Jailed for racing, 80 in a 50 is that the norm ?

[PXW]

What is frustrating is how quickly some people want to blame anyone or everyone else.

If this driver was given a custodila sentence then my guess would be that they were not Mother Theresea but hey ho lets blame everyone else and instead give this driver a medal

Not sure who has been blaming anyone else? The thread has been querying the case, given that on the facts as presented (and yes, everyone's acknowledged we weren't in the court room) the outcome seems a bit odd. I haven't seen anyone offering the guy a medal either - don't get it out of perspective. But there is genuine puzzlement about the sentence and the basis for it, given the precedents quoted on the CPS website. And no-one seems to be able to offer a definition of 'racing' - does it just mean out-accelerating another car? Or what? If we are so clear that there is NO PLACE for any type of racing on the public highway, as you put it, then what constitutes racing? The incident in this case, in which the other driver made the fatal error, lasted about 10 seconds, so we are not exactly talking about re-enacting the british grand prix here. 10 seconds of speeding for a year in jail? Or 10 seconds of racing? What determines the difference? And even if racing, is a year in jail proportionate?

 

[glojo]

As you rightly say we can all pontificate on this case and okay it is entertainment and no doubt some will say the driver is hard done by, but as I keep saying..

Look at those fly on the wall documentaries

Look at the standard of reckless, dangerous driving and then listen to the sentences. Listen to all of them and try to find one that was excessive.

The difference being that with the fly on the wall documentary you actually witness an event. You see it with your own eyes and then make a decision.

Here we have a report or a brief resume of a court case, something we haqve not witnessed.

You tell me what you define as raqcing because I gaurantee that no matter what we suggest, the armchair critics will lash out.

A public highway is a means to allow us all to commute from 'a' to 'b' in a safe and sensible manner, and I will go back to my old favourite....

If you cannot stop within the distance you can see to be safe then you are being silly and open to criticism\prosecution.

If you are persuing or being persued by a friend in another vehicle and you are both driving without reasonable consideration for other road users then I am guessing that the CPS might consider a prosecution for possibly racing on a public highway, BUT... they would need an awful lot of evidence before even considering a prosecution.

Just remember the CPS makes these decisions and NOT the police. They need a very good chance of a conviction before they will even consider prosecuting.

 

[nick mercedes]

What is frustrating is how quickly some people want to blame anyone or everyone else.

There is NO PLACE for any type of racing on the public highway and one day we will all learn that media reports will ALWAYS be biased to one degree or another.

Look at all these fly on the wall documentaries and listen to the outcome of the great majority. listen to what happens to the accused and see how rarely they get a custodial sentence. If this driver was given a custodila sentence then my guess would be that they were not Mother Theresea but hey ho lets blame everyone else and instead give this driver a medal

Car thieves get community supervision orders, bloke doing 30 mph over the limit gets jail time...

 

[flango]

Car thieves get community supervision orders, bloke doing 30 mph over the limit gets jail time...

Lets get this in perspective this is not simply doing 30 mph over the posted limit. The fact this case was heard in Crown Court and not dealt with by magistrates tells you how the CPS view it. If it were simply 30 mph over it would be a band B fine, disqualification for 56 days and 6 points end of.

Now the facts, a race car being driven on a public road involved in an accident will always attract more attention and the driver usually faces more severe punishment, the logic being if they are used to racing on a track then they should know better than to do anything stupid on a public road. This was a clear case of racing on the pubic highway doesn't matter if it lasted 10 seconds or 10 minutes, in this case one of the drivers paid the ultimate price, and yes racing away from lights does count as racing on the public highway and I have seen these in court.

After indictment then the maximum sentence would be 2 years and on this occasion the judge went for the maimum sentence, we have not heard the summation of the jury or the defence and prosecution evidence so it is difficult to pass comment, all you can say that given the sentence there must have been some very compelling evidence that the race contributed to the mans death or the CPS would not have prosecuted on DD.

The police also have a mandate to ensure public safety on the highway and by removing this reckless individual thats hopefully one less idiot out there.

There is never any excuse that justifies racing on public roads as it usually end in tradgedy, wrecking the lives of the friends and family concerned.

If you want to race keep it for the track

 

[st4]

Lets get this in perspective this is not simply doing 30 mph over the posted limit. The fact this case was heard in Crown Court and not dealt with by magistrates tells you how the CPS view it. If it were simply 30 mph over it would be a band B fine, disqualification for 56 days and 6 points end of.

Now the facts, a race car being driven on a public road involved in an accident will always attract more attention and the driver usually faces more severe punishment, the logic being if they are used to racing on a track then they should know better than to do anything stupid on a public road. This was a clear case of racing on the pubic highway doesn't matter if it lasted 10 seconds or 10 minutes, in this case one of the drivers paid the ultimate price, and yes racing away from lights does count as racing on the public highway and I have seen these in court.

After indictment then the maximum sentence would be 2 years and on this occasion the judge went for the maimum sentence, we have not heard the summation of the jury or the defence and prosecution evidence so it is difficult to pass comment, all you can say that given the sentence there must have been some very compelling evidence that the race contributed to the mans death or the CPS would not have prosecuted on DD.

The police also have a mandate to ensure public safety on the highway and by removing this reckless individual thats hopefully one less idiot out there.

There is never any excuse that justifies racing on public roads as it usually end in tradgedy, wrecking the lives of the friends and family concerned.

If you want to race keep it for the track

How was it proven they were racing?

One witness said they were. Its an intepretation, probably based on the witness opinion of the modded car. The car, and thus its driver, were judged on that.

However 30mph over the speed limit is very fast and I can't see any logical excuse for it but its not a prison type offence.

 

[flango]

How was it proven they were racing?

One witness said they were. Its an intepretation, probably based on the witness opinion of the modded car. The car, and thus its driver, were judged on that.

However 30mph over the speed limit is very fast and I can't see any logical excuse for it but its not a prison type offence.

As I point out in paragraph 2 we dont know as we have not heard the evidence, but there must have been some and it be reliable at that for the CPS to prosecute.

 

[flango]

"The inquest was told Pople's Peugeot 306, which he used on track days had no rear seats, an interior roll cage, two racing seats and a racing harness."

The specification of the car, other than it being legal on a public highway, is surely not relevant. .

The specification of the car is very relevent particularly if it has a cage fitted. But anyone who drives this type of car on a public road must be devoid of brain cells in the first place. On a public road in a car fitted with a roll cage you are 10 times more likely to die than in the same car without one if you are involved in an accident (unless wearing a crash helmet)

If this were a simple speeding case say 30 mph over the posted 50 mph and it went to magistrates court then they type of car would be very relevent in the sentencing as there would be a greater degree of culpability and there would be factors that indicated a greater degree of harm so the points given and the fine would be more severe than if the car was the normal standard road going version.

These are things people dont think about when they use track cars on the road and one of the reasons insurers load the premiums if they are for road use.

Track cars have no place on public roads and maybe its time to ban them?

 

[grober]

Lets see what facts are available. The cars were travelling at speeds up to 80 mph- this would have been accurately deduced from the dynamics of the crash,skid marks etc. They both overtook another car in a 50mph limit. This 3rd party witness characterised their driving as "racing" as indeed I would if 2 cars in close proximity passed me at up to 80mph in a 50mph zone. The phrase "had been overtaken by Pople moments before his car overturned, leaving the road and hitting a hedge and a concrete post." is a telling one since car instability at speed often occurs in an overtaking situation for a variety of reasons. This can be seen in any racing situation when the leading car adopts the racing line and perhaps starts to brake for an approaching corner. The second car is often unsighted, possibly becomes unstable in the slipstream of the other and forced to lift off/brake inappropriately losing tyre grip and spins off. This happens every day on racing tracks round the country and usually means nothing more than a bit of driver embarrassment and an inadvertent skid/spin into a run-off zone. It is however yet another reason why close quarter driving at excessive speed on the public highway falls within the definition of dangerous driving.

 

[st4]

As I point out in paragraph 2 we dont know as we have not heard the evidence, but there must have been some and it be reliable at that for the CPS to prosecute.

From the article

"Nobody other than witness Ben Curtis used the word 'racing' at all."

I assume Ben Curtis is an expert in this field and road traffic law, vehicle dynamics etc . Two cars over take you in quick succession @ high speed. Doesn't make it a race, just means they were both going a lot faster.

I love the press sometimes

In January an inquest heard how Mr Martyn, the managing director of Cheddar print firm SP Press, had been overtaken by Pople moments before his car overturned, leaving the road and hitting a hedge and a concrete post. They had both just overtaken another driver, Ben Curtis, who then saw them race towards a bend where Mr Martyn lost control.

How is it important that Mr Martyn was a MD and presumably a wealthy man. How does that add weight to the article or make it more useful.Its done to make you envious, and therefore make you dislike the two drivers. Perhaps the jury did this too?

 

[Swiss Toni]

From the article

"Nobody other than witness Ben Curtis used the word 'racing' at all."

I assume Ben Curtis is an expert in this field and road traffic law, vehicle dynamics etc . Two cars over take you in quick succession @ high speed. Doesn't make it a race, just means they were both going a lot faster.

I love the press sometimes

In January an inquest heard how Mr Martyn, the managing director of Cheddar print firm SP Press, had been overtaken by Pople moments before his car overturned, leaving the road and hitting a hedge and a concrete post. They had both just overtaken another driver, Ben Curtis, who then saw them race towards a bend where Mr Martyn lost control.

How is it important that Mr Martyn was a MD and presumably a wealthy man. How does that add weight to the article or make it more useful.Its done to make you envious, and therefore make you dislike the two drivers. Perhaps the jury did this too?

The Offence wasn't Racing on a Public Highway - nor was it Causing Death by Dangerous Driving.

The Offence he was convicted of was Dangerous Driving - which means the Court must have been satisfied beyond reasonable doubt, that the offence was proven;

“1 Causing death by dangerous driving A person who causes the death of another person by driving a mechanically propelled vehicle dangerously on a road or other public place is guilty of an offence.

2 Dangerous driving A person who drives a mechanically propelled vehicle dangerously on a road or other public place is guilty of an offence.

2A Meaning of dangerous driving

(1) For the purposes of sections 1 and 2 above a person is to be regarded as driving dangerously if (and, subject to subsection (2) below, only if)—
(a) the way he drives falls far below what would be expected of a competent and careful driver, and
(b) it would be obvious to a competent and careful driver that driving in that way would be dangerous.

(2) A person is also to be regarded as driving dangerously for the purposes of sections 1 and 2 above if it would be obvious to a competent and careful driver that driving the vehicle in its current state would be dangerous.

(3) In subsections (1) and (2) above “dangerous” refers to danger either of injury to any person or of serious damage to property; and in determining for the purposes of those subsections what would be expected of, or obvious to, a competent and careful driver in a particular case, regard shall be had not only to the circumstances of which he could be expected to be aware but also to any circumstances shown to have been within the knowledge of the accused.

(4) In determining for the purposes of subsection (2) above the state of a vehicle, regard may be had to anything attached to or carried on or in it and to the manner in which it is attached or carried.”

 

[glojo]

How does that add weight to the article or make it more useful.Its done to make you envious, and therefore make you dislike the two drivers. Perhaps the jury did this too?

My guess just like your guess is that this gentleman's occupation had very little if any relevance and I would respectfully suggest that the journalist that wrote this article has included the person's occuptaion.

As regard to it influencing the jury, then did the prosecution make an issue regarding this? Did they even mention it to the jury?

 

[stevesey]

From the article

"Nobody other than witness Ben Curtis used the word 'racing' at all."

I assume Ben Curtis is an expert in this field and road traffic law, vehicle dynamics etc . Two cars over take you in quick succession @ high speed. Doesn't make it a race, just means they were both going a lot faster.

It all depneds how you read between the lines in the article - that quote is from the defence lawyer (along with several others in the article). They could well be taken for his closing arguement, but whatever you'd expect his words to be biased. On the other side of the coin the Judge said:

"The jury convicted you on overwhelming evidence that you were racing with the deceased"

So whilst the word (racign) may not have been used by others, there is the implication that there is a volume of evidence that we are not party to.

Like John said earlier the CPS must have thought they had sufficient evidence for the DD charge (so not just the word of one witness in whose opionion they were racing).

Equally on the basis of what we know it's easy to visualise a version of events where the Pug was not racing, but guilty of excessive speed, and having been passed the lotus driver took the decision to follow (or "race") and paid the ultimate price for his error. Certainly it does raise questions in my mind about what would happen if I was overtaking and another car decided to follow with similar consequences. But the judges words here do suggest there is more to this than we know about and we are left having to assume that the police, CPS and courts did their jobs properly and justice has been served.