Surely it's time to have stricter sentences for drink-driving deaths

nabby

Drink-drive soldier jailed for causing deaths of teenage girls

I can't believe this idiot will probably be out of jail in only three years after being sentenced to a mere six years for killing two young girls.

I don't generally admire justice in the USA but at least there the deaths would be considered separately and the sentence would have been at least double.

I just hope that his service record wasn't used to mitigate the circumstances of his murderous behaviour.

Sonic67

Why? If he was a civilian and he had never done anything wrong before then that would be taken into account.

Also "murderous" is wrong. It implies he set out to get drunk and kill deliberately. You think that was his plan?

The law applies to everyone and having a fair trial is the bedrock of our justice system. Do you think some should be treated different because of their profession?

EarthRod

Drink/drive deaths coupled with lenient sentences have been going on for over 100 years, why bring it up now?

The way the OP is written shows a high level of emotive subjectivity triggered by something. The only thing I can think of is that the perpetrator is a soldier. What else could it be?

The words 'idiot' and 'murderous' are unfortunate and inappropriate.

nabby

He went and drank a large amount of alcohol and willingly got behind the wheel of his own car. He definitely showed an attitude that meant he felt he was above the law. He then also drove at almost 20 mph over the limit in a 30mph zone. Again, he felt he was above the law.

I was posting that I hoped he wasn't treated differently because of his profession, so I have no idea how you surmise that I think someone should be treated differently because of their profession.

nabby

Interesting that in two separate threads you have replied to me about emotions. As for your insinuation that his profession is my sole motivation for posting, it's insulting to your intelligence and mine.

And lots of things have been going on for 100 years or more and we discuss them. If you don't want to discuss it then don't. I'm not forcing you to reply in here.

Sonic67

If he was a drug addict with a history of crime he'd probably be treated differently to someone who had previously had an unblemished record but then made a mistake.

Part of the purpose of having a trial is to hear all the evidence, get to know the case and then make an informed decision.

Here, second conviction for drunk driving, six times over limit, escaped jail. Perhaps she made a convincing argument that her family would be affected.

Aberdeen drink-driver avoids jail after being caught at six times legal limit - Evening Express

We don't have fixed sentences for crime. We have a judge make an informed decision based on him hearing the evidence and the affect.

Also note, tougher sentences might do little. Everyone is sensible while sober. When someone is drunk they can do stupid things. So whether he "willingly" got behind the wheel of a car is dubious. I wouldn't "willingly" sing in a karokee if I was sober. I doubt he felt he was above the law. When you drink, or take any other kind of drug, you are affected by it. You aren't thinking logically.

He will be in prison, he will have had a dishonourable discharge, a criminal record, be out of a job and a screwed up conscience. He will have had family and friends view him in a new light. His entire life will be affected. Prison will just be a small part of that.

PSM1

Although there is an element of punishment with prison surely the focus should be on rehabilitation so that the individual can reenter society after their sentence has passed.
In this case would a 12 year  sentence do any more to rehabilitate the person? They would have been punished for longer but how would this help him, his victims, their families or society as a whole. As mentioned above his life will already be in ruins you may well find that life will be harder when he comes out of prison than when he is in it (going to find it hard to get a job and support himself where as in prison he at least has food and shelter).

Blitzkrieg

Alan cd has made it clear in another thread that things like profession and achievements should count for a lot in a court of law. Even to the point where you should not even be charged with a crime if you have "achieved a lot in life". I disagree

Blitzkrieg

I don't think prison should be primarily about rehabilitation, prison first and foremost should be about removing people that are a danger to society from society, for the safety of society.

Most of our prison sentences  in this country are way too lenient. If you get behind a wheel drunk and you kill someone,  I think you get 20 years minimum. We should also have 5 years minimum just for being caught drunk behind the wheel

PSM1

But the person is still going to be in society again in 20 yrs so rehabilitation is needed.
So you think one mistake brands you a danger to society for the rest of your life and hence stay in prison.
Personally I would prefer less time as long as the individual is rehabilitated and no longer a danger.