how come all judge's decisions are not the same?

bmmck

Hi

My brother was put off the road for drink driving, he got 3 years and he deserved it,he was way over the limit but in court he was never made do an alcohol awareness course!(which he could have done with), a girl I work with had one glass of wine with a meal and was put off the road for 1 year and was made do an alcohol awareness course, and a friend of my brothers knocked down and killed a man while drink driving and is off the road for a year!!! shocking but true!!!! how does this make sense? does it depend on the judge on the day? should they not all have the same rules for everyone?

Tom Young

Every case is assessed on its merits, sorry to be short but it can also be guided by the Judge in question, any plea in mitigation or countervailing circumstances. In general terms offence which are strict liability or have sentencing guidelines of a certain nature will have sentences that will be 'doled out' on the basis of the lowest common denominator.

Tom

johnfás

Two things to think about:

1. Not all cases or circumstances are the same. This is why judges have discretion.

2. Most of these issues dealt with at District Court level are not well reported and thus there may not be an adequate precedence established on many of these issues.

3. Judges are a law unto themselves.

Pick any of the above and add another 10 categories and you will get some idea.

Cunsiderthis

bmmck wrote: »

Hi

My brother was put off the road for drink driving, he got 3 years and he deserved it,he was way over the limit but in court he was never made do an alcohol awareness course!(which he could have done with), a girl I work with had one glass of wine with a meal and was put off the road for 1 year and was made do an alcohol awareness course, and a friend of my brothers knocked down and killed a man while drink driving and is off the road for a year!!! shocking but true!!!! how does this make sense? does it depend on the judge on the day? should they not all have the same rules for everyone?

It's hard to believe that one glass of wine, taken with a meal, would put any adult over the alcohol drink drive limit.

You don't say if the friend of your brothers was guilty of driving drunk or not when he had what sounds like a terrible accident.

Perhaps the lesson to be learned is not to necessarily believe it when someone at work, who has been disqualified for drunk driving, tells you it is after "one glass of wine" - more interesting would be the results of her urine sample or blood test to see how much alcohol was present in her blood.

The third case, of the friend of your brothers , seems unrelated as you don't mention what he was charged with, and it doesn't sound as if it was over the limit when the accident happened.

Reloc8

Actually, I think the OP has focused on the length of the driving disqualification. The minimum period of disqualification is fixed by law in bands of 1, 2 and 3 years (with 4 years for drug driving or failure/refusal to give a sample). The applicable DQ is related back to how drunk someone was. It is only a minimum and a judge is free to give a higher ban, but this is very rare. Almost invariably in a drink driving case, the minimum period is imposed.

i.e. the OP's brother got a 3 year ban for being well over the limit, the other 2 got 1 year bans for being less over the limit.

The question of whether anyone deserved a prison sentence in the above cases is certainly begged, and this decision is indeed down to the individual judge who hears the case and is influenced by the factors described by Tom & Johnfas above.