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

[Sootyandsweep2019]

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.

The driver is not the victim in this

@HunterHearstHelmsley that’s a truly aweful statement to wish op to be run over

Hopefully op can be educated that cars need to be driven with care and the difference between a crash and an accident

YABU. He shouldn't have been driving and the law needs to be tougher on this kind of offence.

If his sentencing was reduced because of his great age should sentencing be reduced for teenagers because of their young age? Teenagers are notorious for behaving impetuously and without a thought for consequences.

The judge decided that the letter from the GP did not create exceptional circumstances for sentencing - she probably sees these a lot. There were aggravating circumstances so the judge decided that a custodial sentence was what was required. She put the sentence at the lower end of the range.

This man shouldnt have been driving in that moment. This was not a sudden unpredictable mechanical failure it was a decision made by the man to get back into his car then drive. Whether he should have been driving at all is a different question. No doubt his family have done some soul searching about whether they should have tried to stop him driving.

It would make sense for everyone to take the hazard perception part of the test every 5 years. If they fail it, then have to take the full test with a mandatory period between each retest. It would take about 15 minutes in a test centre and cost £23 at today's price, so not financially punitive to the majority of people who can afford to run a car.

I know that I'd fail it right now, so won't drive.I'm also on a dangerous combination of medications that mean I could drive in theory, but in practice my body is just used to being stoned so I don't notice the effects.
Giving up my independence before 40 is awful, but not as awful as having to live with myself if I harmed someone by living in denial.
It's not ageism, it's common sense that as we age our reaction times slow and for a majority, it makes us unsafe on the road.

Sadly I have experience of this.

I think some older drivers (mainly men?) have an arrogance/entitlement about driving, combined with reduction in their response time, visual processing etc, which can be a deadly combination.

In my case the driver collided with someone and was so much in denial (possibly a result of the guilt he felt) that he tried to maintain that the other person collided with him, despite many witnesses to the contrary.

The lack of admission of responsibility/regret/apology can play a big part in how the courts deal with them.

Accidents versus reckless behaviour can be down to perception of the judge/jury - this lack of apology can have an impact on the perception & decision.

I think it is hard for the family of the guilty party, as their relative could be vulnerable/frail. But ultimately it was their actions which caused the accident, so I understand why some judges would see a prison sentence as an appropriate punishment/deterrent to others.

The thing that I can’t get over is that he supposedly showed remorse to his probation officer but did not apologise to the family, much like the other case in Renfrewshire.

To me, if it was an accident you’d say sorry.

I was at the scene of an accident where a little girl was hit by a car. I was walking about 20ft away when she ran across the road, without looking, right in front of a car. I didn’t have time to even call out before she was hit.

All I heard from the poor driver was ‘I’m sorry I’m sorry I’m sorry’ and that truly was an accident. I sat with him a while (an off duty nurse had stopped and she took over care of the wee girl) and his concern was all about the little girl. I held him as he sobbed.

I’m sad that this gentleman died. I’m more sorry for the ladies who took the brunt of his angry driving that day.

I think a lot of sentences seem to be very lenient nowadays, and there are enough examples of that on this thread.

I also think that regular tests should be given to older drivers to check their ability. And that will include me sooner than I’d like if I choose to drive again.

He knew he should not have been driving. His wife drove to the supermarket, and then got out and left him to park the car.

He immediately hit a bollard then in a raging temper got in the car and reversed at speed (due to being not in control of his temper). He says he thought he had put the car in drive, it is an automatic car so it isn’t like he put it in reverse in a manual by accident, you have to select drive or reverse and it tells you on your dashboard which gear you have selected. He was not fit to drive and should not have been driving, the accident is also partly his lazy wife’s fault if she couldn’t be bothered to park the car knowing he is not safe to drive.

yabu
a woman died horrifically and another was seriously hurt.
OP you seem to care more about drivers that kill than their victims.
odd to say the least.

YABU.

Time and again I see stubborn, older people who are an absolute liability on the road but selfishly refuse to give up driving. It's right that he was jailed, he's lived his life. The young man he killed didn't get that chance.

So any suggestion that two years in jail might lead to his death are completely disingenuous.

He would only have spent just over a year in prison, almost certainly most of it in an open prison.

I have a few doubts about Anne Sacoolas too. They want her back now, but often in these cases the lead up to the court case can take a full year. Does she need to come back right now, or could it be that she could come over for the trial? Could the trial take place without her being there in person and she gets some sort of sentence that she could serve in the US? There is also a bit of me that feels that she is being hounded. She has been charged and the trial will come, but will she receive a fair trial? She also has young children, so no doubt worried that if she comes over now, and trial isn't until next year, what happens to the children? Is her husband still here? I took it that he isn't? So where would she be for a full year waiting for trial? She has also acted on the advice of her solicitors. An awful situation all round really.

I think hitting two people and continuing to drive with them trapped by your car is NOT a fuckin tragic accident.
OP your comments about Anne Sacoolas are deplorable, again NOT an accident to drive for 400m on the wrong side of a road.
Do you think all cute elderly folk should avoid jail?

He was reversing at top speed for 4-5 seconds. Try counting those seconds out loud. It feels like a long time. And he didn't react.

The judge, in possession of all the facts not just a trash newspaper article, made a decision in line with their years of training and experience. But you think you know better because the criminal is a frail old man?

He should not have driven the car. He drove it dangerously. He killed one person and maimed another. Why should he be treated differently from anyone else in the same situation?

He was frail and 87 chances were high that he would’ve died within 27 months in or out of prison. I’m sorry he died, but I’m also sorry that his victims died or had life altering injuries.

If this were a 25 year old I do nt doubt y ou 'd be on here saying 27 months is stupidly lenient. Which is it because you can't have it both ways.

Dangerous driving is dangerous driving regardless of age and age is not a protection against a prison sentence. I worked in the prison service for years and there are plenty of 90 year old paedophiles in prison who couldnt keep their hands off the grandchildren. Should we let them off too? The elderly drivers who get put away are always repeat offenders who won't give up driving. Every time you get behind the wheel of a car you need to ask yourself if you are fit to drive and that includes the elderly. It doesn't exclude them from the resulting punishment from dangerous driving.
Imagine if that was your child who was killed. You would not be so forgiving then.

A year ago or so I was knocked by a car in a car park...or rather I ran into it.
I was loading my shopping into the boot while DS was sat in the trolly when someone started reversing out of a space. She didn't look. I saw her not look. She was on her phone. Her car (admittedly not going too fast) was coming towards us and showed no signs of slowing down. I panicked and ran around the trolly (couldn't move it anywhere else due to other cars) and banged on the back of her car with my hands to get her to stop. It was about 3 ft from us at this point.
I had post natal anxiety and kept replaying what happened in my head, thinking of worst case scenarios (her car smashing into DS or the trolly getting caught on her car and dragging it off etc) and blaming myself. I should have put DS in the car first (trolly bay was miles away and I used to take him back with the trolly and carry him back to the car), or maybe I had positioned him wrong, or maybe I should have worn brighter colours so she saw me, or maybe, or maybe or maybe. Or maybe she shouldn't have been a selfish driver and put her fucking phone away and looked properly before moving her vehicle.

I’m currently learning to drive and in every lesson it is mentioned to me that a car is a lethal weapon if handled incorrectly, if you can’t handle it then you shouldn’t be driving it. If anything happens while you’re in control of your car due to your poor driving then it is your fault, you make a decision everyday when you go into your car you have to live with the consequences of that decision.

If you start making exceptions and allowances in the judicial system because of age where do you stop? Do you give more lenient sentences based on age regardless of the crime? The law is the law and the man broke it. It was preventable, not inevitable.

It's sad for the man's family that he lost his life. But it's sadder still to imagine lives lost because of the recklessness he displayed.

Yes because a 99 year old peadophile who assaulted their grandchild is exactly the same and as repeatedly stated; I would not be clamouring for people of a younger age to get more, I find it a tragedy when anyone is sent to prison after a car accident.
So no if he was 17, ( and a newly qualified driver) 27,,37, 47 etc. I would.NOT be clamouring for a longer punishment and would just feel sad that he had been put through this

OP

Did you not know the full story before posting or did you deliberately miss out the all the pertinent facts?

OP have you read the story? He wasn’t out for a lovely drive and got confused and sadly killed someone. He lost his temper in a supermarket car park, almost injured a dad & child, reversed at high speed and severely injured one person and killed another who didn’t die quickly or painlessly. Why is all your sympathy to the driver and not to those he killed and their families?

Even if they were drunk or high?
Tell me what the difference between taking drugs and/or drinking and getting behind the wheel and knowing you are dangerous but doing it anyway, and knowing you are dangerous because you haven't the strength , reaction speed, eyesight etc and driving anyway.

And why is either crime worthy of sympathy as opposed to punishment

OK. That's your opinion.
I fully believe in a system built on rehabilitation. But I also believe there must be punishment.
He doesn't get to do what he wants just because he's old.

He killed someone.
It's no ones fault but his own how his lie ended.