Drunk driver gets community service after killing man and severely injuring two Garda

TerrorFirmer

Seems mind-boggling. Community service for getting behind the wheel of a car after a fair scatter of pints, killing one man and severely injuring two Gardai.

One of the two Gardai was injured so badly she almost died and went into a coma.

Seems a bit at odds with the ongoing general push against drink-driving to not give a custodial sentence for such a serious incident.

http://galwaybayfm.ie/community-service-kilcolgan-drunk-driver-killed-pedestrian-injured-gardai/

Galway Bay fm newsroom – A drunken driver, who killed an elderly pedestrian and injured two Gardaí, has been given 240 hours of community service in lieu of a four-year prison sentence and disqualified from driving for four years.

Father of two, 44-year-old Adrian Nestor, from Keamsella, Kilcolgan, pleaded guilty before Galway Circuit Criminal Court last November to causing the death of 66-year old Liam McDonnell.

He also pleaded guilty to causing serious bodily harm to Garda Sharon Casserly, by driving dangerously near Ardrahan in the early hours of Monday, February 1st last year.

Adrian Nestor further pleaded guilty last November to driving while drunk at the time of the fatal collision.

Sentence was adjourned to today for the preparation of reports and victim impact statements.

Superintendent Sean Glynn gave evidence staff at a local nursing home rang Gardai at 11.35p.m. on March 31, 2016, to say a resident had left the premises and they were concerned because he was wearing dark clothing.

Two Garda cars were despatched to look for Liam McDonnell and just over half an hour later, Garda Sharon Casserly and Garda Peter Murtagh located him.

He was down on on the ground on his hands and knees, on the hard shoulder about 1.5km on the Galway side of Ardrahan.

The patrol car pulled in on the hard shoulder, three to four meters behind Liam McDonnell, facing in the direction of oncoming traffic.

Its dipped headlights and blue flashing lights were on.

Supt. Glynn said that as both Gardai were getting Mr McDonnell into the patrol car, they were struck without warning by a silver Audi car.

The force of the impact caused Mr McDonnell’s death and his body was found in a nearby field.

Garda Casserly received severe injuries and her colleague could hear her screaming in agony as she lay further down the road on the hard shoulder.

Garda Murtagh sustained a broken leg, a large cut to his head and damage to his knees and ankles and he could not move to help his colleague.

Adrian Nestor, who sustained a minor head injury in the collision was later arrested and a blood sample showed a reading of 272 mgs. of alcohol per 100 mls of blood.

A brief victim impact statement from Mr McDonnell’s ex-wife stated that she was not looking for anything except clemency for Nestor’s young family, as jail would not help bring Liam back.

Supt. Glynn confirmed Nestor had no previous convictions and was married with two children.

Adrian Nestor apologised in court to Mr McDonnell’s family and to both injured Gardai who were also present.

Garda Sharon Casserly, who continues to suffer from injuries she sustained that night, read her own victim impact statement into evidence.

She listed out the multiple serious injuries she sustained, including a brain injury.

The court heard she also suffered a stroke while in hospital which left her paralysed on her right side for a time.

She had to cancel her wedding day which was due to take place the following June and her career prospects have been put on hold.

Adrian Nestor told the court he had contemplated taking his own life after that night.

He became anxious and depressed and turned to alcohol.

He was hospitalised twice for his mental health difficulties and while he no longer drinks, he continues to receive counselling and prescribed medications for depression.

Taking Nestor’s previous good record, his genuine remorse, his mental state and the very positive probation report into account, Judge McCabe said the interests of justice would not be served by imposing an immediate custodial sentence.

He imposed the maximum of 240 hours of community service in lieu of a four-year prison sentence for the charge of dangerous driving causing death and serious injury, along with a four-year disqualification.

The judge also fined Nestor €1,000 and disqualified him for three years for the drink driving charge.

Mutant z

That's disgraceful he should have got a prison sentence.

c.p.w.g.w

Depression being used again to get away with murder

JMNolan

Fuck that's light. I can't see how a judge can pass that sentence and consider it just. 240 hours, €1000 fine and 3 year disqualification for all those lives ruined.

Your Face

So...
Drunk driving
Killed someone as a result
Injured two Gardai badly.

vs

Depression
Remorse
No previous convictions
Father of two.


Dunno but if it was me - Id be in prison.

Fr_Dougal

He should be banned from driving for life, and given a jail term.

It's not sending the right message out to those people who think it's fine to drink and drive. Far too lenient.

seamus

Look, it's right there and I see the rationale:

Taking Nestor’s previous good record, his genuine remorse, his mental state and the very positive probation report into account, Judge McCabe said the interests of justice would not be served by imposing an immediate custodial sentence.

Would there be any purpose served in locking this guy up? Would it discourage someone else from drink-driving? I don't think so. His victim's family even asked for mercy for the sake of his children; so they don't suffer from having their father locked up.

Ultimately what is the purpose of putting someone in prison if society is not improved by doing so?

Though a four-year driving ban is a joke. If you piloted any other vehicle while completely plastered and crashed it and killed someone you'd be disqualified for life. We're far too slow to take people's driving licences away in this country. It's a serious privilege that should be hard to gain and easy to lose.

Beta Ray Bill

A brief victim impact statement from Mr McDonnell’s ex-wife stated that she was not looking for anything except clemency for Nestor’s young family, as jail would not help bring Liam back.

That's what got him off I'd say... selfish prick!

Regardless though the judges are getting very light touch in this country.
I think it's because the Prisons are effectively full, there is barely capacity.

We need a Prison capable of holding up to 5,000 inmates.

Beta Ray Bill

seamus wrote: »

Ultimately what is the purpose of putting someone in prison if society is not improved by doing so?

Punishment?

seamus wrote: »

Though a four-year driving ban is a joke. If you piloted any other vehicle while completely plastered and crashed it and killed someone you'd be disqualified for life. We're far too slow to take people's driving licences away in this country. It's a serious privilege that should be hard to gain and easy to lose.

Agreed!

tobdom

seamus wrote: »

Look, it's right there and I see the rationale:

Would there be any purpose served in locking this guy up? Would it discourage someone else from drink-driving? I don't think so.

Yes is actually the answer you're looking for here......

Absolutely f***ing disgusting........ judiciary are a joke!

Potential thought-process (although admittedly there is a complete lack of thought) of someone who might 'chance' drink driving...... "ah, sure it's not like ya can get locked up for it if anything did go wrong"......

Doctors room ghost

Joke of a country.healy rae will be along soon saying sure he had only a few pints supped.
Should have got a 5 year sentence and a lifetime ban from driving. The kids weren’t his top priority the night he was p1ssed up driving but hold the phone there judge,he’s going to be father of the year now.

Fr_Dougal

seamus wrote: »

Look, it's right there and I see the rationale:

Would there be any purpose served in locking this guy up? Would it discourage someone else from drink-driving? I don't think so. His victim's family even asked for mercy for the sake of his children; so they don't suffer from having their father locked up.

Ultimately what is the purpose of putting someone in prison if society is not improved by doing so?

Though a four-year driving ban is a joke. If you piloted any other vehicle while completely plastered and crashed it and killed someone you'd be disqualified for life. We're far too slow to take people's driving licences away in this country. It's a serious privilege that should be hard to gain and easy to lose.

The Garda who he knocked down and seriously injured didn’t ask for clemency. People don’t just randomly decide to drink-drive at that age, I’d wager that it wasn’t his first time.

RhubarbCrumble

He killed one person and injured two others while drunk. He should be behind bars and banned from driving for life.

Doctors room ghost

seamus wrote: »

Look, it's right there and I see the rationale:

Would there be any purpose served in locking this guy up? Would it discourage someone else from drink-driving? I don't think so. His victim's family even asked for mercy for the sake of his children; so they don't suffer from having their father locked up.

Ultimately what is the purpose of putting someone in prison if society is not improved by doing so?

Though a four-year driving ban is a joke. If you piloted any other vehicle while completely plastered and crashed it and killed someone you'd be disqualified for life. We're far too slow to take people's driving licences away in this country. It's a serious privilege that should be hard to gain and easy to lose.

You’re getting soft with age Seamuseen.

I guess the main rationale is that the victim was himself on the road in dark clothing on his hands and knees at night time, and the Gardaí were lifting him into their car. If a fellow is being pulled away from crawling around the road at night time and they are all struck by a drink driver, the driving itself is hardly the only factor.

But think a prison sentence would still be appropriate.

Shenshen

Deleted User wrote: »

I guess the main rationale is that the victim was himself on the road in dark clothing on his hands and knees at night time, and the Gardaí were lifting him into their car. If a fellow is being pulled away from crawling around the road at night time and they are all struck by a drink driver, the driving itself is hardly the only factor.

But think a prison sentence would still be appropriate.

Given that the report says their dipped lights were on, facing the direction of oncoming traffic, and the blue flashing lights were on, I'm not buying that he just ran into them because he didn't see them for lack of reflective clothing.

I'm not sure about prison, one victim's family called for leniency on that count, and I'm not convinced prison is much of a deterrent, but I would agree that he should not ever be given back his license.

I particularly liked the bit in the article where it says he got depressed after the accident and turned to alcohol.
He kills someone while driving drunk, and his reaction to that is to drink more?

Cantona's Collars

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I guess the main rationale is that the victim was himself on the road in dark clothing on his hands and knees at night time, and the Gardaí were lifting him into their car. If a fellow is being pulled away from crawling around the road at night time and they are all struck by a drink driver, the driving itself is hardly the only factor.

But think a prison sentence would still be appropriate.

Read the report again,they were putting the man into the squad car when hit. The squad car had headlights and blue flashing lights on,they were hardly invisible.
The guy that hit them must have been seriously over the limit if he couldn't see that. There are no mitigating circumstances in the case.

Doctors room ghost

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I guess the main rationale is that the victim was himself on the road in dark clothing on his hands and knees at night time, and the Gardaí were lifting him into their car. If a fellow is being pulled away from crawling around the road at night time and they are all struck by a drink driver, the driving itself is hardly the only factor.

But think a prison sentence would still be appropriate.[/quote

No excuse.he was drunk driving which is wrong full stop.if he was sober maybe he would have seen the man on the road or the guards or the squad car.a lifetime ban from driving and 5 years in the big house might take the thirst off him.

seamus

tobdom wrote: »

Yes is actually the answer you're looking for here......

Really, though? If potentially killing someone (or themselves) isn't going to stop someone drink-driving though, I don't think a potential jail sentence is going to be any more of a disincentive.

As far as I can see the main purpose of jail terms are to protect the rest of us from a dangerous individual, or to create real consequences for crimes that may not otherwise have serious ones (like tax evasion).

In this case, based on what's presented, I see nothing to be gained from locking this man up except for some justice boners.

There's no mentioned of a suspended sentence though, which would be disappointing if the judge didn't give one. I'm all for giving a previously clean individual the "benefit of the doubt", but if that benefit is shown to be abused, the appropriate sanctions should be applied.

Doctors room ghost wrote: »

You’re getting soft with age Seamuseen.

Ah, I was always pretty soft.

It's become increasingly clear though through millennia of human experience that locking people up is of limited effectiveness and that sentences which have positive social outcomes are preferable to ones which seek punishment or vengeance.

JMNolan

The jail sentence is only one aspect though. This guy will be back driving in 3 years!!!

seamus

Cantona's Collars wrote: »

The guy that hit them must have been seriously over the limit if he couldn't see that. There are no mitigating circumstances in the case.

0.272

Lowest limit is 0.05. Disqualified at 0.08 - and you'll feel it at that level. 0.12 is properly drunk and over 0.15 you'll be slurring your words and very wobbly on your feet.

0.272 is absolutely scuttered. Most people wouldn't even be vertical at that level.

Crazy
Not so long ago a Dublin man was locked up for 2 years for falling asleep at the wheel and killing a young mother and injuring a child. No alcohol involved

How can this drunk driver get community service?????

Doctors room ghost

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Crazy
Not so long ago a Dublin man was locked up for 2 years for falling asleep at the wheel and killing a young mother and injuring a child. No alcohol involved

How can this drunk driver get community service?????

You wouldn’t know he might have a bit of pull with man pants o’sullivan.if justice was served he’d have a lifetime ban from driving and 5 years minimum in the big house to take the thirst off him.

Skyfloater

seamus wrote: »

0.272

Lowest limit is 0.05. Disqualified at 0.08 - and you'll feel it at that level. 0.12 is properly drunk and over 0.15 you'll be slurring your words and very wobbly on your feet.

0.272 is absolutely scuttered. Most people wouldn't even be vertical at that level.

How many pints would an average man have to have to get to .272?

tobdom

seamus wrote: »

Really, though? If potentially killing someone (or themselves) isn't going to stop someone drink-driving though, I don't think a potential jail sentence is going to be any more of a disincentive.

I don't think people think like that though..... anyone who takes the car & chances it, their thinking, "I wonder is there any fear of coming across a checkpoint or meeting Gardai"...... "gees I might kill myself/someone else" doesn't really enter into the thought process as far as I'm concerned.

that's why the logic that follows is that - what are the consequences if I do get caught?..... Nowhere near harsh enough in this case from my perspective (and most others it would seem)

suicide_circus

It dosnt feel like justice. Does that matter?

Whatever about no jail time, I can see no justification for this guy getting his licence back, particularly when he himself admitted to turning to drink after this event. He has surely proven himself unable to use the roads.

Kristopherus

Was looking at an American docu on tv last night. A cop had pulled in a suspected drunk driver. A big suv-type vehicle flew by and clipped the cop with a wing mirror. Two following drivers saw the incident and chased the flying driver. eventually blocking him in. That driver got 11 yrs in the clink. The cop made a full recovery. Maybe some of that type of punishment may not go astray here.

xckjoo

tobdom wrote: »

I don't think people think like that though..... anyone who takes the car & chances it, their thinking, "I wonder is there any fear of coming across a checkpoint or meeting Gardai"...... "gees I might kill myself/someone else" doesn't really enter into the thought process as far as I'm concerned.

that's why the logic that follows is that - what are the consequences if I do get caught?..... Nowhere near harsh enough in this case from my perspective (and most others it would seem)

I wonder would people think more if the consequences was a lifetime/long-term driving ban if caught. Prison is something for criminals and people that drink and drive probably don't think they're criminals.

amcalester

Skyfloater wrote: »

How many pints would an average man have to have to get to .272?

I worked it out to be about 9, assuming he weighed 80kg.

seamus

Skyfloater wrote: »

How many pints would an average man have to have to get to .272?

Impossible to say, but it's around the point where you wake up in the morning and have flashbacks of getting home where you were the guy bouncing off walls and tripping over kerbs, muttering to yourself, while people walking by stare at you and make comments about how drunk you are.

Now, the test is done after you're brought to the station, so if this guy had jumped straight in the car after leaving the pub, he could have had 3 pints in his belly, so his BAC was lower when he crashed than it was in the station after the 3 pints got into his bloodstream. But nevertheless it would have been well in excess of 0.2, which is around the point that anyone would say you've had enough and need to be brought home.

suicide_circus

Kristopherus wrote: »

Was looking at an American docu on tv last night. A cop had pulled in a suspected drunk driver. A big suv-type vehicle flew by and clipped the cop with a wing mirror. Two following drivers saw the incident and chased the flying driver. eventually blocking him in. That driver got 11 yrs in the clink. The cop made a full recovery. Maybe some of that type of punishment may not go astray here.

With an average inmate cost of $32,000 per annum it will set the tax payer back $352,000 to keep that person in the clink for 11 years.

Mossy Monk

Surely that sentence will be appealed. I am interested to know what friends he has that managed to get him community service for not only killing someone but also injuring Gardai. You'd nearly get jail for the latter alone.

It's high time the judiciary were taken to task for these mind boggling sentences they hand out.

Danjamin1

seamus wrote: »

As far as I can see the main purpose of jail terms are to protect the rest of us from a dangerous individual, or to create real consequences for crimes that may not otherwise have serious ones (like tax evasion).

He killed one person & severely maimed two others. He took one life and drastically altered another. How does that not categorise him as a dangerous individual, remorseful or not?

BattleCorp

seamus wrote: »

Look, it's right there and I see the rationale:

Would there be any purpose served in locking this guy up? Would it discourage someone else from drink-driving? I don't think so. His victim's family even asked for mercy for the sake of his children; so they don't suffer from having their father locked up.

Ultimately what is the purpose of putting someone in prison if society is not improved by doing so?

Your posts are normally very rational and sensible and I'd be in agreement with most of them.

That said, and I'm saying this with respect, I think you are off the wall here. He certainly deserves to go to jail. If you kill someone while you are drunk driving, then you deserve to go to jail.

seamus

Danjamin1 wrote: »

He killed one person & severely maimed two others. He took one life and drastically altered another. How does that not categorise him as a dangerous individual, remorseful or not?

Assuming the facts given in the report are accurate, does the man described in report seem to you to now pose a danger to the rest of society?

Take it as fact that he no longer drinks, is remorseful to the point of depression, and is disqualified from driving - does he now pose a danger to the public?

BattleCorp wrote: »

If you kill someone while you are drunk driving, then you deserve to go to jail.

With respect though, that doesn't answer my question about whether jailing him serves any purpose. What good would come of it?

diomed

Of course you would be depressed if you killed someone and severely injured another.
What goes on in someone's life after a crime should have no bearing on a case.

BattleCorp

seamus wrote: »

Assuming the facts given in the report are accurate, does the man described in report seem to you to now pose a danger to the rest of society?

Take it as fact that he no longer drinks, is remorseful to the point of depression, and is disqualified from driving - does he now pose a danger to the public?

With respect though, that doesn't answer my question about whether jailing him serves any purpose. What good would come of it?

Jailing him shows that the Judiciary take drink driving seriously and that if you kill someone while you are drunk driving, you will do time.

Not jailing him shows that while drink driving is a no-no, don't worry. You might be put off the road but you won't be jailed.

This isn't a case of a guy having one pint and being barely over the limit. He was buckled, got behind the wheel and now three families are having to deal with the fallout of this incident through no fault of their own.

Regarding the mitigating factors such as he doesn't drink any more, would the excuse 'I don't rob banks anymore' be a mitigating factor for someone caught robbing banks - I think not.

Disqualified drivers often get behind the wheel of a car so there is the potential for him to do it again. Jailed drivers tend not to get behind the wheel when they are in jail.

Snickers Man

Doctors room ghost wrote: »

healy rae will be along soon saying sure he had only a few pints supped.

Five times over the legal limit? That's more than " a few pints supped".

Give the Healy Raes their due: they're not asking for people to be allowed drive while pissed out of their minds. They just want a more reasonable drink driving limit.

As do I.

The "new" proposed legislation would have had no effect on this guy's behaviour. He was just as illegal under the old laws (even the very old 80mg limit laws which we should bring back IMHO) as he would be under the new.

punisher5112

Shocking really....

If I did that I would be asking to be sent down.


Disgraceful really is.

Sam Quentin

I would totally ignore his depression, he said himself he also took to drink after what he did and contemplated taking his own life...
Nobody who drinks should be acknowledged as a depressed person until they are free from Alcohol..
He's just a drunk who killed an innocent man and damn nearly killed 2 Gardaí...
His sentence was way too lenient.

Doctors room ghost

Snickers Man wrote: »

Five times over the legal limit? That's more than " a few pints supped".

Give the Healy Raes their due: they're not asking for people to be allowed drive while pissed out of their minds. They just want a more reasonable drink driving limit.

As do I.


Ah will you stop.a can of worms that don’t need opening.how many pints would a 20 stone man be allowed before driving compared to a 12 stone man factoring in metabolism.
Drink driving is wrong full stop. If you want pints leave the car at home and organize a lift or a taxi myself included.
As for Healy rae the country on its knees coming out of a recession and he wants to draft in the army to pull up a few bushes in Kerry and legalize drink driving to suit rural publicans

jimmycrackcorm

Cantona's Collars wrote:

Read the report again,they were putting the man into the squad car when hit. The squad car had headlights and blue flashing lights on,they were hardly invisible. The guy that hit them must have been seriously over the limit if he couldn't see that. There are no mitigating circumstances in the case.

I think it's significant though that the Garda car was on the same side of the road facing the driver. Their lights facing him would have been disorienting regardless of alcohol and even more so with it.

On a dark night facing such you could actually wonder if you are driving on the right of what looks like an incoming car.

Deleted User wrote:

Crazy Not so long ago a Dublin man was locked up for 2 years for falling asleep at the wheel and killing a young mother and injuring a child. No alcohol involved

On appeal the judge found the sentence too harsh.

Hector Bellend

Is anyone genuinely surprised by this?

To my mind, it's one of either two things that's wrong.

It's either

a) the law is an absolute and utter piece of sh1t. If this is the case we should adapt or completely re-write current legislation to provide serious deterrents for this kind of crime or

b) the judges who apply the law are either mad, stupid or dont know whats going on.

How else do you explain a sentence like this?

jimmycrackcorm

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

On appeal the judge found the sentence too harsh.

Wasn’t aware of appeal. He served 9 months in prison and they upheld the 10 year driving ban (for falling asleep, no alcohol)

Where is the consistency?

This absolute scourge of society killed an old man, nearly killed two guards, and gets a 4 year ban????? And community service. Wtf

Hector Bellend

In this day and age there is no Justification for driving with any amount of alcohol in your system. Simply put there should be a zero limit.

You cannot defend the indefensible.

It's time we start throwing the book at people like this. We need stiffer and more meaningful sentences to reflect the gravity of these offences.

darced

This post has been deleted.

longshanks

Garlic.

Summer wind

Absolutely shocking and disgraceful result.

Akrasia

tobdom wrote: »

Yes is actually the answer you're looking for here......

Ok, so someone is thinking of drink driving but remembers the guy who killed someone, ruined his own life, and seriously injured 2 gardai and thinks, feck it, the guy didn't even go to jail. Another one for the road!

seamus

Adrian Nestor told the court he had contemplated taking his own life after that night.

He became anxious and depressed and turned to alcohol.

Caused the fcuking problem in the first place.

seamus wrote: »

Assuming the facts given in the report are accurate, does the man described in report seem to you to now pose a danger to the rest of society?

Take it as fact that he no longer drinks, is remorseful to the point of depression, and is disqualified from driving - does he now pose a danger to the public?

With respect though, that doesn't answer my question about whether jailing him serves any purpose. What good would come of it?

He shouldn't have done it in the first place. I don't think it's ok to say sure you're grand so, as long as you're REALLY SORRY SWEARZ.
A lifetime ban from driving with some kind of checks should be the very minimum, not 4 years