Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

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:
ExterminAitch · 25/07/2008 00:02

it's the threat to society bit i'm not getting, tbh. what threat does he pose to society?

Mamazon · 25/07/2008 00:04

so your only guilty if you get caught because you have killed someone?
thats like saying that the law only applies if there is a speed camera or a police car nearby.

VeniVidiVickiQV · 25/07/2008 00:06

Tough one. REally difficult for all concerned.

But, he failed his daughter on two counts. Of taking her out on open road on the quadbike when he shouldnt have. Then, after being in an accident he failed to get her checked over appropriately.

It's not just recklessness here.

LittleBella · 25/07/2008 00:10

No it's not Mamazon.

The law always applies. I'm not defending my breaking of it, I'm acknowledging that I shouldn't do so.

But the crime for breaking the speed limit isn't prison. If it were, I wouldn't break it tbh. And a lot of other people wouldn't either.

LittleBella · 25/07/2008 00:12

Well, it depends on whether you think someone who exposes their children to an unreasonable level of danger for a not very worthwhile benefit, is a threat to society. You could argue that he wasn't a threat to society, he was only a threat to his children and the emotional well-being of his ex-wife and relatives, but I think the death of children due to negligence isn't just a matter for their relatives, it is a matter for soceity, isn't it? No man is an island and all that.

I also think someone who has such a sense of entitlement that he would allow his children to take that particular type of risk, is pretty dangerous tbh. I'm not arguing that all parents everywhere who allow their children to take risks are a threat to society, but I do think this bloke and the way he behaved, sounds utterly unreasonable. And unreasonable people are a threat to a society based on reason. (Which I'd like to think ours was, but obviously I appreciate I'm on extremely dodgy ground there!)

oops · 25/07/2008 00:17

Message withdrawn

thumbwitch · 25/07/2008 00:19

Should he go to prison when Jason Howard was let off with a fine after mowing down Rhiannon Bennett? here Sure, Elizabeth's dad was negligent, insane, careless but he didn't set out to harm his daughter and he didn't actually cause her accident, did he? I agree he should be charged but not that he should go to prison for it - he is in his own personal prison for the rest of his life anyway.

LittleBella · 25/07/2008 00:21

I think that cyclist should be in prison as well.

I sound like a right old hangemanflogem, don't I?

thumbwitch · 25/07/2008 00:23

no actually I too think that cyclist should go to prison - he looked like a right smug bastard who wasn't at all sorry.

unknownrebelbang · 25/07/2008 00:27

Who caused the accident thumbwitch?

I have mixed views on this - I don't doubt that the man is suffering following the death of his daughter (even if it is because of his own recklessness), but not to take her to hospital? That's beyond my comprehension tbh.

Quattrocento · 25/07/2008 00:32

that article in the Daily Mail is one of the worst pieces of journalism I have ever read

regardless of the rights and wrongs of the case, how on earth can it be right to publish that someone is well-known (really? find a quotable source then) thrill-seeker.

ExterminAitch · 25/07/2008 00:32

"But the crime for breaking the speed limit isn't prison. If it were, I wouldn't break it tbh. And a lot of other people wouldn't either"

sorry, that's absolutely dense. if you speed, you are more likely to be in an accident and potentially kill someone... ergo, you're a threat to society by your own reckoning and should hand yourself into the nearest cop shop.

thumbwitch · 25/07/2008 00:33

I admit to not knowing enough about the circs of Elizabeth's accident but it seemed that she came out from behing her father's car and was hit. He of course is insane for not taking her to hospital immediately; but then so are all hit and run drivers so I suppose he should be prosecuted for that anyway. how could you NOT take your injured child to hospital?

But still - what purpose is served by locking him up? Whereas that bastard Howard might have learned that yelling at someone that he isn't going to stop is not a good enough excuse to knock them flying - as it is, he can just carry on and do it again if he feels like it. I doubt Elizabeth's dad would do anything remotely similar.

LittleBella · 25/07/2008 00:41

Righto Aitch I'm off to the nearest cop-shop.

Oh I'm back again, couldn't be arsed with the queue.

Actually, seriously, if the punishment were prison, then I would be a much more serious threat to society for speeding. Because people who are prepared to risk heavy punishment like that, are more determined to do the crime. Hence my observation that if the punishment for speeding were harsher, fewer people would do it, simply because most people are not hell-bent on speeding whatever the consequences.

colacubes · 25/07/2008 00:49

Yeah he broke the law was negligent and his daughter paid the price, so lock him he wont care, his daughter his dead, like any law in the land can cause more pain or have a more sobering effect than that.

ExterminAitch · 25/07/2008 00:50

but speeding isn't a threat to society itself, it's a law that is there to make driving safer. it's the killing and maiming as a result of speeding that'd be the problem.

thumbwitch · 25/07/2008 00:51

Quattro, are you surprised it's crap journalism - it is the Daily Fascist Mail. Sorry, it was the first link that I found on the relevant story.

wannaBe · 25/07/2008 09:03

Should it just be about whether they are a threat to society though? Or should it be a case of having to serve a punishment (according to the law not according to what sympathisers think you are already going through)?

He didn't just make one stupid mistake. this is not one of those "surely we've all made mistakes" things like turning your back for a second and your child running out in the road or falling off a climbing frame or shutting their fingers in a closing door. He bought a vehicle for a 7 year old. Surely any idiot with half a brain knows that these quad bikes are powerful vehicles which are designed at best for teenagers (and even then it's questionable). i have a 5 yo who will be 6 in November, I just could not imagine that in just over a year's time he will be able to drive such a vehicle (he wouldn't, because I would never be so stupid as to let him).

But even if he thought that giving her the bike was ok, he then let her drive it on a public road. If the man has a driving licence he knows that you're not allowed to drive vehicles on public roads without licence and insurance. I don't have a driving licence and I know that.

And then when she was hurt he didn't take her to hospital.

There were so many stages at which his actions would have meant this child would still be alive. Had he not bought her the bike she would still be alive. Had he not let her drive on the road she wouldn't have been hit. Had he taken her to hospital her injuries might have been spotted earlier and she might still be alive.

He failed his child on every count. and should, IMO, pay the price for it.

I have to say that if I was the child's mother then he would already be paying the price, because there's no way he would get to see my other child unsupervised again.

OP posts:
ExterminAitch · 25/07/2008 11:08

'pay the price'?

well imo there should certainly be a court case, but i personally hope it'll be a quick one with a lenient sentence. but he does need to be called to account for his behaviour in front of the law.

floaty · 25/07/2008 11:15

The other thing is that it was dark and the quad bike had no lights ,there is no way thta ther other driver would have been able to see her.I admit to also having reservations about the benefits of proson in this case but he should be charged and stand trial whatever punishment is given as an example to other people that these vehicles are not suitable for children to drive on the road etc,they ar not a toy

Upwind · 25/07/2008 11:16

Wannabe - I suppose it depends on what purpose you think prison serves. I think it primarily gets people off our streets who are a threat/danger to others. And it also serves to deter people from wrong doing. I don't think people will ever be deterred from bloody stupid behaviour because they don't believe they will face any consequences, and this girl's father is no threat to anyone. Agree with Aitch that it should hopefully be a quick case with a lenient sentence.

LittleBella · 25/07/2008 21:18

He is presumably a threat to his other children.

What's to say that he won't take similar risk-taking action with them in the future if he's not safely locked up in prison? He may not use a quad bike, but there are numerous other ways to endanger children, if you are the sort of person who engages in risk-taking behaviour.

None of us really know what the guy is like and if he has learnt from this or if he blames himself. Lots of people who harm children never see how culpable they are, denial kicks in as a self-defence mechanism and they never really face up to their part in the child's harm. We don't know if he's one of those or someone who really has understood just how wrong he was.

cornsilk · 25/07/2008 21:34

Why didn't he seek medical help for his child?
Had he been drinking? Was he already in trouble for driving or other offences?
Whatever happened he neglected his child by not seeking medical help and that may have contributed to her death.
If a mother had done this she would be ripped to shreds on here.

Piffle · 25/07/2008 21:43

another sad case of a dad being charged here
here
case local to me very devastated community and family
Hope the link works as am on iPod thing.

As forcase in op. They had to really... Sad but truly needed attention imo

expatinscotland · 25/07/2008 22:16

'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. '

This accident occurred on a single track road with no lights.

Now this is NOT speculation, but anyone who drives on such roads regularly knows damn well how windy and narrow all these roads are. There is often little to no room to manouvre on such roads as the geography around them prevents it. Even at slow rates of speed, other vehicles and animals can be nigh on impossible to detect even during the day due to the bendy nature of many of these roads.

I've had to reverse into passing places quite frequently around here.

Sometimes, too, if the road is downhill, even in a lower gear, it's not so easy to stop quickly without flipping your vehicle, over a cliff or into water in many instances.

You have an astronomically small chance of avoiding such a collision if you cannot see the object properly at night no matter how careful a driver you are.

That is why you don't see people on horses or the like on such roads at night except in rare instances and then they are covered in reflective materials.

I think it's absolutely unconscionable to assume that poor woman was at any fault especially after the investigation has demonstrated as much.

He broke the law.

He also realised this and took teh wee girl home instead of ringing an ambulance then and there or taking the girl straight to hospital.

This is negligent.

He will probably not serve any jail time.

But the law needs to be upheld or become an even bigger ass than it already is.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page