Wednesday 09 Jan 2008 @ 16:30
Sentencing Council
Sentencing Council
 Printable version
|
 E-mail this to a friend
|
Council Consults on Guideline for Sentencers dealing with Driving Offences Resulting
Drivers who kill after flagrantly ignoring the rules of the road and disregard the danger they pose to others should be given jail terms of at least seven years, recommends a draft guideline published today for consultation.
The Sentencing Guidelines Council recommends that prolonged, persistent and deliberate bad driving and consumption of substantial amounts of drugs or alcohol should put offenders into the most serious category of causing death by dangerous driving.
A combination of these features of dangerous driving – particularly if accompanied by aggravating factors, failing to stop or a very bad driving record - should attract sentences towards the maximum term of 14 years.
The Council’s consultation guideline covers four offences: causing death by dangerous driving, causing death by careless driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs, causing death by careless driving and causing death by driving: unlicensed, disqualified or uninsured drivers. The latter two offences were introduced by the Road Safety Act 2006 but are not yet in force.
Guidance from the Court of Appeal in relation to sentencing of the two existing offences (which was based on advice from the Sentencing Advisory Panel) has been fully reviewed. For most of the offences, judges and magistrates will need to assess how bad the driving was and the degree of danger that it created.
Other issues – largely related to the offender’s behaviour – are treated as aggravating factors.
The Council advises a robust approach to the use of mobile phones; the fact that an offender was avoidably distracted by a hand-held mobile phone when the offence was committed will always make an offence more serious, the guideline says. Reading or composing text messages over a period of time will be a gross avoidable distraction likely to result in an offence being in the highest level of seriousness.
In dealing with cases of causing death by careless driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs the proposed guideline gives greater weight to the degree of intoxication of offenders. Sentences for cases of careless driving just falling short of dangerous driving should have a starting point of 15 months’ imprisonment, the Council recommends.
In cases involving “momentary inattention” and no aggravating factors offenders should be given a community sentence which could include a curfew requirement. Fines are not likely to be appropriate.
The guideline recommends a different approach to cases involving driving unlicensed, disqualified or uninsured. As the offence may not involve any fault in the offender’s standard of driving, Parliament has set down a lower maximum penalty of two years’ imprisonment. Here in the absence of any additional aggravating factors relating to the driving the level of seriousness is guided by the nature of the unlawfulness of the offender’s driving, with driving while disqualified being the most serious category,
The starting point where the driver was disqualified is 12 months imprisonment. The Council recommends offenders should be sentenced to at least 36 weeks even if there are strong mitigating factors, such as making the decision to drive because of a genuine emergency.
The guideline again recommends that fines are not likely to be appropriate sentences in dealing with any of these offences; where non-custodial sentences are considered appropriate, a community order should be used.
Sentencers are also reminded that for each causing death by driving offence, disqualification is a mandatory part of the sentence. The duration of disqualification orders, for which there is no statutory maximum, should allow for the length of any custodial period in order to ensure that they have the desired impact.
The Council drew up the consultation guideline following advice from the Sentencing Advisory Panel which carried out an extensive consultation including commissioning detailed independent research to test public opinion on sentences for the offences.
The research confirmed that sentencing in this area provokes strong reactions but it also demonstrated that the Panel’s proposals were broadly acceptable to the majority of participants.
Researchers also interviewed a number of relatives of victims and heard details of how the court process can often add to the pain they are experiencing. Council chairman Lord Chief Justice Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers has sent copies of the research to key individuals and organisations including the Courts Service, the Crown Prosecution Service, the Attorney General and the Justice Secretary to draw attention to these issues.
Deputy Chairman of the Council Sir Igor Judge said: “Sentencing in cases where death results from the misuse of a car on the road is always extremely sensitive. Obviously the consequences are appalling. Very heavy sentences are appropriate where the standard of driving involves flagrant disregard of the safety of other road users.
“But sometimes death results from a relatively minor error of judgement, to which every motorist, however experienced, is liable from time to time. Cases like these present sentencing judges with very difficult decisions, because the gravest consequences have to be balanced against varying levels of culpability.”
Fellow Council member Peter Neyroud added: “Parliament has established the maximum punishments available to the courts; the Council’s role is to provide guidance to judges and magistrates working within the statutory framework in order to support a just and consistent approach across the country.
“The impact of these recommendations is that there will be more custodial sentences and community sentences for causing death by careless driving where in the past offenders would almost certainly have received a fine.”
Notes to editors
The consultation guideline is available on the SGC website (http://www.sentencing-guidelines.gov.uk/) along with:
• a copy of a covering letter being sent to consultees;
• advice to the Council from the Sentencing Advisory Panel; and
• the report of research commissioned by the Panel into attitudes to sentencing of
offences involving death by driving.
Printed copies may be obtained from: the Sentencing Guidelines Secretariat, 4th Floor, 8-10 Great George Street, London SW1P 3AE (tel: 020 7084 8130).
The consultation closes on Monday 10th March 2008.
About the Council
The Sentencing Guidelines Council (SGC) was set up in 2004 in order to frame guidelines to assist courts in England and Wales dealing with criminal cases.
Created by statute, the SGC and the Sentencing Advisory Panel are independent nondepartmental public bodies sponsored by the Home Office and the Ministry of Justice. They share a joint Secretariat.
The Council is chaired by the Lord Chief Justice, Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers, with seven other members from the judiciary and four members who between them bring experience of policing, criminal prosecution, criminal defence, and the interests of victims of crime. Judicial members are appointed by the Lord Chief Justice: non-judicial members by the Justice Minister.
The other members of the Council are: Sir Igor Judge (Deputy Chairman); Lord Justice David Latham; Mr Justice Christopher Pitchford; HH Judge Peter Beaumont; HH Judge Michael Mettyear; Judge Timothy Workman; Malathy Sitaram JP; Anthony Edwards (Solicitor); Sir Ken Macdonald QC (Director of Public Prosecutions); Chief Constable Peter Neyroud; and Teresa Reynolds (interests of victims).
Meetings of the Council are also attended by Christine Stewart, the Director of Law and Sentencing Policy in the National Offender Management Service, and by the Chairman of the Sentencing Advisory Panel, Professor Andrew Ashworth.
The Sentencing Advisory Panel
The Sentencing Advisory Panel is an independent advisory and consultative body created in 1999 and now constituted under section 169 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003.
The Panel submits its advice to the Sentencing Guidelines Council. The Panel’s advice concerns general sentencing principles and sentencing of specific offences as well as allocation (the choice of court venue – magistrates’ court or the Crown Court). Chaired by Professor Andrew Ashworth, the Panel has 14 members.
Details of current membership can be found at:
The Sentencing Guidelines Council recommends that prolonged, persistent and deliberate bad driving and consumption of substantial amounts of drugs or alcohol should put offenders into the most serious category of causing death by dangerous driving.
A combination of these features of dangerous driving – particularly if accompanied by aggravating factors, failing to stop or a very bad driving record - should attract sentences towards the maximum term of 14 years.
The Council’s consultation guideline covers four offences: causing death by dangerous driving, causing death by careless driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs, causing death by careless driving and causing death by driving: unlicensed, disqualified or uninsured drivers. The latter two offences were introduced by the Road Safety Act 2006 but are not yet in force.
Guidance from the Court of Appeal in relation to sentencing of the two existing offences (which was based on advice from the Sentencing Advisory Panel) has been fully reviewed. For most of the offences, judges and magistrates will need to assess how bad the driving was and the degree of danger that it created.
Other issues – largely related to the offender’s behaviour – are treated as aggravating factors.
The Council advises a robust approach to the use of mobile phones; the fact that an offender was avoidably distracted by a hand-held mobile phone when the offence was committed will always make an offence more serious, the guideline says. Reading or composing text messages over a period of time will be a gross avoidable distraction likely to result in an offence being in the highest level of seriousness.
In dealing with cases of causing death by careless driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs the proposed guideline gives greater weight to the degree of intoxication of offenders. Sentences for cases of careless driving just falling short of dangerous driving should have a starting point of 15 months’ imprisonment, the Council recommends.
In cases involving “momentary inattention” and no aggravating factors offenders should be given a community sentence which could include a curfew requirement. Fines are not likely to be appropriate.
The guideline recommends a different approach to cases involving driving unlicensed, disqualified or uninsured. As the offence may not involve any fault in the offender’s standard of driving, Parliament has set down a lower maximum penalty of two years’ imprisonment. Here in the absence of any additional aggravating factors relating to the driving the level of seriousness is guided by the nature of the unlawfulness of the offender’s driving, with driving while disqualified being the most serious category,
The starting point where the driver was disqualified is 12 months imprisonment. The Council recommends offenders should be sentenced to at least 36 weeks even if there are strong mitigating factors, such as making the decision to drive because of a genuine emergency.
The guideline again recommends that fines are not likely to be appropriate sentences in dealing with any of these offences; where non-custodial sentences are considered appropriate, a community order should be used.
Sentencers are also reminded that for each causing death by driving offence, disqualification is a mandatory part of the sentence. The duration of disqualification orders, for which there is no statutory maximum, should allow for the length of any custodial period in order to ensure that they have the desired impact.
The Council drew up the consultation guideline following advice from the Sentencing Advisory Panel which carried out an extensive consultation including commissioning detailed independent research to test public opinion on sentences for the offences.
The research confirmed that sentencing in this area provokes strong reactions but it also demonstrated that the Panel’s proposals were broadly acceptable to the majority of participants.
Researchers also interviewed a number of relatives of victims and heard details of how the court process can often add to the pain they are experiencing. Council chairman Lord Chief Justice Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers has sent copies of the research to key individuals and organisations including the Courts Service, the Crown Prosecution Service, the Attorney General and the Justice Secretary to draw attention to these issues.
Deputy Chairman of the Council Sir Igor Judge said: “Sentencing in cases where death results from the misuse of a car on the road is always extremely sensitive. Obviously the consequences are appalling. Very heavy sentences are appropriate where the standard of driving involves flagrant disregard of the safety of other road users.
“But sometimes death results from a relatively minor error of judgement, to which every motorist, however experienced, is liable from time to time. Cases like these present sentencing judges with very difficult decisions, because the gravest consequences have to be balanced against varying levels of culpability.”
Fellow Council member Peter Neyroud added: “Parliament has established the maximum punishments available to the courts; the Council’s role is to provide guidance to judges and magistrates working within the statutory framework in order to support a just and consistent approach across the country.
“The impact of these recommendations is that there will be more custodial sentences and community sentences for causing death by careless driving where in the past offenders would almost certainly have received a fine.”
Notes to editors
The consultation guideline is available on the SGC website (http://www.sentencing-guidelines.gov.uk/) along with:
• a copy of a covering letter being sent to consultees;
• advice to the Council from the Sentencing Advisory Panel; and
• the report of research commissioned by the Panel into attitudes to sentencing of
offences involving death by driving.
Printed copies may be obtained from: the Sentencing Guidelines Secretariat, 4th Floor, 8-10 Great George Street, London SW1P 3AE (tel: 020 7084 8130).
The consultation closes on Monday 10th March 2008.
About the Council
The Sentencing Guidelines Council (SGC) was set up in 2004 in order to frame guidelines to assist courts in England and Wales dealing with criminal cases.
Created by statute, the SGC and the Sentencing Advisory Panel are independent nondepartmental public bodies sponsored by the Home Office and the Ministry of Justice. They share a joint Secretariat.
The Council is chaired by the Lord Chief Justice, Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers, with seven other members from the judiciary and four members who between them bring experience of policing, criminal prosecution, criminal defence, and the interests of victims of crime. Judicial members are appointed by the Lord Chief Justice: non-judicial members by the Justice Minister.
The other members of the Council are: Sir Igor Judge (Deputy Chairman); Lord Justice David Latham; Mr Justice Christopher Pitchford; HH Judge Peter Beaumont; HH Judge Michael Mettyear; Judge Timothy Workman; Malathy Sitaram JP; Anthony Edwards (Solicitor); Sir Ken Macdonald QC (Director of Public Prosecutions); Chief Constable Peter Neyroud; and Teresa Reynolds (interests of victims).
Meetings of the Council are also attended by Christine Stewart, the Director of Law and Sentencing Policy in the National Offender Management Service, and by the Chairman of the Sentencing Advisory Panel, Professor Andrew Ashworth.
The Sentencing Advisory Panel
The Sentencing Advisory Panel is an independent advisory and consultative body created in 1999 and now constituted under section 169 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003.
The Panel submits its advice to the Sentencing Guidelines Council. The Panel’s advice concerns general sentencing principles and sentencing of specific offences as well as allocation (the choice of court venue – magistrates’ court or the Crown Court). Chaired by Professor Andrew Ashworth, the Panel has 14 members.
Details of current membership can be found at:
http://www.sentencing-guidelines.gov.uk/about/sap/index.html
 FINAL.gif)
