Observer reveals tougher sentences for killer drivers

 The front page of today's Observer has an article revealing how drivers who kill people will face much tougher sentences.

The story comes after an interview with the Director of Public Prosecutions, Ken MacDonald QC.

I started life in PR as the press officer for a national road safety charity that campaigns for tougher sentences for killer drivers and drivers that cause serious injury, among other things.

The story says that Ken MacDonald has sent a directive to 3,000 prosecutors in England and Wales telling them not to undercharge 'motorists' who kill. He says that cases where small fines are levied instead of custodial sentences risk being 'miscarriages of justice'.

The Observer gives two case studies. In the first a bus driver in Scotland killed a pedestrian and walked from court with a £350 fine, while a driver who killed a toddler on a pedestrian crossing in Exeter received a ban and a £200 fine.

Cases where the punishment is appallingly disproportionate to the crime usually arise because prosecutors have difficulty proving 'death by dangerous driving' (only 1 in 10 according to The Observer) compared with securing a conviction for the lesser charge of 'careless driving'.

The main difference between the two charges are the words 'far below'. Careless driving is 'driving below the competant standard for the average driver' while 'Death by Dangerous' is 'driving far below the competant standard for the average driver'.

Thus proving what is 'far below' rather than simply 'below' rests on legal technicality. Unfortunately it also means the difference between handing down a maximum 14 years in jail or a £300 fine and a 12 month ban.

The cases highlighted by The Observer are two out of probably thousands each year. What's worse is that children are at major risk on the roads (there's no bigger killer of 11-16 year-olds in the UK than cars, trucks etc) and children living in poorer areas of the UK are even more likely to be killed or seriously injured.

Road safety is a massive social issue that doesn't get the attention it deserves. Today's news from Ken MacDonald is good but action is also needed from the CPS to accompany his word. Otherwise we'll see his good intentions fail to transfer into real justice.

Comments

[Andrew Wake]

Simon, a subject close to my heart too. The nation's attitude to road deaths has to change and my first suggestion is that we stop calling them accidents. 99% of deaths and serious injuries on our roads are caused by human error and the level of risk taking and generally bad driving is all too widespread.

It's also unfortunate that police forces are cutting back on road policing to focus their resources elsewhere because traffic offences have never figured highly in government-set performance targets.

You're right that the burden of proof has always been an issue in securing convictions and the lack of consistency within the judiciary is particularly clear for these types of offences.

Road safety campaigners have quite rightly been demanding tougher sentences together with zero tolerance enforcement for many years however the real solution to this issue in my opinion is that bad driving has to become socially unacceptable. Sadly, this is much easier said than done.

[Simon Collister]

All good points, Andrew.

I struggled for a good month after my media training to remember to call 'accidents', 'crashes'.

Which perhaps says something about your other point that bad/dangerous driving has a long way to go to become socially unacceptabe.

Amazingly, drink-driving is at the highest rate for over 10 years... utterly incredible.