James Hill was jailed for 8 years today for killing 2 young girls when he lost control of his car during a road race on a the A46 near Grimsby. Apparently he had been banned from driving 5 times before, has previously been jailed, twice, for driving offences and was 3 times over the limit. I can't imagine what the parents of the girls must be going through. Was 8 years enough for this man?
He will be free in 4 years and although he was banned for 15 years this apparently won't stop him getting behind a wheel.
|
I cannot think of anyway that this discussion will remain on motoring. It seems almost inevitable that it will get into a genereal political type debate.
For the moment I'll let it stand, however I suspect that I'll need to remove it - it will depend on the direction the thread takes.
|
|
|
Jeds,
Maybe whether he drives again depends on his fellow prisoners...along the lines of;
Want to buy a ticket for the prisoners ball?
I don't dance
It's not a dance, its a raffle.
Matt35.
|
I tend to get incensed when I hear sentences as mentioned for it equates to 2 years per life taken. Unbelievable.
I understood that it was a ten year ban only 4 years of which will apply as he will be unable to get behind the wheel. His past history indicates he will drive again when out so a danger again.
But on reflection, ignoring the obvious which Joe Public would like in such cases and which cannot apply because it is our law, then just what do you do with such a person?.
We have in the Forum His Honour who I understand is well versed in sentencing and I would dearly like to hear his views.
As Mark says without political ranting just what is the solution?.
DVD
|
|
When sentences like this are passed is it taken into account that an 8 year sentence means "he will be out in 4"? Perhaps one solution would be to make 8 year sentences last 8 years, life sentence mean life etc.? Or give him 16 so "he will be out in 8". Why can his 10 year ban not start the day he is released from prison? Though I suspect that no ban will actually stop him getting behind the wheel. Goodness knows how you stop him - except by locking him away permanently.
|
|
Mark, I'm not sure the thread will deteriorate in that way. The contributors to this site might be a disparate bunch but one thing I think most have in common is a concern for the state of the culture on our roads. I just think this can't go without some reflection on the utter tragedy of the situation against the apparent helplessness we have to do anything about it.
|
|
Why only a 15 year ban, been banned 5 times already? why on earth would we ever want this low life behind the wheel again legally???
|
|
|
|
|
I haven't heard about this case, but the guilty party seems a multiple recidivist. I feel there must be an argument for more steeply escalating penalties for those who repeat serious misdemeanours, along the famous Clinton lines of 3 strikes and you are out. In extreme cases, permanently out.
|
I don't think any of us would feel that this man has been treated in the way that is deserved.
I cannot bring myself to even think of it clearly, but if any young relative of mine was mown down in such a manner, and I later found out that their lives, under the British justice system, were deemed worthy of only 4 years a piece (obviously halved with good behaviour) then I would feel utterly devastated.
Compounded with the fact that the bloke had already been banned a number of times, then surely, surely, there should be a better way of punishment than this?
I don't know the solution, and I hope this post (I've tried hard) has not gone political in any way.
But what I have read above is disgusting, upsets me a great deal, and I just wish our land, whatever political party is in power, would just finally get some perspective on making the crime fit the punishment.
The situation as it stands is just too depressing.
HF
|
If this guy has been banned already 5 times and imprisoned twice (and presumably released early on each occasion for "good behaviour") how come he is still eligible for early release for "good behaviour". Surely he has shown that although he can behave himself in prison (in order to get early release?) he cannot be trusted to behave himself when he gets out so should not qualify for early release in this instance? And if he gets into trouble repeatedly how come he is not put back inside to complete his terms? (Preferably before he kills some other poor innocents and destroys other families) Is there no way of stopping these people from driving?
Having said that, I once got a lift from a bloke at work and I noticed his tax disc was out of date. I commented and he replied, "No need to get one, or insurance, after all I'm banned for drunk driving. Still my year's ban runs out next week and I can get back to being legal again. He had been banned in Manchester and felt that there was little chance of him being "done" in Leics - and he was right. Needless to say, I didn't accept another lift.
|
|
|
|
Short of the death penalty, how can we ever ensure that this person can't repeat what he's already done? If you lock him up for ever how much is that going to cost tax payers? Even Ian Huntley will see out his time, in spite of whatever his mother may think.
|
Bring back the stocks....24 hrs on the village green, then throw what's left in jail to serve his sentence.
Sorry, not very PC.
|
|
|
Been running through my head if there might be some way in the future in connection with the vehicle tracking we are promised for road tolls etc.
Can't think of a way that would work yet not be too intrusive for others though...
My thinking is that everyone who has a ban could be 'chipped'. It would be mandatory for cars to have a chip reader in so they could tell if someone who wasn't supposed to be is driving and report their location to the nearest PC. Of course, trouble would be if it mistook passenger for driver, not to mention the fact that it's all very 'Big Brother'.
Actually, thinking about it, things like automated tax disc checking and numberplate recognition should help here. I'd guess a lot of banned drivers will be running around in their own car still but with no tax / insurance, so checks would pop these up. Might be difficult to prove though in the case of shared cars and even then, unless you catch the person driving they can but claim to have lent the car to someone else.
(Sorry to get slightly political here, but I wonder what punishment they'd have in places like Singapore? I suspect along the lines of making sure it wasn't possible for the offender to drive....)
|
With a couple of exceptions (Steve42's suggestion of chip readers in cars) this has been a thread on sentencing and prisoner rehabilitation. Sorry folks, thread locked.
No Dosh
mailto:Alan_moderator@honestjohn.co.uk
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
