£200 fine for crash driver who cost Elmbridge postman a leg

[Lounge Lizard]

"a decent man who was apologetic" - we always hear similar about postmen convicted of stealing mail.

There is a difference between a momentary lapse in concentration and thieving for personal gain (the driver didn't go out that day to run someone over but those posties gone in everyday with the intention of stealing).

As a professional driver he should have been held to higher standards than other drivers so the old "momentary lapse of concentration" excuse counts for nothing in this case.

[andy2007]

Yes, of course he is trained to a higher standard, and we should expect higher standards, than from "normal" Motorists. But he's also Human, and therefore suceptable to mistakes. That's why it's called "Human Error".

But it doesn't alter the fact that the penalty should have been higher. His victim has to live with the aftermath, for the rest of his life. And a £200 fine, plus points, belittles his plight. Obviously, I wouldn't expect a jail term, or anything like that. But perhaps a temporary ban, or Community Service would be more appropriate?
Or if they insist on fining, then it should be far more than £200! That's just an insult!

[Lounge Lizard]

Yes, of course he is trained to a higher standard, and we should expect higher standards, than from "normal" Motorists. But he's also Human, and therefore suceptable to mistakes. That's why it's called "Human Error".

But it doesn't alter the fact that the penalty should have been higher. His victim has to live with the aftermath, for the rest of his life. And a £200 fine, plus points, belittles his plight. Obviously, I wouldn't expect a jail term, or anything like that. But perhaps a temporary ban, or Community Service would be more appropriate?
Or if they insist on fining, then it should be far more than £200! That's just an insult!

Bring back the birch, that's what I say.

[andy2007]

Don't you think that's a bit excessive?
I was saying that a small fine was insulting, considering the severity of the injuries he caused. But I also pointed out that it shouldn't be excessive: "Obviously I wouldn't expect a Jail term". Surely a balance could be reached.

[Pat Ostman]

I know its been mentioned before by others but..........

Mr Blackburn argued that, although the accident resulted in Mr Griffiths losing a limb, Simpson’s sentence should not reflect the consequences of the incident

WHY NOT!?

[TrueBlueTerrier]

I know its been mentioned before by others but..........

Mr Blackburn argued that, although the accident resulted in Mr Griffiths losing a limb, Simpson’s sentence should not reflect the consequences of the incident

WHY NOT!?

It should have done. Their own sentencing guidelines say http://www.sentencing-guidelines.gov.uk ... S%20WISHES" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

2. If an offence has had a particularly damaging or distressing effect upon a victim, this should be known to and taken into account by the court when passing sentence.

[Lounge Lizard]

Selby rail crash - driver who fell asleep on M1 causing it got a lengthy jail sentence because of the consequences.
Recent M6 crash, family of six killed, Portuguese lorry driver only got a short jail sentence because it was only Careless Driving not Dangerous Driving.
- No consistency there.

[Stormproof]

They should up the fine and make him take the full HGV test again, I still can't believe he got off so lightly.

[NWpostie]

I believe you can appeal if you think a punishment is too lenient.