Woman charged with killing teenage cyclist while over drink drive limit

This is another interesting one. I would like to compare and contrast if there is any difference between the sentence handed out if this was two young pedestrians versus the same lads on their bikes. PLEASE tell me that there is no difference!! If there is a difference then we are all right and there is a massive prejudice against us cycling scum!

I really really wish we could be treated equally but the cyclist racism we are all reacting against is just awful! I will be riding in Spain next week - I know I will be treated with respect and have a great time!

I'm willing to bet that she does no jail time. I cannot see a judge sending a 67 year old to jail for any amount of time regardless of the circumstances. I'm expecting the phrase " she has suffered enough" to pop up before a ban, 3 years, a fine £500 & some community service or suspended sentence. The family of the young lad will suffer for the rest of their lives but will not be able to do a thing about it. Welcome to "justice" English style.

And too many magistrates are crazy old upper middle class bats more concerned with how good people's addresses are than the facts of the case. They may well empathise with a 67-year-old drink-driver more than a teenager on a bike.

"drink driving should be regarded as attempted murder"

+1 for that. Unfortunately the CPS seem to have sent another case to Magistrate's Court, because the driver "carelessly" drank and drove, and drove her car into someone's child, killing them. Whoops.

STRING...HER...UP. NO EXCUSES. DRUNK AT WHEEL. VEHICULAR MANSLAUGHTER AND GRIEVOUS BODILY HARM.

Repeats to self "The death penalty is still wrong". Several f***ing times. Difficult to see her getting off this one without a substantial spell inside.

I do hope Owen is right what consistently amzes me iz the number of repeat offenders on our roads

As Owen said, this could actually result in a genuine conviction but I do hope the sentencing properly reflects the incident. Too often drivers just aren't getting sentences that are commensurate with their actions.

To explain, the offence of causing death by careless driving whilst under the influence was introduced because dangerous driving has a high threshold of proof and offenders were only being convicted of one offence for each incident, more often drink drive as its the more serious and simple. This offence is more serious still. If she clipped someone because of inattentiveness that's not dangerous, it's careless. If she did the same thing whilst drunk the individual action is now much more serious and she CAN be sentenced more harshly. We'll see if she is…
As for manslaughter, you may be right, but juries (that's you and me folks) are historically reluctant to convict of what is perceived as a serious offence for driving offences. In truth, she's likely to get a similar sentence anyway.

Updesh The sooner the law and society at large equate the duty of care when using a gun, a chainsaw or other dangerous device with an equivalent responsibility when using a motor vehicle, the faster we'll eradicate such inequitable outcomes.

You were driving a vehicle which caused injury or damage then you carry a liability for the outcome, not necessarily the event. This has in fact been reflected in motoring law since 1903, and is now seen from the wording of Section 170 of the Road Traffic Act, even when someone is injured of property damaged with no actual contact taking place - the wording sets out that it is the PRESENCE of a motor vehicle causing damage or injury. Worth remembering if you are forced off the road and can nail the keeper, or driver with clear evidence of this.

I firmly believe that drink driving should be regarded as attempted murder, even if you don't injure anyone

It's the same as carrying a gun. And if you kill someone - same sentence as gun crime

You can't accidentally get drunk and drive

She'll probably get more a sentence for the DUI than causing death.

Drink and drive costs lives! She's GUILTY of Manslaughter at least; and certainly premeditated dangerous driving. it's time for the law to get tough with people who cause death, because of their selfish indulgence.

They are more interested in charging for DUI than a childs life Nice one CPS lets hope it doesn't happen to any of your family. No doubt the insurance company will blame the child for not wearing hi-viz clothing

This is tragic - but how is driving when over the limit 'careless'. Did you carelessly drink that 5th pint then carelessly pick up your keys and carelessly drive off after hitting a cyclist? They're all deliberate acts.
CPS under-charging yet again?

Quote:

East Riding Council organised a group, the B1230 Howden to North Cave Corridor Safety Strategy

So they aren't doing anything then! A talking shop to use up any budget and not changes because "there's no money left"