Hit-n-Run - You'll want to punch the screen

pitkin2020

Sarah all that tells you is the case No, and whether its concluded or not it doesn't tell you the offence so y. I guess you would have to cross reference every case number and see what the crime was to get an answer as to who the offender was and what the sentencing was.

pitkin2020

pendulum wrote: »

Courts aren't serving their purpose well enough. Punishments are too soft. Politicians keep making promises about harsher sentencing which never materialise. I can't really blame people who don't want to just sit back and accept that like you're happy to.

However, by "proper justice", I meant naming and shaming. Perhaps the guys at 4chan will see fit to show everyone on her street, her family, and her employer what she did. I think that kind of extra judicial punishment is acceptable. I wasn't suggesting they physically string her up to a lamppost or harm her (although I've seen others suggest similar, and even though she didn't care about the harm she caused to the victim she run over).

Do you feel bad that she may be subjected to this kind of treatment Flyboy? If so, you should watch the video again and remember who the guilty one is.


I don't think they would have gone to the effort of masking the number plate in the video if it couldn't be read.

The original video, before it was uploaded to video sharing sites and compressed in the process, was probably even clearer.

Whilst I don't disagree with you a line has to be drawn. I agree the courts are soft, they have always been soft though. If your going to go to the point of dealing out justice after the courts then there is no point of having a court case. Whilst this offender obviously didn't give a toss and mowed a man down basically, what if it had been someone who had a medical condition lets say. Why should that person be punished twice??

the courts have dealt out a punishment they believe to be adequate so thats that. If you take it after the court where is the line drawn to who should and shouldn't be made public!! Who decides if the punishment the court dishes out is adequate. If she had got 5 years in prison for this incident there will still be people who say it wasn't enough and would still want her named and shamed.

At the end of the day she has committed the crime and has been dealt a punishment which she will have to pay for. Maybe those who spend all the time trying to name and shame should concentrate their efforts on changing the sentencing laws.

BTW i'm not saying I agree or disagree with the punishment she received but we shouldn't be a bunch of vigilantes dishing out punishments after the courts where only a few facts are really known outside of the court!

scheming_gypsy

If she pleaded guilty to a motoring offence.... how come she was apparently sentenced at crown court in front of a judge and jury? wouldn't it be a magistrates court?

Woody._2

scheming_gypsy wrote: »

If she pleaded guilty to a motoring offence.... how come she was apparently sentenced at crown court in front of a judge and jury? wouldn't it be a magistrates court?

Too serious for the magistrates to impose a penalty?

It happens.

scheming_gypsy

Woody. wrote: »

Too serious for the magistrates to impose a penalty?

It happens.

she barely got a sentence though and the bloke survived (£500 compensation).

A quick google shows
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-110277/Couple-court-girls-hit-run-death.html - magistrates court for hit and run death

http://www.yorkpress.co.uk/news/seanhamilton/8213412.York_hit_and_run_suspect_in_court/ - magistrates court for hit and run death

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/1495765/Man-in-court-on-hit-and-run-murder-charge.html - magistrates


There's a crown court one here but that's 'wounding with intent' http://www.leaderlive.co.uk/news/100263/man-in-court-over-flintshire-hit-and-run.aspx so it sounds like he aimed for him

Flyboy152

scheming_gypsy wrote: »

If she pleaded guilty to a motoring offence.... how come she was apparently sentenced at crown court in front of a judge and jury? wouldn't it be a magistrates court?

Because the charge would have been dangerous driving. This is not a strict liability offence and carries a maximum sentence above which a District Court can impose.

Flyboy152

scheming_gypsy wrote: »

she barely got a sentence though and the bloke survived (£500 compensation).

A quick google shows
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-110277/Couple-court-girls-hit-run-death.html - magistrates court for hit and run death

http://www.yorkpress.co.uk/news/seanhamilton/8213412.York_hit_and_run_suspect_in_court/ - magistrates court for hit and run death

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/1495765/Man-in-court-on-hit-and-run-murder-charge.html - magistrates


There's a crown court one here but that's 'wounding with intent' http://www.leaderlive.co.uk/news/100263/man-in-court-over-flintshire-hit-and-run.aspx so it sounds like he aimed for him

They are all pre-trial hearings, where the defendants get to enter their pleas, to establish if the charges are correctly applied and to apply any bail or remand conditions.

From the York Press link:

Magistrates deemed the case too serious for them to deal with and committed it to York Crown Court.

scheming_gypsy

cheers, i didn't read through them all the way; but apparently magistrate courts can give up to 6 months and then refer it to crown court if they don't think that's enough. Although it's a bit of a waste of time referring it just to give a suspended.

happy_lass

heartless b itch should of had the book thrown at her. What about the lives that she has wrecked with her stupid actions ?????

scheming_gypsy

happy_lass wrote: »

What about the lives that she has wrecked with her stupid actions ?????

well he survived so there's not many wrecked lives.