Who Makes These Ridiculous Decisions?

[Onchanguy]

Three court cases today:-

 

http://www.manxradio.com/readNEwsItem.aspx?id=29998

 

http://www.manxradio.com/readNEwsItem.aspx?id=30000

 

http://www.manxradio.com/readNEwsItem.aspx?id=29994

 

You sell drugs to people, which they choose to buy and take of their own accord, you get over nine years porridge.

 

You stab someone in a fight you get eighteen months porridge.

 

You cause someone's death by driving without due care and attention you walk away from court.

 

Who decides on these bloody stupid sentencing guidelines?

 

Presumably being a former Clerk of Tynwald gets you out of doing stir for causing someone's death. Coincidence, I don't think so.

 

EDITED.

[The Old Git]

You cause someone's death by dangerous driving you walk away from court.

 

Presumably being a former Clerk of Tynwald gets you out of doing stir for causing someone's death. Coincidence, I don't think so.

 

Quayle denied driving without due care and attention but was found guilty.

 

He was found guilty of driving without due care, not dangerous driving. How many people guilty of driving without due care are sent to prison?

[Slim]

Three court cases today:-

You sell drugs to people, which they choose to buy and take of their own accord, you get over nine years porridge.

You stab someone in a fight you get eighteen months porridge.

You cause someone's death by dangerous driving you walk away from court.

 

Who decides on these bloody stupid sentencing guidelines?

 

Presumably being a former Clerk of Tynwald gets you out of doing stir for causing someone's death. Coincidence, I don't think so.

 

I don't really understand your objections, as you seem to think they're self explanatory. What's up with the sentencing in your opinion?

[Onchanguy]

My problem is that you walk out of court after causing someone's death but you get nearly ten years stir for selling drugs which people choose to take.

 

I would have thought the original post was self-explanatory.

 

Taking someone's life does not warrant a prison sentence but assisting idiots to kill themselves warrants nearly ten years inside.

 

Seems pretty f*cked up to me.

[Slim]

My problem is that you walk out of court after causing someone's death but you get nearly ten years stir for selling drugs which people choose to take.

 

I would have thought the original post was self-explanatory.

Taking someone's life does not warrant a prison sentence but assisting idiots to kill themselves warrants nearly ten years inside.

Seems pretty f*cked up to me.

 

The three cases are very different. One of them knowingly and willingly destroyed lives and lived off the proceeds over time. Another in a fit of rage, did something stupid but isolated, another caused an accident. As I understand it the law treats these things very differently, the intention not just the effects of the crime.

[Mr. Sausages]

I would have thought the original post was self-explanatory.

 

Regardless of what point you're trying to get across, you've stated that somebody was found guilty of death by dangerous driving, but they weren't. It's a serious crime, and a serious accusation. You've got it wrong, and if you don't edit your post then the mods will have to.

[La_Dolce_Vita]

The three cases are very different. One of them knowingly and willingly destroyed lives and lived off the proceeds over time. Another in a fit of rage, did something stupid but isolated, another caused an accident. As I understand it the law treats these things very differently, the intention not just the effects of the crime.

 

But it still remains that the person selling the heroin will have people coming to him asking to buy it. The drug dealer has no concern as to what the person buying it does, that is their decision. Smoking f*cks people up too, the selling of tobacco is not illegal, the selling of tobacco is not even a moral or ethical issue.

Prison itself is an injustice, but NINE YEARS, christ. Crazy. Think these judges need some to just chill out.

[Slim]

But it still remains that the person selling the heroin will have people coming to him asking to buy it. The drug dealer has no concern as to what the person buying it does, that is their decision. Smoking f*cks people up too, the selling of tobacco is not illegal, the selling of tobacco is not even a moral or ethical issue.

Prison itself is an injustice, but NINE YEARS, christ. Crazy. Think these judges need some to just chill out.

 

We've debated the drugs thing to death, I've said my feelings, drugs are not victimless and there are many more victims than the addicts who buy them. Read up on the subject, or read back on the forum.

[manshimajin]

I think that the issue is not the sentencing but why in the Quayle case the charge in a situation that caused death was 'driving without due care and attention' rather than the more serious one of 'causing death by dangerous driving'. Was this the decision of the Police or the Attorney General’s Chambers?

 

You cannot blame the judge for passing a sentence that is appropriate for the charge that has been brought.

[molly]

I think that the issue is not the sentencing but why in the Quayle case the charge in a situation that caused death was 'driving without due care and attention' rather than the more serious one of 'causing death by dangerous driving'. Was this the decision of the Police or the Attorney General’s Chambers?

 

You cannot blame the judge for passing a sentence that is appropriate for the charge that has been brought.

 

You can hardly say he was driving dangerously by pulling out on a motorcyclist. Maybe there needs to be a new charge introduced like causing death by driving without care and attention with serious sentences to go with it.

 

It seems the going rate for a motorcyclists death these days,

[mojomonkey]

There must be technical differences between the charge of 'driving without due care and attention' and the charge of 'causing death by dangerous driving'. As I understand it Mr Quayle was either stationary or moving out of the junction when the accident happening, presumably that doesn't constitute dangerous driving (i.e. he wasn't speeding). It really is difficult to comment on individual cases without knowing the full and complete background but it does takes two to have a road traffic accident. My sympathies go to Mr Self's family, nothing will bring him back for them.

[Cret]

I don't know the circumstances, but it's perfectly possible to cause death by driving without due care and attention. It's extremely unfortunate and tragic if that happens, but totally possible that ones person's DWDC&A results in nothing, and another person doing it sadly results in a loss of life.

If they've both driven the same way then you can't say logically that they have committed different offenses as the outcome is a separate issue.

[%age]

I remember another case of death by "careless" driving not so long ago. Ooooh, I could write a book about that one and the perceived injustices involved.

 

But we can't speak about that on this (and I would suggest any other) forum. It got me 10% warn factor which I suppose I will have to live with.

 

Anyway . . . .

 

carry on.

 

edited to add:

Actually it tells you who makes the decisions. It shouldn't actually matter though should it as sentencing should be consistent no matter who is wearing the wig and tights.

[Mr. Sausages]

There must be technical differences between the charge of 'driving without due care and attention' and the charge of 'causing death by dangerous driving'.

 

Correct.

 

I've sat on a jury for a fatal accident. The rule for dangerous driving is something like "of a standard well below that of a competent driver" (that's not an exact quote, but it's something like that - the deemster explains it). If the jury isn't sure that the incident was caused by driving "well below" that standard, then it has the option of convicting for lack of due care and attention. I don't know what happened in this case, but that's what happens when someone is charged for death by dangerous driving.

[%age]

So if say, you killed some whilst driving, best to quickly take an advanced driving test, and the deemster will think you surely can't be too bad a driver.