Footballer gets 7 years

[merckx]

to that end because of his downright stupidity and ignorance towards others then as far as i am concerned he should spend the rest of his life in prison, his bank account should be frozen and any money in it should be used to compensate the family.

I agree.

 

How many drivers after a drink think they're capable of driving normally?

 

I feel that we need a deterrent that will work.

 

Maybe the law needs to be changed so that drinking any amount and driving would be a criminal offence with a significant jail sentence and a massive financial penalty, the same goes for using a mobile phone. Offenders should have their lives ruined because that's what will happen to their victims, they're playing russian roulette with innocent members of the public which is intolerable!

[MARTIN R]

7 years, should of got life:(

[Jake]

I agree.

 

How many drivers after a drink think they're capable of driving normally?

 

I feel that we need a deterrent that will work.

 

Maybe the law needs to be changed so that drinking any amount and driving would be a criminal offence with a significant jail sentence and a massive financial penalty, the same goes for using a mobile phone. Offenders should have their lives ruined because that's what will happen to their victims, they're playing russian roulette with innocent members of the public which is intolerable!

You've never broken a speed limit or used a phone while driving then?

[Shadow Beast]

I don't think the guy is as loaded as some people seem to think. He was just a goalkeeper for a lower division team (Plymouth Argyle are hardly Manchester United)

 

The rest of his life? What good would that do?

Similarly, giving his money to the family of the dead boys won't bring those poor boys back or ease their parents' grief. Some things can't be fixed with money. Compensation isn't always appropriate.

 

Teach the pathetic excuse of a human being that no matter who he is or what he was, he drank, got in his 40K+ Range Rover and killed 2 little lads and has put the father in a wheel chair, for that reason alone he needs to reflect on what he has done, he has taken what i consider 3 lives, therefore he has no right to his own in WHAT 4 years? the family have been given a life sentence of sorrow, he should have the same, and that to me is under HMP.

 

I agree what you say about money and compensation, but i know myself that should i ever end up in the situation that the parents have, rebuilding a life on the money that is from the one that took your little ones away it would sit right up there as justice. As well as knowing that when he comes out (because lets face it life is only 24 years) he will have nothing.

 

richie

[merckx]

You've never broken a speed limit or used a phone while driving then?

I'm not talking about speeding, rather drink driving and using a phone.

 

I do speed occasionally, only on a motorway and in a quick burst then I slow down again.

 

I've never used the phone whilst driving since the new law was introduced. I could've had a few lagers at my brother in laws house the other day. He gave me a full glass which was maybe half a pint, I only drank half and poured the rest away when he wasn't looking.

[Jake]

Teach the pathetic excuse of a human being that no matter who he is or what he was, he drank, got in his 40K+ Range Rover and killed 2 little lads and has put the father in a wheel chair, for that reason alone he needs to reflect on what he has done, he has taken what i consider 3 lives, therefore he has no right to his own in WHAT 4 years? the family have been given a life sentence of sorrow, he should have the same, and that to me is under HMP.

Does the fact he had a few quid and a nice car bother you? I can't really understand what that's got to do with it.

Do you think he should go to prison for life, for the accident or for the drink driving?

I agree what you say about money and compensation, but i know myself that should i ever end up in the situation that the parents have, rebuilding a life on the money that is from the one that took your little ones away it would sit right up there as justice. As well as knowing that when he comes out (because lets face it life is only 24 years) he will have nothing.

Isn't that revenge rather than justice?

 

I can understand you putting yourself in the parents' shoes and thinking about what you'd want if you were them - but that's exactly why the victims of crime should not decide sentences. If they did the prisons would be full of people serving life.

[Vaughany]

2 kids paid the price indeed, but will giving him 15 years bring them back? Nope. Will 30 years bring them back? Nope. He's gonna learn a lesson and as Jake said, i seriously doubt he'll drive a car again let alone drink and drive. Depending how remorseful he is then he's got to live with what he's done as long as he's breathing and that *should* be the biggest punishment for him. Locking him up for years on end won't really solve much else.

 

It is not about if he will drink and drive again, it is about he shouldnt of done it this time. I have 2 children aged 6 and 9, it sickens me to think this could of been my kids. The parents will suffer for the rest of their lives.

 

The sentence should of been far worse especially when you consider there were various reports stating he was snaking all over the motorway at speeds in excess of 90mph. Drink and driving is careless, forget all the adverts saying dont drink and drive, hard sentences is the key to stopping this.

[Vaughany]

Agree 100%

 

Remember that this bloke admitted guilt, he didn't claim innocence. At the end of the day had he wanted to, he could have claimed diminished responsibility (jet lag, fiance's affair + lack of sleep) and with a very good solicitor/barrister might have sneaked it....

 

What will prision teach this man?

 

Oh and you are not allowed to send a person to prision to send a message to others as you have to try a person on the facts of the crime alone.

 

Finally, as sick as it sounds, I am quite glad the boys died rather than living but with very serious injuries. I was working on a case today where the young lad survived but he was so brain damaged his life is just a prison sentence.

 

I wonder if he pleaded guilty on the advice of his highly paid lawyer, i.e if you plead not guilty and get found guilty, the sentence will be far worse. I can guarantee he wouldnt of pleaded guilty if the lawyer reckoned he could get off of the charge.

 

At the end of the day, the guy was a p**ck, he had been on the piss and decided to drive and as a result he killed kids two young children and ruined several people lives. Anyway you look at it, he was at fault, if he was not drunk and driving the kids would be alive. No amittigating circumstances, no one else to blame, all of his own doing, 7 years is ridiculous, he will be out in 2 years and will probably be playing pro football again within 3 years.

 

On a another note, wasnt this the guy who was involved in the dont drink and drive campaign, I wonder how much is agent got him paid for doing that!

[Jake]

I'm not talking about speeding, rather drink driving and using a phone.

 

I do speed occasionally, only on a motorway and in a quick burst then I slow down again.

 

So somebody who answers their mobile phone while driving should have their life ruined with a significant jail sentence and a massive financial penalty?

But it's alright for you to speed?

 

I've never used the phone whilst driving since the new law was introduced.

Really? Never? Not one answered call? Be honest.

 

I could've had a few lagers at my brother in laws house the other day. He gave me a full glass which was maybe half a pint, I only drank half and poured the rest away when he wasn't looking.

Why did you do that? Is he not aware of your draconian views on motoring offences.

[Kopite]

It is not about if he will drink and drive again, it is about he shouldnt of done it this time. I have 2 children aged 6 and 9, it sickens me to think this could of been my kids. The parents will suffer for the rest of their lives.

 

The sentence should of been far worse especially when you consider there were various reports stating he was snaking all over the motorway at speeds in excess of 90mph. Drink and driving is careless, forget all the adverts saying dont drink and drive, hard sentences is the key to stopping this.

 

But what'd you consider to be an appropriate sentence here? What about people who cause death through speeding, should they go to jail for 20+ years as well? Yes the goalkeeper made the choice to drink and drive and has to be punished. But to put it in the same bracket as premeditated murder etc isn't the way forward IMO.

If someone on this forum accelerates over the speed limit in their supra, spins and hits another car coming the other way and kills 2 kids then, what should happen to them? It was their choice to floor it in the car so shouldn't it be treated in the same way?

[merckx]

So somebody who answers their mobile phone while driving should have their life ruined with a significant jail sentence and a massive financial penalty?

The reason why people still do these things is because the punishments aren't severe enough, there needs to be a deterrent. Maybe I did overstate what the punishments should be but there has to be a significant increase over what they are now with a publicity campaign.

 

Speeding isn't good either but I only do it on motorways when there's very little traffic about which is very often the case where I live. I've barely gone over the speed limit in recent years. It wouldn't particularly bother me if they increased the penalties for this too, I would just have to slow down and live with it like eveyone else.

 

Really? Never? Not one answered call? Be honest.

I haven't and I drive a lot. A few years ago I used to have a look to see who's calling and then put the phone down on the seat, I don't do that anymore.

[Vaughany]

But what'd you consider to be an appropriate sentence here? What about people who cause death through speeding, should they go to jail for 20+ years as well? Yes the goalkeeper made the choice to drink and drive and has to be punished. But to put it in the same bracket as premeditated murder etc isn't the way forward IMO.

If someone on this forum accelerates over the speed limit in their supra, spins and hits another car coming the other way and kills 2 kids then, what should happen to them? It was their choice to floor it in the car so shouldn't it be treated in the same way?

 

An appropriate sentence for me would be serving at least 7 years, an appropriate sentence for the mother and father would I am sure be live. I feel that sentences should be set based on circumstance. This case is not a blow out at 70mph which resulted in a collision and injuries/deaths.

 

As for the speeding, you must consider each case on the individual circumstance, speeding at 80mph is certaintly different to speeding at 140mph. Dont get me wrong we have all exceeded the speed limit at some time to varying degrees. What I feel is, we are all adults and if we decide to break the law, we should accept the penalty whatever that is.

 

Causing a death thgrough iresponsible driving be it speeding or drinking is wrong, if this happens to me I must accept the penalty whatever that is. What I am saying is speeding, being twice over the limit and causing the death of two children should have a stiffer sentence that 7 years, out in 3 and a half years is wrong.

 

What message does this send to the law breakers out there and amongst us?

[Shadow Beast]

Does the fact he had a few quid and a nice car bother you? I can't really understand what that's got to do with it.

Do you think he should go to prison for life, for the accident or for the drink driving?

Isn't that revenge rather than justice?

 

I can understand you putting yourself in the parents' shoes and thinking about what you'd want if you were them - but that's exactly why the victims of crime should not decide sentences. If they did the prisons would be full of people serving life.

 

no that doesn't bother me, every body is entitled to earn money and drive nice cars, but it appears to me having watched the news over the last few years that these footballers seem to think that they are something special, walking in or out of court looking smug for various cases.

 

I just wish this judicial system we have in this country would for once make a proper job of sentencing someone, he should go to prison for life for both, they go hand in hand, the accident would not of been caused had he not of been drunk. Therefore the sentence should IMO of reflected this, causing the death of 2 children by hitting there car whilst asleep at the wheel,(oh and speeding) and causing death of 2 children whilst in charge of a vehicle whilst drunk.

 

Richie

[Scoboblio]

What message does this send to the law breakers out there and amongst us?

 

Spending any time in jail, let alone 7 years is surely enough of a deterant for the non-criminal amongst us. Does anyone really think that some people will read that story, then think "well, because I might only spend 7 years in jail, I'll risk drink driving, if it was 15 years I might think twice.......".

 

The justice system shouldn't be about 'sending out a message' it should be about justice for the crime. If you were caught speeding slightly over the limit, would you like to be banned so the justice system can 'send out a message'? Bit unfair when you look at it like that isn't it?

[Snooze]

Shouldn't the punishment (which I tend to agree should only be high as a deterrent - it doesn't really affect the purpotrator) be the same for all drink drivers, regardless as to whether the result is a death or not? By differentiating the two, that's like suggesting there are safe and unsafe times when you can drink and drive!

 

Oh - and the mobile phone thing is a bit silly - whilst I agree that nobody should be doing anything which involves looking down at a phone to dial or similar, just using a mobile phone only actually involves (a) taking one hand off the wheel and (b) focusing on a conversation rather than on driving. These things you're allowed to do under other circumstances.

eg. if I take one hand off the wheel and sit on it for two minutes whilst having a conversation with someone in the back seat, that's fine - but if I take one hand off the wheel and hold it to my ear (with a phone in it) for two minutes whilst having a conversation down the phone, that's bad!

Seems inconsistent to me.

[Gaz6002]

I've never used the phone whilst driving since the new law was introduced. I could've had a few lagers at my brother in laws house the other day. He gave me a full glass which was maybe half a pint, I only drank half and poured the rest away when he wasn't looking.

 

It makes me laugh how people get on their high horse about this and then say they'd never do something AFTER a law is passed but would before. Hypocritical much? If it's wrong to do something then you shouldn't do it. Use your own head to make decisions.

[Charlotte]

Therefore the sentence should IMO of reflected this, causing the death of 2 children by hitting there car whilst asleep at the wheel,(oh and speeding) and causing death of 2 children whilst in charge of a vehicle whilst drunk.

 

Richie

 

Incidentally the man who caused the Selby train crash by falling asleep at the wheel and veering off the road got 5 years, and that was 10 people.

 

Let's face it, the man's life is ruined, he will live with the guilt for life, not to mention the fact that he's probably just a normal guy who will be spending time with lots of other people who are actual criminals. It's a sad story for everyone involved, however the term of his sentence will not change that.

[Charlotte]

Shouldn't the punishment (which I tend to agree should only be high as a deterrent - it doesn't really affect the purpotrator) be the same for all drink drivers, regardless as to whether the result is a death or not? By differentiating the two, that's like suggesting there are safe and unsafe times when you can drink and drive!

 

http://www.mkivsupra.net/vbb/showthread.php?t=155418&highlight=drink+drive

[SBDJ]

Maybe the law needs to be changed so that drinking any amount and driving would be a criminal offence with a significant jail sentence and a massive financial penalty, the same goes for using a mobile phone. Offenders should have their lives ruined because that's what will happen to their victims, they're playing russian roulette with innocent members of the public which is intolerable!

 

I could've had a few lagers at my brother in laws house the other day. He gave me a full glass which was maybe half a pint, I only drank half and poured the rest away when he wasn't looking.

 

...and then drove home I assume? By your own original post you should have been locked up and had the key thrown away

[marbleapple]

The reason why people still do these things is because the punishments aren't severe enough, there needs to be a deterrent. Maybe I did overstate what the punishments should be but there has to be a significant increase over what they are now with a publicity campaign.

 

Its a proven fact that the level of punishment is not an effective method of deterent primarily because in most cases the deterent is only considered after the crime has taken place (so the scientists and boffins say).

 

A more effective method to deter people is to have society percieve such actions as unacceptable and thus through groupthink we follow like sheep. THe government have used this technique very well with drink driving over the past few years.

[marbleapple]

his bank account should be frozen and any money in it should be used to compensate the family.

 

richie

 

 

Personally I would prefer to claim against his insurance company... they have a hell of a lot more money than a 2nd rate goal keeper.

 

I am sure there will be civil cases on this matter taking place as we speak.

[Shadow Beast]

 

Personally I would prefer to claim against his insurance company... they have a hell of a lot more money than a 2nd rate goal keeper.

 

I am sure there will be civil cases on this matter taking place as we speak.

 

My way of thinking is any modifications that have to be carried out at there home, or vehicle to accommodate injuries sustained from this idiot he should pay for them.

 

If his insurance company pays out, then they will get that money back somehow, and i'll tell you how, the likes of you and I will pay for it when our premiums go up on our next renewal (don't even get me started on that subject),

 

Richie

[Vaughany]

Spending any time in jail, let alone 7 years is surely enough of a deterant for the non-criminal amongst us. Does anyone really think that some people will read that story, then think "well, because I might only spend 7 years in jail, I'll risk drink driving, if it was 15 years I might think twice.......".

 

The justice system shouldn't be about 'sending out a message' it should be about justice for the crime. If you were caught speeding slightly over the limit, would you like to be banned so the justice system can 'send out a message'? Bit unfair when you look at it like that isn't it?

 

I take your point mate but certain elements of people will committ crimes based on the length of penalty if they caught. For example if the penalty for armed robbery was 7days, then I would be sure there would be far more armed robberies taking place.

 

If they introduce that legislation where people who carry knives get sentences, i would be surprised if the amount of people who are softer criminals who carrying knives doesnt fall. The harden criminal will also committ crimes regardless of the sentence, what the justice system must do is deter one off crimes by the softer criminals so this can/may deter them from becoming a repaet offender.

 

Lets face it, the chances are that this guy has been a serial drink/driver, this time he messed up and has to face the punishment, what i feel is that 3 years actual time is not long enough based on the outcome of his stupid behaviour.

[Charlotte]

My way of thinking is any modifications that have to be carried out at there home, or vehicle to accommodate injuries sustained from this idiot he should pay for them.

 

So what about his family? Do they get to suffer because of his actions that weren't their fault?

[imi]

He doesn't pay any tax. He's been unemployed since (and because of) the accident.

 

Oh really, then they should have hung him by his bollocks

 

I couldn't care less about him TBH but I feel for the parents and two little lads that died

 

Exactly. on a serious note, if it had been an accident then a suitable prison sentence would be in order, drinking and driving - personally, he should get the DP - as in death penalty.