A friend's son is in big trouble. Aged about 30, with six points on his licence for speeding, driving a highish-powered Ford Mondeo, he was provoked by aggressive driving in North London recently into attempting an unwise overtaking manouvre. He ended up hitting a keep-left bollard and ricocheting into a woman with a pushchair, who was crossing the road. In effect, when she was hit, the car was partly on the wrong side of the road. The child was unharmed, but the woman suffered facial and leg injuries, requiring hospitalisation for several days.
At yesterday's magistrates' court hearing, after the prosecution outlined the case and the victim's statement was read out, the case was adjourned to a criminal court, as the magistrates felt their powers of sentencing might not be sufficient. As expected, an immediate driving ban was imposed on the accused, who was finally persuaded to accept legal representation.
So far the lad has accepted he was entirely in the wrong, has been remorseful and offered restitution. He is of good character and is usually a quiet lad. At the moment he is off work through stress. His initial inclination was to refuse legal representation on the grounds that he did wrong and must accept whatever the courts decide. He now realises a solicitor will be able to present arguments that may minimise his sentence.
My friend is badly affected by it all, as you would expect. A lengthy driving ban and a hefty fine are the least concerns. Given that the magistrates could have imposed a custodial sentence of six months had they wished, I'm wondering if the lad is now looking at an even longer stretch in prison. Is a suspended sentence a possibility? Does anyone have any similar experience?
|
|
How was he "provoked" into attempting an unwise overtaking manouvre?
|
Prisons are full /overfull with people who have committed much greater crimes
Sounds like community service, heavy fine and a long ban
|
...Sounds like community service...
Don't bank on it - the injuries to the woman may mean a short stay inside.
Just to be clear, he has pleaded guilty to dangerous driving in front of the magistrates.
They could lock him up for up to six months, but they have sent the case to the crown court because they feel their sentencing powers are insufficient.
This doesn't mean he will go to prison.
Might work in his favour because a crown court judge is less likely to make a barmy decision, which magistrates sometimes can.
He needs to contact a solicitor, who will brief a barrister to present his mitigation at sentencing.
The early guilty plea and previous good character will help a good deal.
The barrister will want to see the lad before the hearing.
I predict he will say something like: "I will try to keep you out of prison, and there is a reasonable chance of that.
"But you should be aware a short custodial sentence is a possibility."
|
>> previous good character will help a good deal.
>>
He already has 6 speeding points, is that good character in this context?
|
...He already has 6 speeding points, is that good character in this context?...
Pretty much, yes.
Speeding points, assuming it was two moderate offences and he was dealt with by post, will not appear on his list of previous convictions, known as antecedents, which the court works from.
|
@RR
He says he was cut up by two drivers and then attempted to get past them. Road-rage, really.
Last edited by: ChrisPeugeot on Tue 5 Apr 11 at 17:32
|
|
he best not be admitting to road rage!
|
|
What other construction can be placed on the event, even by a smart brief?
|
...He says he was cut up by two drivers and then attempted to get past them...
Oh dear, that might not sound too clever when it's described in court for the judge.
About the best thing that can be said is the incident did not last long.
Another thing which can impact on sentence is the victim personal statement made by the woman.
|
This is what they use as sentencing guidelines for dangerous driving:
www.cps.gov.uk/legal/s_to_u/sentencing_manual/dangerous_driving/
Only at Court can those mitigating/aggravating factors be decided, but it will give you a clue as to what they look at, at least.
A trial on indictment, as this is, carries a 2 year maximum and/or fine. It also says "Sentencing Range: Non custodial options may be considered, but usually a custodial penalty is appropriate, especially where a number of aggravating factors combine".
|
>> @RR
>>
>> He says he was cut up by two drivers and then attempted to get past
>> them. Road-rage, really.
>>
If he has admitted that in his statement to police it ain't going to sound good.
|
Maybe it's gone to a criminal court because of his admission? Let the professionals advise him now. Sounds like he is fortunate not to have killed someone.
I think I'd assume custodial sentence and anything less is a bonus.
|
...Maybe it's gone to a criminal court because of his admission?...
Dangerous driving is a 'proper' criminal charge - fingerprints, mugshot, DNA swab etc.
It cannot be dealt with anywhere other than magistrates' or crown court.
|
>> It cannot be dealt with anywhere other than magistrates' or crown court.
Magistrates have passed it on to another court though.
This 30 year old 'lad' has caused serious injury due to dangerous driving which he's admitted to. Could have been worse. He needs proper legal advice and representation and I'd assume a custodial. If it's not a custodial then he can consider himself lucky.
|
Most people have been there at that sort of age. 30 is a sort of second, supercharged, grown-up adolescence when people can be quite psychopathic however nice they may be really. I'm judging by my own case here.
But most of us got away with it fortunately for the potential victims, even though we ourselves probably didn't deserve to.
The young man in the OP as described doesn't deserve porridge, and if he's really decent and contrite the chances are that the judge will see it like that too.
|
Seems a bit rum describing a 30 year old as a lad, he's far from that.
It seems an innocent woman has suffered facial and leg injuries, whatever sentence a judge sees fit to give won't fix the scars this woman may well carry for life.
|
|
Causing serious injury to a woman by a deliberately reckless act doesn't deserve a custodial sentence? Not sure the judge will see it that way.
|
I deliberately drove into someone in the 1970's causing injury, I was charged with failing to stop after an accident + dangerous driving.
I managed to get the failing to stop charge dropped and the dangerous driving charge reduced to careless driving,
Laddo needs a good brief.
|
|
Bit late for that Dog if it's been committed to Crown Court for sentencing. The opportunity has passed.
|
At first I thought, exuberance of youth, powerful car, a percieved slight from someone else and a bad reaction to that.
Then, later , I read how old he was.....for exuberance read road rage. The courts don't like road rage...events can snowball........Kenny Noye ?
I think he may well get some bird and there'll certainly be major complications afterwards with insurance, licence and possibly job.
We're all different but when you get behind an engine in public, you've really got to control your emotions.
I can't find any sympathy, much as I'd like to. I guess most of us have been there and got away with it !
Ted
|
I've noticed this myself, I am up to a lot more know good now than I did when I was in my early 20's. I think it is a last chance to be young and free sort of thing.
I've been in there myself as a passenger - my mate driving his powerful GTI car, a Mondeo was doing 50 in a 70, my mate decided to over take, Mondeo driver took offence and then sped up (it was the V6) my mate then speed up to 90 and nearly missed crashing into an oncoming Toyota by a few yards.
Thankfully nobody was hit and that taught him a lesson.
I always dread something like this happening to me if its my fault. I don't ever do anything that could really be considered dangerous driving but I dread the thought of having an off moment which I am sure we have all had.
|
>> powerful GTI car, a Mondeo was doing 50 in a 70, my mate decided to over take, Mondeo
>> ... driver ... then sped up ... my mate then speed up to 90 and nearly missed crashing into an oncoming Toyota
How can you crash into an oncoming car in a 70mph when it is a dual carriageway? Or was it a NSL road and actually 60mph?
Like Ted, I think the driver mentioned in the original post is looking at a custodial. He should certainly plan for it.
|
It was indeed a 60 :).
The speeds involved were probably higher than above, but I do remember him reaching 90mph (indicated) before the near miss.
It was one of them reads in Lancashire heading towards to Rawtenstall.
|
|
If a single carriageway at 90mph then scary driving. Doing 97mph (real not indicated) on a motorway will get 5+ points. On a NSL road that's a temporary ban if caught. Without accidents!
|
It was certainly the most experience I have ever had in a car and I've been in quite a major accident in which two cars were written off and I have been in a 70mph tyre burst.
This incident really did feel like I came a few seconds to death. It would have been a closing speed least 60mph (allowing for both cars to have slowed down a bit) I doubt all the airbags would have been enough to survive that.
It was dangerous driving by both drivers.
|
>> I deliberately drove into someone in the 1970's causing injury,
>>
Isn't that attempted murder?
|
>>Isn't that attempted murder?<<
Obviously not, or I wouldn't have got away with the lesser charge of careless driving,
My wifes mum had died that week from a brain tumour at the age of 45, so someone had to suffer,
Guy drives like a mimser, I'm at work trying to make haste, he stopped and got out to visit shops hence blocking the narrow road, I eventually overtook and deliberately tried to get as close to him as possible, but I'm afraid it was a tad too close.
Long time ago though, it wouldn't happen today ... unless someone upset me.
|
Thanks for your contributions.
My own take on the situation is that the "lad" (that's how I think of him - so many youngsters seem to take ages to grow up these days) has let himself and the rest of his family down very badly and he knows it.
He's fully aware of what he has done, to the point where intitially he refused legal representation, feeling that he should suffer the full weight of the law and not attempt to minimise it.
Of course there are other, personal, issues that are emerging; some of them too personal to mention here. It will be sufficient to say that there is a suppressed anger stemming from incidents in his past which needs addressing; ironically he had admitted to such problems and his determination to seek professional help only days before the accident.
When his case next comes up, as I said after the initial hearing at the magistrates' court, he would be well advised to take his toothbrush. Anything else, it seems, will be a bonus.
Last edited by: ChrisPeugeot on Wed 6 Apr 11 at 11:03
|
|
Sarcasm NOT intended. Might be an idea to take proof that problems are being addressed - GP's letter or record of specialist appointment or consultation outcome.
|
...Might be an idea to take proof that problems are being addressed...
The barrister will be alive to this.
It's the type of case where he/she will present a small sheaf of documents to the judge, including a few written character references.
Expect to hear the following phrase, or a variation: "Not only does this man not have any previous convictions, your honour, but he is a man of positive good character."
Not that barristers trot out the same lines over and over, you understand.
There was a multi-handed drugs case in which they had a 'cliche sweep' in the robing room beforehand to decided who could use: "he's reached rock bottom", "he's turned the corner", etc, etc.
|
|
Ah yes, a variation on Bullshet Bingo.
|
If someone hits my wife and child sending either of them in hospital due to careless driving I'd have no sympathy for the driver. Sorry.
I might have shown sympathy if it were an accident, but as per OP, he was provoked AND he already had 6 points!
Things are not just adding up!
Still I think he's unlikely to go to jail.
|
>> If someone hits my wife and child sending either of them in hospital due to
>> careless driving I'd have no sympathy for the driver. Sorry.
>>
At the risk of appearing pious: "let he who is without sin cast the first stone", if it were my wife and child I would also find it hard to forgive, however the "lad" appears to have admitted his fault and he will be punished - perhaps quite severely. I use a religious quotation but the principal is universal.
I hope our legal system can be objective (with its victim statements, character references etc) and the result is that whatever punishment he receives will help him to change his driving whenever he is next allowed behind the wheel.
|
Case heard this afternoon.
Lad sent down for three months, of which he will probably serve 12 weeks.
|
given that he is lucky he is not for years for causing death by dangerous, I would say he has not been too unfairly treated.
Its going to haunt him, both personally and in practice for years tho.
|
>>
>> Lad sent down for three months, of which he will probably serve 12 weeks.
>>
last I heard, 3 months was the same as 12 weeks ?
Hang 'em high, I say.
Last edited by: Kithmo on Wed 11 May 11 at 14:35
|
"last I heard, 3 months was the same as 12 weeks ?"
Oops! Maths was never my strong subject!
I have just checked the text message I received. He will probably serve 6 weeks.
@Zero
Spot-on. It could have been a lot worse, both for the lad and his victim. I think everyone realises that.
|
Roughly as predicted.
The first two or three nights will be the worst.
That sounds obvious, but what I mean by that is he will be sent to a reception jail where he will encounter all the druggies, rapists, thieves and thugs who have been locked up that day.
Depending on space, he may then be sent to somewhere a bit more relaxing.
But for such a short stretch, it's hardly worth the prison setting up a custody plan.
Six weeks is the absolute most he will serve.
Might get out a little sooner on a tag, or at the very least they might chuck him out on the Friday if his six weeks is up early the following week.
Last edited by: Iffy on Wed 11 May 11 at 16:10
|
First stop - Pentonville, apparently.
Yes, early release on tag was mentioned by somebody - not sure who. I wasn't at court as I was working all morning (unusually) and have only a brief text message to go on. I'll no doubt get a fuller account soon.
|
...First stop - Pentonville, apparently...
He's following in some famous footsteps.
I'm fairly sure Oscar Wilde began his sentence in Pentontville, although he did most of his time in Reading, hence The Ballad of Reading Gaol.
Hugh Cornwell of The Stranglers definitely served time in Pentonville for drugs.
I've mentioned before the story he tells about saying to a prison officer he was a musician and wanted a guitar.
The reply was something like: "Look mate, we've got bus drivers in here and we don't give them buses."
|
Seems to me this guy has been punished quite severely for being a bad driver. For his poorly-executed moment of madness he has been treated as a criminal, something he obviously isn't judging by what CP tells us. If he's balanced and solid he should rise above it, but if emotionally fragile he could be quite badly harmed by the experience.
It's true that someone was hurt, quite nastily if not gravely, as a result of the bad driving. But deliberate unprovoked assaults occasioning worse injuries are sometimes treated with what seems insane leniency. My guess though is that the court was swayed by the involvement of a child in a pram even though the child wasn't injured.
|
|
You cant scatter mothers with prams around the carriageway, in a moment of road rage. End of. Gaol time was inevitable.
|
I'm afraid yours is the voice of British reason here Zero. Fair I suppose but it does seem hard.
I keep wondering how the rest of us got away with doing dumb things at the wheel before we really knew enough to pass unnoticed most of the time. Perhaps what it boils down to is a shrewder youthful understanding of the laws of physics and probability. This guy had never developed an eye, as it were.
Come to think of it there was a certain attrition among the more gung-ho drivers of my youthful acquaintance, and sometimes their passengers. Apparently charmed lives abruptly ending and so on.
All I had mostly were near ones, scary moments. Now I am cunning and cautious so fingers crossed. Someone can always do for you through no fault of your own. Like the woman in the OP.
|
>> I keep wondering how the rest of us got away with doing dumb things at
>> the wheel before we really knew enough to pass unnoticed most of the time.
It all boils down to outcome, doesn't it?
From the offender's point of view the only difference between murder and attempted murder, is how good a shot you are, intent being the same, and yet you get (or so I believe) roughly half the sentence on average.
If the guy convicted here and avoided the sign by an inch, this would just be a story for his mates down the pub.
|
>> boils down to outcome,
It does of course SS, and disaster can strike anyone at any time.
There may be more than luck involved. But it's a difficult area. Best not gone into here perhaps.
|
I think AC comes across as being very generous. I suppose if you consider the case from the perspective of the lad and his family then it does seem he's paying heavily for a brief attack of the red mist.
From the point of view of the woman hospitalised, who may have problems with her knee in later life, and her family, it probably seems a light punishment.
On the one hand you have an intelligent, sensitive young man with a serious character flaw and on the other an innocent victim, cut down while going about her business.
I would add only one thing: the lad concerned will not feel the sentence is too harsh. He was prepared to accept whatever punishment the court imposed. That much at least says something positive about him. This is not to say he will not be scarred by the whole thing.
I shall do my best to support the rest of his family. I hope the victim is receiving as much help and support as she needs.
Last edited by: ChrisPeugeot on Wed 11 May 11 at 22:34
|
|
Well said, CP. Very fair and even-handed summary.
|
It is a very difficult area. All mistakes can be serious and any accident can be serious.
I've done things which could have caused an accident but I look back on it and learn from it. There are times when I probably haven't concentrated as hard as I should have done etc. Familiar roads are worse for this.
I think the major thing which decides if its a prison sentence of just points for careless driving is if the drivers actions were deliberately reckless. Now of course the last thing the person in question wanted is for any of this to happen.
However there are times when as a driver you know you're taking a risk and that risk can have dire consequences. These are what seem to attract the prison sentence. Then there is times when a driver was simply careless (e.g not checking a blind spot before over taking) which would be a genuine but very stupid mistake.
Does anybody understand where I am coming from? I've mentioned many of times my dad went through on red and caused a major accident, but he got away with it without so much as a few points because the police realised it was a genuine mistake attributed to a very poor junction layout.
If he had skipped the lights on purpose there would have been the same outcome in terms of the consequences of the third parties, but my dad could have been looking at a prison sentence.
It is a really difficult area. Personally I hope the person in question dosn't spent too long inside because surely he has already learnt his lesson. To me prisons should be for people too violent to be out in public or are another risk (e.g keep driving when being banned).
This thread has touched me because I can think of a few people who could have or will end up in prison as a result of this sort of driving.
How what the OP did was very serious, and a customer of mine has been in hospital and has had to have his leg removed due to some uninsured reckless driver crashing into him.
Last edited by: RattleandSmoke on Wed 11 May 11 at 22:50
|
>> intelligent, sensitive young man with a serious character flaw
In fact the capacity to do something silly when emotionally aroused isn't even a very serious character flaw. In any case it is very widespread in young or youngish inexperienced drivers, and many who should know better in fact. Most of us have been there at some stage of our lives.
The essential flaw in this case had nothing to do with character but with driving skill. The petulance at the wheel, understandable although in this case unfortunate, made demands on the driver's skill that he couldn't meet.
|
AC, it's a little more complicated than you think - and less of a case of lack of driving skills than pure foolishness driven by something deeper.
The lad knows (or should know) the road well - he used it regularly to get to work. When he pulled out to overtake he could not see the road ahead and forgot that there was a traffic island with keep-left sign coming up.
One example of foolishness may not constitute a character flaw, but knowing that this is not the first time he has reacted thus (on the roads and in other situations) suggests to me that he has a problem. The lad has acknowledged this and had in fact consulted his GP with a view to starting counselling before this latest incident.
I don't think this in any way diminishes his responsibility.
|
I shudder to think how some of the stupid things I did in cars in my late teens could have turned out.
Reading this story has left me with a thought of 'there but for the grace of God....'
|
|
You and me and my progeny.......
|
I can feel sorry for him because prison is a horrible place for someone who is not of that fraternity, but "Moment of madness" cannot be used as an excuse to avoid custody as most murderers (and quite a few rapists) were probably acting thus when they did their deed.
You just have to learn to exercise control.
|
|
Too true. I know a very nice gentle chap who went to prison for murdering his wife. I think he was in for about 18 months, tops.
|
"I think he was in for about 18 months, tops."
Totally worth it. Should've done in my first wife before she stole my house.
|
...before she stole my house...
Post a pic of the place and we'll see if anyone's seen it.
|
Dangerous driving charge - Robin O'Reliant
