Donate SIGN UP
Gravatar

Answers

1 to 17 of 17rss feed

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by kuiperbelt. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.

For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
I would say - yes.

The point of prison is to punish an offender, and prevent him or her from re-offending via the harsh lesson of incarceration.

It's apparent that this man will be punished daily for the rest of his life, so prison is unlikely to increase or diminish that punishment, and would simply deprive his grieving family of his support, and him of theirs.

It was an accident, although a law was broken, but we have to assess these issues from a human point of view, and I believe the judge has correctly done so.
IMO yes...

not sure how a custodial sentence would serve any real purpose...
He was disobeying the rules and speeding though - would he have had the 'accident' if he hadn't been speeding? I have mixed feelings and feel the poor woman in the other vehicle is being very gracious.
I find it quite telling that the victim in the other car didn't want him to go to prison. Terribly sad case and, as andy points out, what purpose would a custodial sentence be for Teddy's family?
Prison would serve no purpose. He will be haunted by this terrible accident every day of his life. That’s punishment enough.
Question Author
\I find it quite telling that the victim in the other car didn't want him to go to prison\

What surprised me was the victim's impact statement actually made a difference to the sentence which was handed down. I guess the outcome would have been very different had someone been killed in the other vehicle??
This feels like the right outcome. To my mind a custodial sentence would achieve no more than inflicting greater anguish on his family.
what would a prison sentence do here except put the man at risk of other prisoners for accidentally killing a child yes i think this was the right call i am sure he wont speed again
speeding isnt an imprisonable offence
Roadman - No it isn't. But causing death by dangerous driving is, and that was the conviction and sentence.
Question Author
>14.45 Good Point!!
No, it wasnt an accident he ignored the road conditions and paid the price. I see the council finally reduced the road speed, looks like they are also culpable.

However, I dont see the point of jail in this particular case.
Yes, the guy will punish himself forever.
YMB - his behaviour was a factor, but it was still an accident in the definition of the term, because the result was not caused by deliberate predetermined behaviour.
SO, when anyone speeds and hits something its not an accident is what you are saying? Seems pretty deliberate to me.

Compare and contrast to the partiallyblind, disabled pedestrian who shouted and gestured to a cyclist riding on the pavement
YMB - speeding may contribute to an accident, but it's still an accident because the driver did not intend to crash.

Speeding makes cars go faster, it does not always make them crash.

Therefore the speeding was intentional, the crash was not, it was accidental.

1 to 17 of 17rss feed

Do you know the answer?

Did The Judge Make The Right Call.

Answer Question >>

Related Questions