Four and a half years for a killing

How is this not manslaughter? He'll be out in 2020 and able to drive soon after.

https://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/driver-swerved-violently-during-row-14676132

It's about the kind of sentence you would expect on this charge for a first offence when they've reached the age of 35 and no convictions.

https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/web_causing_death_by_driving_definitive_guideline.pdf

He was banned for 5 years from his 'release'. Small change in the law - so the ban actually has some longer term impact after release.

I have said before these cases are some of the most difficult for the courts to deal with.

https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/web_causing_death_by_driving_definitive_guideline.pdf

 

He was banned for 5 years from his 'release'. Small change in the law - so the ban actually has some longer term impact after release.

 

I have said before these cases are some of the most difficult for the courts to deal with.

Well that's good news.!! It's hardly a 'Small' change in the law though.!

The time's iv'e seen people getting sent down with a driving ban to boot, only for the ban to take place WHILE they are banged up, so on release they are no longer banned.

Iv'e often queried about that ridiculous law.!

I'd not heard about that change, it's certainly welcome in principle.

Mind you, a company director who fails to maintain a lorry that careers into a bus stop can be prosecuted for manslaughter whereas a driver kills a cyclist in these circumstances and it's death by dangerous driving.

Life seems very cheap if it's a crazed motorist doing the killing rather than a crazy with a gun.

Mind you, a company director who fails to maintain a lorry that careers into a bus stop can be prosecuted for manslaughter whereas a driver kills a cyclist in these circumstances and it's death by dangerous driving.

 

both causing death by dangerous driving and manslaughter are very serious charges. The actual sentence that a company director would likely get in that situation for manslaughter would not be likely to be more than the four and a half years this guy got and may have been less.

For somebody with no previous convictions at all, it is quite a lengthy sentence, although the four and a half years he got is more than it would have been had he not contested the trial of issue.

How is this not manslaughter? He'll be out in 2020 and able to drive soon after.

 

 

 

A driver swerved “violently” on to the wrong side of the road during an argument with his girlfriend and killed a cyclist.

 

Newport Crown Court heard Eurico Costa, 36, lost his temper during the row and tore down a sun visor before deliberately veering across the road intending to scare his partner.

Four and a half years?????

RIP that poor man and my deepest sympathies to his family and friends.

both causing death by dangerous driving and manslaughter are very serious charges. The actual sentence that a company director would likely get in that situation for manslaughter would not be likely to be more than the four and a half years this guy got and may have been less.

 

For somebody with no previous convictions at all, it is quite a lengthy sentence, although the four and a half years he got is more than it would have been had he not contested the trial of issue.

I don't consider 4 and a half years a lengthy sentence. His actions took a life.

I don't consider 4 and a half years a lengthy sentence. His actions took a life.

I agree...But the law is the law...If you want to argue about it...Become a Lawyer? (I have no idea how old you are)..!

Taking someones life is an awful thing, i agree..

Fighting in the court's today?...A damned good lawyer will get these kids off..

I agree...But the law is the law...If you want to argue about it...Become a Lawyer? (I have no idea how old you are)..!

 

Taking someones life is an awful thing, i agree..

 

Fighting in the court's today?...A damned good lawyer will get these kids off..

 

The lawyers have nothing to do with the sentencing powers of the judge.

The lawyer in this case presumably advised the client if he had a 'newton hearing' trial of the issue - and lost - his credit for pleading guilty would be reduced - if he won he would be sentenced on his version - The client no doubt thought it was worth it. It very rarely is.

The lawyers have nothing to do with the sentencing powers of the judge.

 

The lawyer in this case presumably advised the client if he had a 'newton hearing' trial of the issue - and lost - his credit for pleading guilty would be reduced - if he won he would be sentenced on his version - The client no doubt thought it was worth it. It very rarely is.

Codswallop..

A good lawyer NEVER presumes ANYTHING..!

---------- Post added 20-05-2018 at 15:10 ----------

The lawyers have nothing to do with the sentencing powers of the judge.

 

The lawyer in this case presumably advised the client if he had a 'newton hearing' trial of the issue - and lost - his credit for pleading guilty would be reduced - if he won he would be sentenced on his version - The client no doubt thought it was worth it. It very rarely is.

Come back at me lad...I like your style..

Codswallop..

 

A good lawyer NEVER presumes ANYTHING..!

 

---------- Post added 20-05-2018 at 15:10 ----------

 

 

Come back at me lad...I like your style..

If they didn't so advise they would be professionally negligent. That good enough?