Man given two-year sentence for fatal crash

Tigger

http://www.rte.ie/news/2016/0510/787419-anthony-handley-olivia-dunne/

Judge Pat McCartan said he had to send out a message to the community that driver fatigue was a phenomenon that had to be in the minds of all drivers and must be reacted to when recognised.

Seems very harsh, and that he is being made an example of

colm_mcm

No room in the jails for proper scrotebags with 57 previous convictions who will be guaranteed to reoffend though.

biko

Seems pretty reasonable to me considering he was assessed as having driver fatigue and killed a mother and harmed a baby because of this.

A man who caused the death of a young mother and seriously injured her baby when he fell asleep at the wheel and lost control of his car has been jailed for two years.

It is estimated that driver fatigue is a contributory factor in as many as 1 in 5 driver deaths in Ireland every year.
Furthermore, tiredness-related collisions are 3 times more likely to be fatal or result in a serious injury because of the high impact speed and lack of avoiding action

savagethegoat

I bet the Lady's husband and family don't think it's harsh

colm_mcm

You would have to ask the question though, what good will putting this guy in jail do?
Surely someone being killed as a result of driver fatigue is enough of an advertisement to the population for not falling asleep, I don't believe anyone will think "jeez remember that guy that got 2 years, better not doze off and kill someone"

That's not to take away from the value of the victims life or anything, just the prison spaces could be better filled than this when there are criminals going in and out of court every few weeks safe in the knowledge that the prison service is so overcrowded that they haven't a hope of seeing the inside of a prison unless they get caught for no tv licence.

gctest50

This is probably one main reason :

He told gardaí he had four hours sleep the night before but this was not unusual for him and he did not feel tired on the day.

He had been to the gym the previous evening, had gone to bed after 12am and got up at 5 am and went back to the gym for a spinning class.

JustTheOne

Hold on?

What sentence that fella who drank a litre of vodka consumed cocaine and then ran down that poor young girl a few weeks ago get?

colm_mcm

7 years with 2 suspended IIRC

Titzon Toast

I live about two minutes from where that happened, I don't believe that microsleep story, that road is not straight at all, how could you fall asleep in such a place.
The sentence given was far too short if you ask me.

Tigger

Titzon Toast wrote: »

I live about two minutes from where that happened, I don't believe that microsleep story, that road is not straight at all, how could you fall asleep in such a place.
The sentence given was far too short if you ask me.

ok two questions,
whats your alternative theory?
should a person not be sentenced on the conviction

gctest50

Titzon Toast wrote: »

I live about two minutes from where that happened, I don't believe that microsleep story, that road is not straight at all, how could you fall asleep in such a place.
The sentence given was far too short if you ask me.

you don't fall asleep, more like a toy robot or something when the batteries run out


http://i.imgur.com/5xqebTN.jpg

“Someone could be clinically asleep, in a light sleep, and you could ask them ‘Are you asleep?’ and they’ll answer you ‘No, I’m awake’ but if you ask them to tell you what was just on the radio or TV in the background, they won’t be able to tell you,” says Professor Lack


http://www.rms.nsw.gov.au/geared/your_driving_skills/staying_safe/freaky_sleep.html

alan partridge aha

Ridiculously harsh judgement IMO.

Cd82

Titzon Toast wrote: »

I live about two minutes from where that happened, I don't believe that microsleep story, that road is not straight at all, how could you fall asleep in such a place.
The sentence given was far too short if you ask me.

Fully agree..

wonski

Titzon Toast wrote: »

I live about two minutes from where that happened, I don't believe that microsleep story, that road is not straight at all, how could you fall asleep in such a place.
The sentence given was far too short if you ask me.

People do fall asleep, and when it happens behind the wheel it is something you can't predict.

Fatigue or falling asleep is not a criminal act, and as such should not be punished severely.

Many people don't sleep as much as they should due to family or work circumstances, night workers getting kids up to school while the other half is getting ready for work etc.

Do you think 5 years in jail would be better as punishment as the person would be more likely to sleep properly for the next five years or what?

I doubt I would have any sleep in first few weeks when united with our greatest part of society locked up with thieves, murderers etc .

stoneill

I don't think this judgement was too harsh, but it does highlight how lenient a lot of other sentences are.

Liam McPoyle

It's harsh in that he was not under the influence of anything nor was he speeding however at the end of the day a child is growing up without her mother, a husband lost his wife, a family lost their daughter / sister because of his actions.

The driver has to carry that with him for the rest of his life which is crueler than any custodial sentence. I'd imagine the judge is making an example of him, if you get behind the wheel of a car while tired then the consequences are on your own head.

frostyjacks

Extremely soft sentence for taking a life, and causing injuries to the baby that she still suffers from.

Cabaal

colm_mcm wrote: »

I don't believe anyone will think "jeez remember that guy that got 2 years, better not doze off and kill someone"

No they obviously won't think exactly that, but they very well might think its not worth the chance that they drive tired.

Once I drove when very tired, I personally wouldn't and haven't done so since.
I simply won't take the chance as its not worth risking my life or others and now I always ensure I take action so I won't end up in the same situation again.

Sleeper12

No drink, no drugs & not speeding. Then his age, he's not a boy racer.

I don't see how he got any sentence at all. Having to live knowing you caused a death is sentence enough for some

Very sad for both families

Cabaal

So people are unhappy about the jail term of two years (which I'd be surprised if he fully serves), do they even accept the 10 year driving ban is acceptable?

almostover

I'd wonder what people reaction and the sentencing would be if this accident were caused by a mother who was fatigued after spending all night awake tending to a sick child and then crashed due to fatigue on the school run the following morning. I think the judgement here is very harsh and the prison term likely to be suspended on appeal. Anyone remember this case? http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/mothers-pain-as-drinkdrive-rugby-star-escapes-jail-term-26535609.html

A man kills a teenager while drunk driving and escapes jail? Unfathomable really isn't it. Driving drunk or under the influence of alcohol is blatantly negligent. If you should kill someone as a result of drink driving the conviction should be far more punitive than if you're fatigued.

I think this ruling is plain stupid. An older gentleman was tired at the wheel and killed this poor woman. By all means a driving ban and compensation to the family of the bereaved is in order but what purpose does a prison sentence serve? The man made a poor judgement call and probably should have given his morning gym session a skip but he did not make a purposely dangerous decision like drink driving or driving at 208 kph. Driving when fatigued is dangerous and should be avoided when driving is not necessary but we don't live in an ideal world and the necessity will arise for us all at some stage where we have to make a car journey in a less than rested state. This ruling sets a dangerous precedent in my opinion.

Cabaal

almostover wrote: »

Driving when fatigued is dangerous and should be avoided when driving is not necessary but we don't live in an ideal world and the necessity will arise for us all at some stage where we have to make a car journey in a less than rested state. This ruling sets a dangerous precedent in my opinion.

Nonsense,
Thats the same type of argument used by drink drivers for years, that they needed to get home etc and that we don't live in an ideal world and people need to have social lives etc.

Abit of planning and you can avoid driving while very tired,

I'm unsure how it sets a dangerous precedent, all its setting is expecting people to take personal responsibility for their actions and deaths that occur from those actions.

Had he taken a break, drank a coffee, tried to get a little rest etc this needless death could very well be avoided.

The sentence is asking people to think before they set out on journeys, thats not alot to ask.

Wibbs

gctest50 wrote: »

you don't fall asleep, more like a toy robot or something when the batteries run out

Exactly. I have stupidly done this myself once. Arrived at the destination with zero recollection of the previous twenty odd miles of country roads night driving, including brief snippets of conversation with my passenger(who ironically assumed my brevity was down to concentration). I only "woke up" when I hit the lights of the town I was aiming for. I remember the sensation was very like waking up too. I had basically driven by learned behaviour and reflex action.

Now I didn't set out to do this. I had actually and deliberately got a good night's sleep the previous night, but had been pulling all nighters before then and they caught up with me

Cabaal wrote: »

So people are unhappy about the jail term of two years (which I'd be surprised if he fully serves), do they even accept the 10 year driving ban is acceptable?

I doubt anyone takes issue with the ten year ban. I suspect they don't take issue with the two year gaol term itself, more that they do take issue with the fact that barely a week goes by when a career scumbag with a rogues roster of previous convictions walks free of our court system. I'd not be surprised to find the same judge has been responsible for that kinda thing.

Mellor

colm_mcm wrote: »

You would have to ask the question though, what good will putting this guy in jail do?
Surely someone being killed as a result of driver fatigue is enough of an advertisement to the population for not falling asleep, I don't believe anyone will think "jeez remember that guy that got 2 years, better not doze off and kill someone"

You think somebody being killed is enough of a disincentive to drive while fatigued?
If that were true, we've never have to worry about speeding or drink driving.

El_Duderino 09

colm_mcm wrote:

You would have to ask the question though, what good will putting this guy in jail do? Surely someone being killed as a result of driver fatigue is enough of an advertisement to the population for not falling asleep, I don't believe anyone will think "jeez remember that guy that got 2 years, better not doze off and kill someone"

Precisely this. If the guy has any social conscience, he will feel the shame, guilt and embarrassment and social ostracism of killing someone needlessly, by falling asleep whilst driving. Being sent to prison will probably be the least part of his punishment.

Why not use him to spread the word to other normal people who might risk driving whilst tyred rather than locking him away and getting 2 days of headlines?

Jakey Rolling

frostyjacks wrote: »

Extremely soft sentence for taking a life, and causing injuries to the baby that she still suffers from.

The thing is, the judge should be sentencing according to the action (intent to harm, willful negligence, careless or dangerous driving etc) NOT according to the outcome, which sadly in this case was the death of an innocent party.

Say he had fallen asleep and crashed into a ditch - no harm done, damage only to his vehicle. Still 2 years in jail?

If instead he had crashed into a bus stop, killing 10 people, should the sentence have been 20 years?

There was a case in England in 2001 , where it appears the guy fell asleep and veered off the road onto the railway line, causing a derailment and 10 deaths. He was convicted of causing "death by dangerous driving", probably because he initially claimed mechanical failure, but only given 5 years sentence.

I work shift and do feel extremely tired after some nights driving home, I suppose I should quit my job and go on the Dole ? Or move closer to work ? well that's not possible.

Add to that a 2 year old and a 4 month old who regularly wake up at night and sometimes take hours to go back asleep or one wakes crying and wakes the other. This is life I'm afraid and we all can't avoid fatigue.

Now perhaps the man should have got more sleep that night instead of just 4 hrs, especially if it's regular as he claimed. But for me and many more people fatigue is unavoidable.

If this was a Nurse driving home, a mother also and killed someone, I bet she wouldn't get a sentence let alone a 10 year driving ban, that's just ridiculous.

I have thought about this many times, and I don't think I could pull in on the shoulder for 8 hrs kip to avoid fatigue, then I'd be home for 3 hrs and back out again. It's also dangerous to be parked on the shoulder.

My heart goes out to the Women and her baby and to their family but this sentence was in my opinion extreme not to mention the 10 year ban.

cson

Viewed in the context of the sentencing regime in operation at present in this country then yes it is extremely harsh.

Taken on its own; it's arguably right if you think a custodial sentence is appropriate for the negligence. Personally I'd prefer to have the man (a) serve community service for a period and (b) pay restitution to the family - ideally you'd like to see that the child was taken care of up to College age.

cson

Wibbs wrote: »

I doubt anyone takes issue with the ten year ban. I suspect they don't take issue with the two year gaol term itself, more that they do take issue with the fact that barely a week goes by when a career scumbag with a rogues roster of previous convictions walks free of our court system. I'd not be surprised to find the same judge has been responsible for that kinda thing.

Exactly; its harsh lined up against the career scumbags who get off scott free time and time again.

There really does appear to be one rule for the general public and one rule for those from 'disadvantaged' backgrounds.

cson

cson wrote: »

There really does appear to be one rule for the general public and one rule for those from 'disadvantaged' backgrounds.

And no form of punishment at all for white collar criminals !!!!

Why do people think it's people from less well of backgrounds who commit crime ?

TonyStark

Saul T Nutzz wrote: »

The driver has to carry that with him for the rest of his life which is crueler than any custodial sentence. I'd imagine the judge is making an example of him, if you get behind the wheel of a car while tired then the consequences are on your own head.

Not everyone is blessed with the same degree of empathy towards others or affected by feelings of guilt. You'd be surprised how people can get over things like that.