Suspended sentence for killing cyclist

boombang · 24-04-2018 6:59pm #1

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 · 24-04-2018 7:10pm

What good would it do anyone in this case ?

eeguy · 24-04-2018 7:13pm

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 · 24-04-2018 7:16pm

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 · 24-04-2018 7:17pm

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 · 24-04-2018 7:19pm

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 · 24-04-2018 7:19pm

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 · 24-04-2018 7:20pm

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 · 24-04-2018 7:23pm

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 · 24-04-2018 7:25pm

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 · 24-04-2018 7:26pm

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 · 24-04-2018 7:27pm

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 · 24-04-2018 7:31pm

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 · 24-04-2018 7:33pm

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 · 24-04-2018 7:40pm

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

magicbastarder · 24-04-2018 7:44pm

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 · 24-04-2018 7:45pm

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 · 24-04-2018 7:47pm

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 · 24-04-2018 7:51pm

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 · 24-04-2018 7:52pm

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 · 24-04-2018 7:52pm

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 · 24-04-2018 7:56pm

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 · 24-04-2018 7:58pm

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 · 24-04-2018 7:59pm

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 · 24-04-2018 7:59pm

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 · 24-04-2018 8:01pm

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 · 24-04-2018 8:03pm

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 · 24-04-2018 8:06pm

magicbastarder wrote: »

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

I cycle, I would not have been there.

eeguy · 24-04-2018 8:09pm

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 · 24-04-2018 8:10pm

kub wrote: »

I cycle, I would not have been there.

that's not even an answer.

Hurrache · 24-04-2018 8:12pm

ted1 wrote: »

The n3 is also 120,

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

Suspended sentence for killing cyclist

Comments