Five months for crippling a kid

Honest John Back Room » Motoring discussion
View Threaded
Wed 24 Aug 2005 22:17
Five months for crippling a kid - David Horn
news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/shropshire/4181928.stm

Boy he hit lost both legs. Driver admits "showing off" and is given a pathetic five months.
Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Wed 24 Aug 2005 22:54
Five months for crippling a kid - J Bonington Jagworth
>Driver admits "showing off"

Perhaps it's time for psychometric testing (and a proper written test) before being granted a driving licence. I'm pretty sure that some 20-year olds are unfit to drive anything.
Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Wed 24 Aug 2005 23:12
Five months for crippling a kid - rustbucket
>Driver admits "showing off"
Perhaps it's time for psychometric testing (and a proper written test)
before being granted a driving licence. I'm pretty sure that some
20-year olds are unfit to drive anything.


Im pretty shure quit alot of all age drivers are unfit to drive anything.


--
rustbucket (the original)
Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Wed 24 Aug 2005 23:20
Five months for crippling a kid - rustbucket
>>Im pretty shure quit alot of all age drivers are unfit to drive anything.
sorry poor inglish should be
I think a lot of drivers of all ages are unfit to drive anything
--
rustbucket (the original)
Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Wed 24 Aug 2005 23:32
Five months for crippling a kid - tyre tread
I am not condoning what he did and I also think this sentence is risible but it doesn't actually say he admitted showing off.

It says he admitted dangerous driving and that he had been showing off.

I am not trying to make light of this merely pointing out an error in the original posting
Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Thu 25 Aug 2005 09:21
Five months for crippling a kid - Cardew
On our local TV they interviewed the injured boy's mother who appeared in court and argued that he should not be given a custodial sentence. That could account for the remarkably light sentence; he also only got a 2 year driving ban.

She wanted him to be made to work with similarly injured children.

It really raises the question of do we punish for the offence, or for the consequences of the offence?

In this case the driver drove too fast, mounted pavement and crushed boy against wall. Had there been nobody else involved i.e. no injuries, I think it is doubtful if a charge of dangerous driving would have brought; careless driving or driving without due care and attention?


Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Thu 25 Aug 2005 10:24
Five months for crippling a kid - drbe
I think this has been done before.

I do not condone the crime, but isn't the sentence for the offence and not for the consequences of the offence?
Reply | Report as offensive | Link