Suspended sentence for killing cyclist

boombang

Apologies if this particular one has been posted elsewhere. It seems this general issue has come up before.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/courts/circuit-court/driver-who-killed-cyclist-in-cork-gets-suspended-sentence-1.3472915

While the driver sounds remorseful and in no way did a hit and run, I feel that the neglect of responsibility that leads to the death of another needs custodial sentencing. Irrespective of whether it was a cyclist, pedestrian or other driver she neglected her duty of care to others and caused a death. Understandably many may say what would be achieved by putting her in jail. Nothing for the woman in question, but the deterant and associated signal it sends is important. Given that she has small kids it would be very difficult, but I would prefer this woman to serve three months than nothing. I know she's likely to take the regret to her grave in any case, but society has to say this is unacceptable in my opinion.

Etc

What good would it do anyone in this case ?

eeguy

It could have happened any one of us really. No one has 100% concentration all the time and it would be especially difficult with children in the back.
Sending the mother to jail would only deprive her children.
RIP to the poor cyclist and his family.

Limestone1

boombang wrote: »

but the deterant and associated signal it sends is important. .

Tragic but it was an accident - you can't deter people from having accidents

boombang

I think society gains by maintaining a stance that taking care while you drive is important. It's an indirect benefit but I think it outweighs the temporary loss to the kids. I also think there's a principle at stake. I know others will see it differently.

ted1

Limestone1 wrote: »

Tragic but it was an accident - you can't deter people from having accidents

But accidents are preventable. In this case she could have safely pulled over to deal with the child or alternatively kept driving without turning around.

boombang

Limestone1 wrote: »

Tragic but it was an accident - you can't deter people from having accidents

This man's death was caused by her inattention. I think you can and should enforce a sense of responsibility.

Carlos Orange

eeguy wrote: »

It could have happened any one of us really. No one has 100% concentration all the time and it would be especially difficult with children in the back.

I don't drive but I assume most drivers don't turn around to take the tag off a toy while driving. Doing that seems a bit more than just lacking 100% concentration.

Whether a custodial sentence would have any benefit is a different question.

boombang

I'm not going to pretend to be a saint at the wheel, but if you look at the activities of some drivers it's clear that many do not take their responsibilities seriously.

uck51js9zml2yt

What good would depriving her children of their mother be?
Not to mention, who looks after the he kids while she's in jail. Does her other half give up his job leading to financial difficulty and inability vto pay mortgage/ rent.
She has to live with what she did

kub

The cyclist RIP was cycling across an exit off a dual carriageway which has a 120 kmh limit.
As in he was going straight on while the car was exiting off the road at the exit.

A very sad accident occurred, by all means that lady should have been watching the road like a hawk.
She was not, this is something which she will always regret and have to live with.
Many have wondered what a cyclist was doing on that road in the first place.

Sleeper12

They ban cell phone use while driving yet children in the car can offer a far greater distraction.

I don't think a prison sentence would benefit anyone here. It's not like drink /drug driving, speeding, texting etc. It wouldn't serve as a deterrent.

Without trying to take away from the great loss of the cyclist to their family this lady has to live with her mist for the rest of her life.

Peatys

The guilt she'll live with will be a far higher sentence than anything handed down from a court.

As for a custodial sentence being a deterrent to other drivers, not killing someone is a greater deterrent.

bucketybuck

kub wrote: »

As in he was going straight on while the car was exiting off the road at the exit.

I know little about the case but that doesn't make a lick of sense to me.

So this woman was turning back to her kids not only while driving, but while turning left and exiting a dual carriageway?

amcalester

Not surprised that the sentence was suspended but I think 12 months is quite lenient for killing someone, accidental or otherwise.

magicbastarder

kub wrote: »

The cyclist RIP was cycling across an exit off a dual carriageway which has a 120 kmh limit.
As in he was going straight on while the car was exiting off the road at the exit.

A very sad accident occurred, by all means that lady should have been watching the road like a hawk.
She was not, this is something which she will always regret and have to live with.
Many have wondered what a cyclist was doing on that road in the first place.

are you saying the cyclist shouldn't have been there?

eeguy

psinno wrote: »

I don't drive but I assume most drivers don't turn around to take the tag off a toy while driving. Doing that seems a bit more than just lacking 100% concentration.

Whether a custodial sentence would have any benefit is a different question.

You can look forward to being constantly surprised by the sh*t people get up to while driving.

Kaisr Sose

kub wrote: »

The cyclist RIP was cycling across an exit off a dual carriageway which has a 120 kmh limit.
As in he was going straight on while the car was exiting off the road at the exit.

I don’t know the full facts here but No dual carriageway has an exit that has a speed limit of 120kph. Vehicles are supposed to slow down and look for other traffic. A lot exits are 60kph at the point where you merge/join another road.

magicbastarder

Kaisr Sose wrote: »

I don’t know the full facts here but No dual carriageway has an exit that has a speed limit of 120kph. Vehicles are supposed to slow down and look for other traffic. A lot exits are 60kph at the point where you merge/join another road.

i suspect the post was referring to the speed limit on the dual carriageway, rather than the speed limit for the exit itself.

anyway, what a stupid bloody reason for someone to die. if the child had been physically ill, or some such occurrence; but to die because a kid asked a tag to be removed from a toy. it's almost farcical.

ted1

kub wrote: »

The cyclist RIP was cycling across an exit off a dual carriageway which has a 120 kmh limit.
As in he was going straight on while the car was exiting off the road at the exit.

A very sad accident occurred, by all means that lady should have been watching the road like a hawk.
She was not, this is something which she will always regret and have to live with.
Many have wondered what a cyclist was doing on that road in the first place.

the court found her actions where the cause of the death, no point victim blaming. the courts have gone through the evidence and she is to blame.

You could use your logic on every case in the courts and never impose a custodial sentence.

Corca Baiscinn

I see the point the op is making re the deterrent effect of a custodial sentence and that it would show the gravity of the offence. But for anyone who hasn't read the report of the case it's important to say that the driver did get a suspended sentence and a 5 year driving ban. She wasn't prosecuted for dangerous driving and I feel she should have been rather than careless but that as not a decision of the judge. I don't know though what the burden of proof entails for dangerous v careless.

Kub, do you mean that dual carriageay has a motowray speed limit? Where M18 changes to N18 and M4 to N4 the speed limit drops to 100. Does it not on the road the collision occurred on? Anyway, I accept the judge's statement that the cyclist did nothing wrong and if he was 10 minutes from home as stated by his family presumably that was his route.

magicbastarder

Corca Baiscinn wrote: »

Kub, do you mean that dual carriageay has a motowray speed limit? Where M18 changes to N18 and M4 to N4 the speed limit drops to 100. Does it not on the road the collision occurred on?

not sure which stretch, but the N40 does have a 120km/h speed limit:
https://www.google.com/maps/@51.8754615,-8.5704985,3a,75y,86.36h,76.22t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1smI69erm6meDRiCO6BtslWQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

kub

Corca Baiscinn wrote: »

Kub, do you mean that dual carriageay has a motowray speed limit?

It does indeed heading westbound on the N40 the speed limit changes approx 1 km before the scene of this dreadful accident. It goes from 100 to 120 and is indicated as such.

Diarmuid

kub wrote: »

Many have wondered what a cyclist was doing on that road in the first place.

He was cycling. Nice victim blaming there

ted1

magicbastarder wrote: »

Corca Baiscinn wrote: »

Kub, do you mean that dual carriageay has a motowray speed limit? Where M18 changes to N18 and M4 to N4 the speed limit drops to 100. Does it not on the road the collision occurred on?

not sure which stretch, but the N40 does have a 120km/h speed limit:
https://www.google.com/maps/@51.8754615,-8.5704985,3a,75y,86.36h,76.22t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1smI69erm6meDRiCO6BtslWQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

The n3 is also 120, my understanding is that n roads that have a 120 limit are motorway spec but are declassed so as to allow learner drivers use them. Often when the original road is no longer available

Blazer

eeguy wrote: »

It could have happened any one of us really. No one has 100% concentration all the time and it would be especially difficult with children in the back.
Sending the mother to jail would only deprive her children.
RIP to the poor cyclist and his family.

Yet his family are deprived of a father.
They’re needs to harsher sentences handed out to deter this type of carelessness going forward

kub

magicbastarder wrote: »

not sure which stretch, but the N40 does have a 120km/h speed limit:
https://www.google.com/maps/@51.8754615,-8.5704985,3a,75y,86.36h,76.22t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1smI69erm6meDRiCO6BtslWQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Same stretch of road but you are further West, the collision occurred here

https://www.google.com/maps/@51.8755602,-8.5666942,3a,75y,229.48h,67.81t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s3gtLLGHjW8inpvWlDF8cBQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

kub

magicbastarder wrote: »

are you saying the cyclist shouldn't have been there?

I cycle, I would not have been there.

eeguy

Blazer wrote: »

Yet his family are deprived of a father.
They’re needs to harsher sentences handed out to deter this type of carelessness going forward

But it's not going to deter anyone.
A case like this won't deter most mothers from having a quick look around to help their child.

Will a mother pull off a motorway and find a safe space to pull in to grab the bottle her baby just dropped and is screaming for. Or will she have a quick look into the back seat and grab it?

kub wrote: »

I cycle, I would not have been there.

Your personal preference has zero to do with this discussion.

magicbastarder

kub wrote: »

I cycle, I would not have been there.

that's not even an answer.

Hurrache

ted1 wrote: »

The n3 is also 120,

Whereabouts? On the Dublin/Meath side I think it's 100 until it becomes the M3.

fat bloke

It's not a motorway, the cyclist was entirely and completely and 100% entitled to be there and not to be run over. The basics of driving include looking out that big glass windscreen in front of you. A suspended sentence is not adequate punishment or deterrent.

boombang

kub wrote: »

I cycle, I would not have been there.

Fair enough. But that man was. He was within his rights to be so too. He also should have an expectation that people would keep their eyes open.

ford2600

kub wrote: »

I cycle, I would not have been there.

I've cycled that road a few times and the similar N25 east of the tunnel. It's not enjoyable but save once you are hyper alert on exits and merges.

So much so that if it doubt that vehicle behind might exit be prepared to take exit and come back down the other side.

While I feel this lady should have served time and a much longer driving ban immediately calling out someone as victim blaming insures the debate becomes polarised people pick sides and nothing is learned.

The excuse that Defendant was a mother and that should shield her from jail is sexist and bollix. The Deceased family are without him forever and never got to say goodbye; justice has to put a value on his life and his family''s loss.

P_1

If there's one thing to take from this it's that to be extremely careful near sliproads. I think it's a reasonable statement that a dual carriageway with a high speed limit is one of the spots drivers would be least expecting to see a cyclist and given the speeds involved the slightest lapse from a driver (which this case is a tragic example of) the potential for things to go wrong is greater.

Would it be worthwhile considering going up and down the sliproads rather than staying on the carriageway when on training runs on roads like the N40/N3/N7 etc?

piplip87

boombang wrote: »

Apologies if this particular one has been posted elsewhere. It seems this general issue has come up before.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/courts/circuit-court/driver-who-killed-cyclist-in-cork-gets-suspended-sentence-1.3472915

While the driver sounds remorseful and in no way did a hit and run, I feel that the neglect of responsibility that leads to the death of another needs custodial sentencing. Irrespective of whether it was a cyclist, pedestrian or other driver she neglected her duty of care to others and caused a death. Understandably many may say what would be achieved by putting her in jail. Nothing for the woman in question, but the deterant and associated signal it sends is important. Given that she has small kids it would be very difficult, but I would prefer this woman to serve three months than nothing. I know she's likely to take the regret to her grave in any case, but society has to say this is unacceptable in my opinion.

Once again I am calling out Sexism in our judicial system. FFS I know a fella that got 6 months for 5 grams of weed. If this was a male there would be no doubt a custodial sentence would have been the end result

ED E

Im not sure a custodial would be a net benefit but christ, double the ban and the sentence (still suspended).

If I threw a hammer over a wall and it smashed a lads skull in you can be sure I'd be jailed for manslaughter. For some reason when its via a car it doesn't count in this little country.

amcalester

piplip87 wrote: »

Once again I am calling out Sexism in our judicial system. FFS I know a fella that got 6 months for 5 grams of weed. If this was a male there would be no doubt a custodial sentence would have been the end result

Not true.

3 times the drink driving limit and kill a cyclist?

Ah sure, €500 fine and a suspended sentence.

http://www.stickybottle.com/latest-news/drink-driver-fined-stefan-cooper/

The issue, as is often the case in Ireland, is judges giving overly lenient sentences.

https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/judges-accused-of-being-lenient-in-killer-driving-cases-36460559.html

magentis

I didn't know Donal very well but he was a gent.I was doing a job on my car and was struggling with it,he was passing and just helped me out without even asking.Sad to see a young man pass away like that.RIP.

whiskeyman

P_1 wrote: »

If there's one thing to take from this it's that to be extremely careful near sliproads.

We should be careful 100% of the time regardless.
I've had friends have blowouts on straight stretches of road, and if it wasn't for their full concentration, they've admitted they don't want to think of the other outcome.

So many of us still don't understand the dangers of distracted driving.
Kids, passengers chatting and phone calls (even on handfree) are all distracting and take the drivers attention off the task of driving.

This is a terribly sad case, but highlights to me the flippancy so many of us have to safe driving. Anything can happen in a split second.

The RSA had a very powerful ad a while ago, specifically targeting mother's with kids which is too apt:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rKUNJMrFeUs

On another point, if she ploughed into a car killing a young child, I wonder if the sentence would be the same?

detones

From what I’ve seen on these cases there are far more negligent drivers who have had no license or insurance or have left cyclists literally for dead and still not seen jail time. This case is a horrible tragedy and the woman in question will probably never be the same after it, her life will be marred by this forever and she assume still will have a criminal conviction. That probably means nothing to some or the victims friends or family but I do feel little would be served by jailing her and I have read the arguments for the message it sends out but don’t fully agree. We need to start locking up monsters like this fella .....

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/suspended-prison-term-for-driver-who-killed-cyclist-1.1316377

Tenzor07

Here's my 2cents...

Doesn't matter if this woman driving the car had killed a granny crossing the road, a kid on a scooter or a man on a bicycle, if you're not in control of your vehicle at all times by the fact of not watching where you are going due to a mobile phone, sat nav or the sun in your eyes, then you should at very least completely forfeit your right to ever hold a licence to drive a vehicle in this country...

The fact that she won't serve prison time means her children will never have to suffer the loss that the innocent deceased man's family will have to live with every single day for the rest of their lives.. and that's not justice... She will be free to drive a vehicle in 5 years, back on the roads..

pearcider

It's well known that women get much lighter sentences. Combine that with the usual Irish judicial leniency and the suspended sentence was predictable. Still stomach turning for the family. I do think it's bordering on farcical that she will only lose her driving licence for 5 years for killing someone with her car. That's just unbelievable.

lalababa

Was she exiting ? Or just veered left? He was wholey within his rights if it is a dual carraigway. I drive that road alot and often wondered what classification it was. I cycle alot as well and wouldn't go near it as it would be leathal with the main culprit being the exit and slipway entrances. Imagine cycling along at 12 mph with traffic trying to exit and join at 70mph and above. All that said, even though there seems to be few accidents on the south ring I find alot of speeding and tailgating, so I imagine not much enforcement.

fritzelly

Too lenient a sentence, should always have your eyes on the road when driving - reason for banning phones etc.
Being a mother should not excuse you from punishment - maybe it will give the kids a message in the future if they ever drive - some custodial sentence was needed. You can say how much you are devastated by the incident and you can never forgive yourself, but probably all forgotten about not much later, she has basically got off scott free after killing someone

Should be a manslaughter charge in any case of someone driving a car and you kill someone bar uncontrollable circumstance like a blown tyre etc

De Bhál

detones wrote: »

From what I’ve seen on these cases there are far more negligent drivers who have had no license or insurance or have left cyclists literally for dead and still not seen jail time. This case is a horrible tragedy and the woman in question will probably never be the same after it, her life will be marred by this forever and she assume still will have a criminal conviction. That probably means nothing to some or the victims friends or family but I do feel little would be served by jailing her and I have read the arguments for the message it sends out but don’t fully agree. We need to start locking up monsters like this fella .....

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/suspended-prison-term-for-driver-who-killed-cyclist-1.1316377

That's sickening.

AndrewJRenko

eeguy wrote: »

It could have happened any one of us really. No one has 100% concentration all the time and it would be especially difficult with children in the back.
Sending the mother to jail would only deprive her children.
RIP to the poor cyclist and his family.

If she, or you, or anyone is unable to drive safely with kids in the back, then she shouldn't be driving with kids in the back. It's that simple.

ayux4rj6zql2ph

This post has been deleted.

eeeee

I'm not sure locking up people does much good in the majority of cases (That's a topic for another thread), but if you kill someone with your car and it's your fault you should never be given a license to drive again for the rest of your life without exception. It beggars belief that she will be behind the wheel again in 5 years time. That is so so so wrong.

His family are without a father, bother, son, his friends bereft - what value a life? I think her sentence was unduly lenient, and her gender and the fact that she is a mother certainly played a part.

Rubberchikken

Everything, guilty plea remorse kids etc taken into account, suspended is to be expected imo.
I would have taken her licence off of her for a lot longer than 5 years (i think), and i wouldnt have waited until 1st july for it to come into effect.
Have to wonder if shes driving at present. Tbh i think if it had bern me i might never sit into a car again.

Im not a perfect driver, but some of the inattention i see on the roads makes me wonder how more arent dead.

Lumen

The suspended sentence is normal for a first offence which is not a deliberate act.

I agree that a lifetime driving ban is appropriate. Sure, it changes your lifestyle a bit but there are loads of people who don't drive, managing fine with public transport and even....cycling.