[News] Is your life worth more than a 2 year suspended prison sentence?

[Stat Brother]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-birmingham-54029127

A driver has been given a suspended prison sentence over the death of a cyclist he hit with a sports car.

West Midlands Police said McSkimming lost control of the car on a bend and it span on to the wrong side of the damp road where it hit a tree before "rebounding" across the carriageway to hit Mr Satterthwaite who was 51.

Investigators found the car was travelling at 59mph in the 40mph zone before the 2018 crash, the force added.

In addition to his suspended sentence, McSkimming - of Gainsborough Crescent, Solihull - was ordered to complete 250 hours of unpaid work and was disqualified from driving for two years.



Ok so I accept mine isn't, but I think we all know Anthony Satterthwaite's life was worth considerably more than that.
But as he was hit by a speeding car, driven by a man who could afford an expensive lawyer, it clearly isn't.

 

[Surrey_Albion]

Liike you said the driver had money so less guilty than if he was poor

 

[Simster]

I am not sure about this. Obviously it is a dreadful thing to happen, and above all, I felt so terrible for the poor cyclist and his family when reading this.. But accidents do happen and you have to wonder how culpable this driver actually was,
Firstly, he was doing 59 in a 40. That is way too high, but I see that happen daily and in modern cars with an engine size of anything over 1.6, it is very easy to do if you switch off for any time. So IMO, that alone isn't enough to demand a long custodial sentence. Secondly, it seems what caused the death of the cyclist was incredibly bad luck as the car hit a tree and rebounded across the road into him. He hasn't been run over.

I don't know, just playing devil's advocate a bit. If that cyclist had been a relative of mine, I'd probably think differently.

 

[Hamilton]

Ah, but we're conflating issues here aren't we.

Arguably, our lives are worth much more than two years and equally not worth anything.

For example, say he had been doing 40 miles an hour and spun out of control, hit the tree and killed the cyclist. He is now within the speed limit and it is all just a tragic accident.

But, he was speeding and therefore contributing more towards the accident. However, his intent was never to kill but to speed and he hit the tree first, not the cyclist. This sounds callous but another 10 metres down the road and there would have been no tree to rebound from and no death.

So, ultimately the offence is for speeding only followed by accidental death. All wrong in anyone's head I'm sure but I'm guessing that's the law.

Add to this the question of why he was speeding? Was there a reason that a jury could understand? I'm sure this man is a habitual speeder but what if he was in the process of slowing as he moved from a sixty mile an hour area to a 40 mile an hour area?

The question really is this - do you think the laws of the land best reflect what all life is worth?

 

[Super Steve Earle]

I see today that a woman was given a 2 year suspended sentence for stealing and immediately transferring £31k to friends and family when £90k was refunded to her account in error by a charity shop instead of £9. Must admit I thought stealing £30k deserved a custodial sentence. Wonder if Stat Brother would have questioned the sentence had it been a pedestrian killed rather than a cyclist. Cyclists Lives Matter and all that.

 

[dejavuatbtn]

Manslaughter in my book. Sentence was a joke, but not to the person’s family. Our justice system is not a justice system.

 

[zefarelly]

I've always thought IF you wanted to do someone in, or bump them off a traffic accident seemed like the path of least resistance, people literally get away with murder on the roads.

I'll add another scenario . . . Cyclist causes car to swerve and cause a fatal accident . . .. then what . . .

 

[maffew]

59 in a 40 is absurd. Im probably alone in wondering why this isnt deemed like manslaughter. The mans lost control of a vehicle breaching restrictions to put in place to prevent accidents. Yes people break speed limits, but 50% over isnt likely to be done by accident, and clearly the consequences, IMO arent enough to prevent people from doing it. Yes modern cars can handle it, then trained personnel can handle a gun, but in the wrong hands then it becomes lethal and the driver clearly isnt lewis flipping hamilton.

 

[zefarelly]

Modern cars are too safe. By that I mean people are cocooned and get a false sense of security, they may well be much safer but are an hugely higher risk to everything and everyone else.

I have a 57 year old car . . . Quite capable of doing over 100mph, but TBH its scary. You know you're in a biscuit tin with no protection.

Modern cars are too good for most drivers, who can't handle the cars they have if anything vaguely out of the ordinary happens.

 

[maffew]

Ah, but we're conflating issues here aren't we.

Arguably, our lives are worth much more than two years and equally not worth anything.

For example, say he had been doing 40 miles an hour and spun out of control, hit the tree and killed the cyclist. He is now within the speed limit and it is all just a tragic accident.

But, he was speeding and therefore contributing more towards the accident. However, his intent was never to kill but to speed and he hit the tree first, not the cyclist. This sounds callous but another 10 metres down the road and there would have been no tree to rebound from and no death.

So, ultimately the offence is for speeding only followed by accidental death. All wrong in anyone's head I'm sure but I'm guessing that's the law.

Add to this the question of why he was speeding? Was there a reason that a jury could understand? I'm sure this man is a habitual speeder but what if he was in the process of slowing as he moved from a sixty mile an hour area to a 40 mile an hour area?

The question really is this - do you think the laws of the land best reflect what all life is worth?

Cant really agree with any of this. If this if that. The mans actions directly resulted in an innocent persons

 

[Simster]

59 in a 40 is absurd. Im probably alone in wondering why this isnt deemed like manslaughter. The mans lost control of a vehicle breaching restrictions to put in place to prevent accidents. Yes people break speed limits, but 50% over isnt likely to be done by accident, and clearly the consequences, IMO arent enough to prevent people from doing it. Yes modern cars can handle it, then trained personnel can handle a gun, but in the wrong hands then it becomes lethal and the driver clearly isnt lewis flipping hamilton.

59 in a 40 is indefensible, yet I see that happen all the time. We have a 30 road round the corner and people frequently do 50 or 60 on it. Last year, a car lost control and went into someone's house.

The thing is, if sentences are made stiffer for excessive speeding, I doubt whether we would actually see a drop in fatalities. A bit like how the death penalty in the US hasn't deterred gun crime.

The problem as I see it is that modern cars drive so well at speed that it is too easy to do and sometimes the driver does not even realise they're doing it.

 

[ATFC Seagull]

Speeding in general does my head in. I used to drive like an idiot in my early 20s, but nowadays I genuinely don't even like being above 70 on a busy motorway.

What annoys me is how it is still deemed as socially acceptable by many. I have colleagues who laugh and joke about how fast they drive on their commute down from Burgess Hill every day. They wouldn't do the same about having had a couple of pints or how they sent a few text messages whilst driving.

Sent from my ANE-LX1 using Tapatalk

 

[Worried Man Blues]

I can never understand why there isn't a lifetime ban for driving in these cases, he will then be reminded for life that he killed someone. I'd also give him 10 years if there are no amazing mitigating circs.

 

[maffew]

59 in a 40 is indefensible, yet I see that happen all the time. We have a 30 road round the corner and people frequently do 50 or 60 on it. Last year, a car lost control and went into someone's house.

The thing is, if sentences are made stiffer for excessive speeding, I doubt whether we would actually see a drop in fatalities. A bit like how the death penalty in the US hasn't deterred gun crime.

The problem as I see it is that modern cars drive so well at speed that it is too easy to do and sometimes the driver does not even realise they're doing it.

I dont know, speeding is almost not deemed a crime isnt it in peoples eyes. 3 points and a fine is what people think. Like taking a library book back late.

We see shootings in America all the time, though the death penalty isnt executed or should be. But yeah the consequences clearly arent enough to prevent people from doing it

 

[Palacefinder General]

I’d be more interested to know how all the drivers who ignore the 50mph camera covered average speed check stretches on the motorways where there are roadworks get away with it. Do they know something the rest of us don’t?

 

[Simster]

I dont know, speeding is almost not deemed a crime isnt it in peoples eyes. 3 points and a fine is what people think. Like taking a library book back late.

We see shootings in America all the time, though the death penalty isnt executed or should be. But yeah the consequences clearly arent enough to prevent people from doing it

There probably needs to be a cultural change rather than law changes alone.

The gun laws in the US aren't notably different from those in Canada or Belgium, but the right to bare arms has turned into an expectation and that is the problem they have that other western countries don't to the same extent.

Similarly, there ought to be a proper campaign here to turn people against speeding, far more than a few wishy washy government posters and very occasional public service adverts. Anecdotally, as ATFC says above, there are just too many people who talk of speeding as if it doesn't matter.

 

[Simster]

I can never understand why there isn't a lifetime ban for driving in these cases, he will then be reminded for life that he killed someone. I'd also give him 10 years if there are no amazing mitigating circs.

The lifetime ban is reasonable, but not sure about 10 years. Imagine your son drives too fast and those unfortunate events unfold.

People do stupid things and accidents do happen, and adding a 10 year prison sentence to gross speeding charges is simply not going to change that.

 

[Hamilton]

Cant really agree with any of this. If this if that. The mans actions directly resulted in an innocent persons

...in an innocent person's what?

You seem to have stopped.

Are you still collecting your thoughts?

Is that one of them there on the ground? I think it just fell out of you ear.

Life is full on if's. It's why there is a great big one in the centre of it.

 

[zefarelly]

I can never understand why there isn't a lifetime ban for driving in these cases, he will then be reminded for life that he killed someone. I'd also give him 10 years if there are no amazing mitigating circs.

Lifetime driving bans I agree with, but there must be better solutions than locking people up for causing accidents, avoidable or otherwise.

'Ran out of talent' is a phrase often used racing cars, people don't crash on purpose, but not everyone grasps the capabilities of their steed or their ability. Having money to acquire fast cars is not a talent/skill

 

[AmexRuislip]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-birmingham-54029127

A driver has been given a suspended prison sentence over the death of a cyclist he hit with a sports car.

West Midlands Police said McSkimming lost control of the car on a bend and it span on to the wrong side of the damp road where it hit a tree before "rebounding" across the carriageway to hit Mr Satterthwaite who was 51.

Investigators found the car was travelling at 59mph in the 40mph zone before the 2018 crash, the force added.

In addition to his suspended sentence, McSkimming - of Gainsborough Crescent, Solihull - was ordered to complete 250 hours of unpaid work and was disqualified from driving for two years.



Ok so I accept mine isn't, but I think we all know Anthony Satterthwaite's life was worth considerably more than that.
But as he was hit by a speeding car, driven by a man who could afford an expensive lawyer, it clearly isn't.

An ex neighbour of ours, who used to work for LFB, travelled to work everyday by bicycle, for his shift.
On one such occasion in 2016, he was taken out by a truck en route to his work.
To this day he's still waiting for an insurance pay out.
This has left him recovering from his injuries, where his personality has changed somewhat.