Recent case commentary - death caused by dangerous driving. English/Scots law comparison.

A recent case in Scotland saw a woman jailed for 16 MONTHS for causing the death of an elderly couple due to her dangerous driving. 

The article reads...

"She had been angered by the slowness of the car in front and sped past glaring at the driver and making hand gestures.

She failed to spot Mr and Mrs Simpson, who had been married for 66 years, as they were crossing the road.

Mr Simpson was killed outright while his wife was airlifted to Glasgow's Southern General Hospital, where she later died.

CCTV images showed Hoy's red Toyota speeding through Largs at 43mph in a 30mph zone." (BBC News)

What if everyone got 'angered by the slowness of the car in front' and 'sped past glaring and making hand gestures' - (I think its quite clear what kind of driver this woman is, one that should never have been on the road in the first place.) What if everyone drove at 43 mph in a 30 zone and took innocent lives in the process? What kind of world do we live in where 16 months is a sufficient punishment for taking two peoples lives?

"Hoy, of Saltcoats, was jailed for 16 months after admitting driving without due care and attention."

Despite being in Scotland, surely the rules are not that different to our own law in England and Wales? Surely, this is an involuntary manslaughter in English law (without going into applying the legal rules, it appears they are satisfied) so why is this being treated as a driving offence in Scotland? Whilst the judge has a discretion, what is 16 months for taking the lives of others and leaving devastation, just because you are IMPATIENT?!?!?!?!?!?!?!

If manslaughter was charged, the maximum could have been a life sentence [based on ENGLISH LAW]. However, it may be this driving offence charged had a low maximum sentencing tariff? Without research into Scots law and the case facts beyond the article, it is difficult to say.

If you take anything away from this though, it is to be a little more patient when on the roads, because otherwise it could well lead to a fatality such as this one.

Article - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-31139534

The recent decision regarding defendant Mr Rogers, who murdered his rabbit in the microwave.

Hi all,

Welcome to my first blog post, I hope you enjoy!

This morning I was scrolling through the news on my phone, when I came across this horrific case and its decision. In general, I struggle to disagree with sentences and can see the judges' reasoning, yet this case completely shocked me. I must add that the following view is not directed at the judge so much, but at Parliament for their lack of sufficient legislation to protect animals. 

I could go on to talk about the many, many cases of animal cruelty I read about daily, but I won't, because that is for a blog post of its own, today I intend to focus on the present case.

Take this man for example, he bought a rabbit 5 days prior to the offence, got angry because he didn't get certain medication, and decided to microwave his rabbit for 3 minutes to vent his anger. During his trial, he admitted he felt no remorse for killing his rabbit. Not to go into detail about insanity, but what sane person would do this? What legislation is in place to deter individuals from doing such heinous crimes to animals? What legislation is in place to protect animals, such as this rabbit, from being sold to owners who are clearly incapable of looking after them? 

In my opinion, if there was sufficient legislation in place to protect animals from this unbearable torture (i.e. by harsher sentences), and the public had notice of these changes, there would be far less cases of animal cruelty. I think these truly evil people commit these acts on animals partly because they know it doesn't carry a life sentence, like killing a human obviously does.

I am very aware legislation is in place to protect animals, but these offences are tried ONLY as summary offences (s32 (1) Animal Welfare Act 2006). Offences under section 4 (causing unnecessary suffering to an animal) are punishable by way of up to 51 weeks imprisonment, or a fine not exceeding £20,000. In my opinion, these offences require a far greater punishment.

To get to the most important part of this post, the man received a sentence of 16 WEEKS IMPRISONMENT. I am horrified at this sentence, in my opinion 16 weeks is nothing in comparison to the suffering this animal went through. As already stated, the judge had little discretion in regard to sentencing as this is a summary only offence, but the maximum is 51 weeks, so I would have expected more. Another issue for me is his questionable insanity, surely a person who believes it is right to microwave a rabbit could be capable of anything!

My argument, and the whole point of this post, is that the law is INSUFFICIENT in protecting animals such as this poor little rabbit, and Parliament seriously need to pass new legislation so that animals aren't the subject of someones anger.

The news story is here - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-gloucestershire-29912065

Please vote in the poll to the right if you agree or disagree that animal law needs amending. The law needs to account for higher punishments to deter offenders and protect the most vulnerable, who cannot protect themselves.

Thanks for reading!

Alice.