandad in a diamond pattern cardigan whose greatest pleasure in life is handing out werthers originals to his adoring grandchildren. The man who did this showed not an ounce of remorse. NOT ONE BIT. Wouldn't you think a decent person who made a terrible mistake and caused death to one and disability to another would at least have the decency to say "I'm sorry for your loss"?
Rude, abusive, selfish men grow old too. Its not as if the arseholes all die off at age 65 (unfortunately) leaving only the sweet ones left.
This man was horrible, he showed not an ounce of concern for his victims, had already hit a bollard and nearly killed a man and his kid and continued driving recklessly in a fog of anger only to go on to kill one person and ruin the life of another. You could argue that what happened to him was karma....