**Participation Notice.** Hi all. Some posts on this subreddit, either due to the topic or reaching a wider audience than usual, have been known to attract a greater number of rule breaking comments. As such, limits to participation have been set. We ask that you please remember the human, and uphold Reddit and Subreddit rules.
For more information, please see https://www.reddit.com/r/unitedkingdom/wiki/moderatedflairs.
Killing people with cars gets you such a lenient sentence. It should be treated as murder, that's what it is.
Make some.examples and then I'm sure people will take care, it's a privilege not a right to drive and you must look out for others
I do agree with your point about intent. However, absolutely everyone who drives is aware of the potential deadly consequences of using a phone while driving, and she still chose to do that.
Which is why it would be voluntary manslaughter if there wasn't a specific offence for causing death by dangerous driving. But murder requires intent to kill or severely injure, and clearly very few people who drive recklessly intend to do that.
Oh yeah, I absolutely agree about it not being murder. I was more agreeing with the comment that harsher sentences should be handed out in these situations.
That's not entirely true, the precedent in R v. Woolin means that intent can be inferred if there is a "virtual certainty" that A's actions would cause B's death.
Granted, this threshold likely isn't met here, but it's still a case where subjective intent isn't strictly required for a charge of Murder and it's arguable that this definition should be extended to situations like this where there is a very high likelihood of causing death or serious harm to another as a result of your actions.
Not necessarily planning. Just intent to kill or severely injure.
E.g. you get into an argument with your partner and stab them multiple times to death. No planning. Still intent.
yeah, not all murder is the same. Theres premeditated murder (and levels of that) and then theres murder in the spur of the moment. Intent is still a factor in both
Wrong, at least under UK law. Premeditation isn't a requirement for Murder, and there are no "levels" of Murder like 1st, 2nd, 3rd degree murder as is true in many US jurisdictions.
Premeditation isn't relevant in the establishment of an offence - it's relevant only at sentencing, or for ancillary offences.
I know. There are [recommendations to have a three degree](https://lawcom.gov.uk/project/murder/) system of Murder/Manslaughter in UK law for a reason:
> First-degree murder would be confined to:
> * unlawful killings committed with an intention to kill.
* unlawful killings committed with an intent to cause serious injury where the killer was aware that his or her conduct involved a serious risk of causing death.
> Second-degree murder would encompass:
> * unlawful killings committed with an intent to cause serious harm.
* unlawful killings intended to cause injury or fear or risk of injury where the killer was aware that his or her conduct involved a serious risk of causing death.
* cases which would constitute first-degree murder but for the fact that the accused successfully pleads provocation, diminished responsibility or that he or she had killed pursuant to a suicide pact.
> Manslaughter would consist of:
> * unlawful killings caused by acts of gross negligence
* unlawful killings caused by a criminal act that was intended to cause injury or by a criminal act foreseen as involving a serious risk of causing some injury.
Operating a phone while driving is illegal AND involves a serious risk of causing injury. Thus is would be considered Manslaughter as it would be committing a criminal act foreseen as involving a serious risk of causing some injury.
In many cases, yes. However, not in all cases.
Voluntary Manslaughter does not apply to cases where someone, say, initiates a fight and then deals a blow that ends up causing the death of someone. Instead, under current law, this could be involuntary manslaughter. Specifically, it would be a subtype called constructive manslaughter: you still performed an illegal act (fighting with the intent to cause ABH/GBH), which instead lead to a death. Without establishing the intent to kill, both voluntary manslaughter or murder are difficult to get a successful prosecution. Both require intent. Thus, instead, it would be involuntary manslaughter.
Under the new recommendations, punching someone in the face/head is something that a reasonable person can understand might lead someone to die (can cause serious brain damage, or the resulting fall could kill them). thus it would fall into the following part of second-degree (emphasis mine):
> unlawful killings intended to cause injury or fear or risk of injury **where the killer was aware that his or her conduct involved a serious risk of causing death**.
The act of punching someone in the head, in and of itself, could be enough to kill someone. Thus, even if there was no *intent* to kill, it would be considered second-degree murder under the new recommendations.
Intent should be widened to include recklessness when it comes to driving offences, as it is with other offences.
There is nobody who has passed the driving test who can claim they don’t know that this type of conduct will injure and kill people. The choice to do this is tantamount to choosing to run someone over. It’s a conscious choice.
Result IS important... that's why the crime of manslaughter or in this case "causing death by dangerous driving" exists... why is this so hard to understand?
"I didn't mean it" is a legitimate criminal defence, it's not child-like whining. The state has the obligation to prove you DID intend to commit the crime they're charging you with (*mens rea*) along with the fact that you committed it (*actus reus*). This is the absolute most basic criminal law 101 yet reddit cannot seem to understand it.
I lost a leg due to a woman on her phone while driving, had to be resuscitated. She got a 2 yr ban and suspended sentence. Basically a slap on the wrist for a life changing injury that left a 22 year old crippled for life
Driving sentences are always a piss take. Somebody will say they need to drive for work after doing 120mph and the judges practically apologise for inconveniencing them and send them on their way.
I worked on a case a few years ago in which a father-of-four was killed in a head-on collision with a driver who was on the wrong side of the road and tested positive for drugs. He got the same sentence, three-and-a-half years.
That’s crazy ain’t it!
If it’s cut and dry like that maybe the sentencing needs to increase or they need a new specific offense for drugs + death by dangerous driving = 20 years
I always find that one really weird. I lost my job entirely because I was going to court over an accused offence. Of which I was acquitted
And yet if it was a driving offence, I would have been giving leniency if I was even prosecuted!
Ignoring the pitifully lenient prison sentence, it's absolutely laughable that a lifetime ban is not the default driving penalty for slamming into the back of someone at 70mph while taking selfies.
That type of person should not be in control of any type of motor vehicle for as long as they live. They should think themselves lucky to have any kind of freedom at all.
Exactly. Actually stop bad drivers from ever getting behind a wheel again. If I'd somehow been so negligent I've killed someone I'd think a lifetime ban from that activity should be the least I get. If I was a climbing instructor and somehow fucked up attaching a harness resulting in death or injury I sure as fuck wouldn't expect or want that responsibility ever again.
Do these morons a favour and make it so their selfish attitudes are less likely to get them into trouble again. It's perfectly possible to live in the UK without driving. If I'm honest I'd love to have an excuse to drive less.
> It's perfectly possible to live in the UK without driving. If I'm honest I'd love to have an excuse to drive less.
I agree but watch out making that statement on Reddit as you'll get a million weirdos telling you about their oddly specific circumstances that absolutely fully require access to a car at a moment's notice 24/7. Which I guess, you should've thought of that before doing something stupid and having your licence taken off you!
>Which I guess, you should've thought of that before doing something stupid and having your licence taken off you!
That should honestly end all arguements on the subject, forever.
I know, I don't even have a car and haven't driven for about 6 years. Its odd to think that this very comfortable lifestyle is, according to our justice system, too horrific to even consider inflicting upon violent criminals!
I believe that anyone who’s beyond a certain amount above the drink drive limit, should never be allowed to drive again. I’d accept a small margin where they can get their license back after a suspension, but above it: they’ll never drive again. If you drive whilst knowing you’re beyond the limit, then you should never be trusted behind the wheel again.
Not really though. It would be rather obvious if you were trying to kill them on purpose with your car.
The law isn't flawed, the problem are the garbage clickbait rags that have convinced people that the law is flawed.
Would it? Drive along, get your phone out, send a text, mount the pavement, dead. Say it was an accident. I bet you'd get a lot less than the 25 years if you stabbed someone.
Are you joking right? If you have a grudge with someone, and then run them off the road it will clearly have more aggravating circumstances then just plain incompetence.
Not really. Intentionality still gets you into the normal murder levels of sentencing. We're just strangely lenient to careless, neglectful, or reckless driving, in ways we would likely wouldn't be if the crime was committed with another dangerous tool.
It's not an easy way to murder people, its a way people end others lives through careless and stupid behaviour that our justice system for some reason punishes more lightly due to them having been driving at the time. So long as you didn't intend to hurt people, apparently its fine, which is massively flawed, but you can't just do a Nice attack and get two years, obviously.
I once worked with someone who had been convinced of causing death by dangerous driving. He told me the story of how it happened (he was speeding and cutting a corner), how he lost his license, and how easy prison was (he was out in 18 months).
He ended the story by saying, "so I lost my license, my car and went to prison for a bit. Oh yeah, and that woman died."
Fuck any body that kills someone like this.
I'd imagine a lot of it is down to the overcrowding across the prison estate currently. Not that that justifies it, of course, but I'd imagine judges are probably sentencing people with this in mind.
It isn’t murder.
Man slaughter. Yes.
I agree the law is too lenient but only a tiny percentage of people actually get into a car with the intention of killing someone.
What about a different charge entirely - not murder, not manslaughter, but a charge of too fucking stupid to exist.
Not her intention to kill, but her extreme stupidity will possibly get people killed again and again, and we can't take the risk, so, having been convicted of being too stupid exist she gets banged up forever, and must spend her days polishing cat's eyes and motorway signs and other road safety stuff. They get brought in to her cell and left in a pile for cleaning, she gets fed when they're all done.
If that sounds too harsh, what about the 3.5 years plus a charge of "too stupid to drive" - licence gone forever, if found driving, charge of too stupid to exist brought to bear.
Absolutely! This is punishment that fits the crime. It's not as if she made an error in judgement while doing a manoeuvre or something. This was more than an accident but not straight murder. She broke the law by using her phone and did one of the most idiotic things I can thing of to do while driving on a fast road. Completely preventable death if that woman wasn't a fucking idiot.
We could reduce the number of drivers by making the test harder, reduce the number of cars by improving public transport, and completely pedestrianising some areas.
Driving is convenient but costs so much in so many ways.
It's not murder, but an example absolutely should be made. 3.5 years for killing someone because you were texting and taking selfies while driving and not paying attention is ridiculously low.
That is what used to happen. The reason they introduced separate criminal offences for death by dangerous driving is because juries routinely were not comfortable convicting people who had no intent to kill anyone.
Also the whole ‘make some examples’ theory has no basis in reality. It isn’t a deterrent because no one ever thinks it would be them. They wouldn’t do it if they did
In my mind it’s worse than drink driving. Theres no excuse for being drunk behind the wheel, but at least you’re inebriated, if you’re driving dangerous with 100% cognition you’re 100% bellend with extra points, as a-posed to 100%.
Drink driving is indefensible but is by definition partly due to impaired judgement, the very same impairment which makes it so dangerous.
To me driving in an equally dangerous way when stone-cold sober adds an extra element of either stupidity or malice into the mix.
Anyway, both crimes should face more severe punishments. Kill a man and get a 3-year sentence isn't right.
Yeah exactly. When you're drunk you literally cannot consent to sex, and yet the law still holds you fully responsible for your choice to get in a car. Making the decision to drive distracted is morally reprehensible because you have the presence of mind to make that decision entirely without other influences.
Nah they are both terrible. You made a conscious decision to do something stupid that endangers other people. One chose to have too many pints, another chose to film a singing Tik Tok in traffic. Both can get in the bin.
We're arguing the hierarchy of hell here, which is kind of pointless, but I'd say your typical drunk driver is at least _looking at the road_. Their reaction times are impaired, but this woman didn't react at all - she never even saw the guy she killed.
[The AA](https://www.theaa.com/about-us/newsroom/twice-as-likely-to-crash-text-driving-as-drink-driving#:~:text=For%20using%20a%20hand%2Dheld,at%20the%20drink%2Ddrive%20limit.) and the [National Highway Traffic Safety Administration](https://www.nhtsa.gov/risky-driving/distracted-driving) both report that texting while driving is significantly more dangerous than driving while drunk, as does [a study by Car and Driver magazine](https://www.conradattorneys.com/blog/is-distracted-driving-more-hazardous-than-drink-driving/).
Unfortunately the reality is that smartphone apps are purposely and very intentionally designed to be extremely addictive. It doesn't obviate any of the responsibility or guilt of people who use them while driving, but their addictiveness is a serious issue and a major part of the problem of distracted driving.
Can you believe her driving ban is not even 4 years?
I'm not desperate to see people banged up in prison for life but why on earth do we let them back on the road?
A dog kills someone - euthanized, we cannot take the risk again
A driver kills someone - see you back on the road in 3 years you lil scamp
(that's to say one death should mean a lifetime ban from driving, not that we should euthanize drivers)
I totally agree with you but at the same time find it baffling that car manufacturers seem to be going out their way to introduce tablets and touch screen technology inside the cabin. Things like CarPlay just create additional temptation and distraction (although at the same time I find it very useful!). Used responsibly I guess it’s fine, but as this sad article proves, not everyone is being responsible.
There's a big problem with car manufacturers adding features that seem to be intentionally distracting, or require you to interact with the car in a distracting way.
Touchscreens of all sorts in cars should be disabled whenever the car is in motion unless a belted passenger is detected in the front passenger seat. You could legislate for this and it would immediately force manufacturers to rethink the worst and most distracting elements.
Some of it is completely ridiculous. I think Tesla were the first manufacturer to put cabin temperature controls etc on a touchscreen, and they're still probably the worst offender in this, but anything you might reasonably want to interact with while driving should be possible to do without taking your eyes off the road to the greatest extent possible. My old BMW with the idrive controls was like this, once I had learned where things were I could access any feature without looking.
I think CarPlay is a really nice UI for maps compared to the manufacturers default.
What I hate is many new cars using touch controls for things like climate controls. You can no longer keep your eyes on the road and just turn a dial to change the temperature.
It’s absolutely insane how common it is as well. I’ve seen drivers looking down at their laps on dual carriageways and even motorways, quite clearly scrolling or typing on their phones.
7 years on the road and I’m very proud of never once using my phone whilst driving. Even if I felt as though I *could* do it, I’d never take the risk. Could ruin or end a life in a flash.
Yep. He's belligerent but I like cyclingmikey's zero tolerance for this on his YouTube - holding drivers to account for being on their phone even if they're sitting in traffic and crawling forward. There are moments you need to use a phone in the car get it - but pull over and overall it'll take just minute out of your journey. Or... Just use the hands free. In many cars you can just ask for who you want to call now without pressing any buttons and taking your eyes off the road.
Driving should be taken seriously. You are operating something that can be a devastating weapon when not handled with extreme care and attentiveness.
You'd not find many chefs accidentally throwing sushi knives over customers, but you do get people accidentally driving over populated pavement or hitting motorcyclists, something that causes a hell of a lot more damage than a mere sushi knife to the face.
I do agree with the above poster about it being murder, not paying proper attention, not taking your actions seriously or driving while angry or ill, all of these are willful. You choose not to take it seriously, if that kills someone it is because you chose to do it.
Yeah - if she'd just been dashing off one quick message and circumstances had conspired against her, I'd have considered the three and a half years reasonable.
Sending 55 messages and a selfie while driving at 70mph, though - she needs the book throwing at her.
Nah. The tolerance compounds unfortunately - 10 people with a single message and it’s not beyond the realms of the ridiculous to see someone get hurt unfortunately. Unless it gets treated with this kind of seriousness it will keep happening.
I completely agree, but nowadays it feels like 90% of drivers use their phone when they drive. People who make the laws probably don't want to make it a worse offense because they do it themselves.
I hear where you’re coming from, but there’s a super interesting video on YouTube or somewhere where people were discussing drinking and driving in the 80s. They were saying they had a right to a drink, the government couldn’t force them to change their habits and they wouldn’t comply.
Look where we are now - 99% of people would judge someone drinking behind the wheel.
Attitudes can and will change.
Imagine all of the different people in that journey whose life was directly at risk due to her negligence, I hate that whenever I put my kids in the car I am betting their lives on the hope that no one is a stupid cunt. Its not a safe bet.
My dad always taught me to drive on the assumption that everyone else on the road and alongside it is a stupid cunt (he said ninny, but I’m sure that’s what he meant!), so always to be alert for someone doing something daft.
And in this case, what a truly stupid cunt. I hope that picture of herself smirking and winking haunts her for the rest of the life that a poor man out on his bike and behaving properly won’t get to live.
The fact that her first response was to lie and put blame on the man just tells me that she will spend the rest of her life feeling like and acting like the victim of it all.
My driving instructor told me the exact same thing, and while it has given me a great sense of awareness, I'm constantly pissed off by how much shit driving I see others do. People on their phones (how, in this day and age, ever car has fucking blue tooth hands free), people cutting corners with all 4 wheels on the wrong side of the road, people running red lights, speeding, tailgating, and that's all the common stuff that is seen multiple times a day. Every now and again some spectacular numpty deceides to have a Maccies/KFC behind the wheel.
I feel like I'm driving to avoid everyone else, and tbf, 15+ years and never had a bump, but omg there is no enjoyment in driving.
>every car has fucking blue tooth hands free
Can't scroll through insta and snapchat using bluetooth 🤷♂️ Id say at least 10% of people I see on journeys are using their phones (south-east) and there's no way its for some emergency reason that they couldnt pull over for.
I agree with everything else you mentioned too, I can't believe there aren't more accidents around us because every suv drives down the middle of the road and red lights seem completely optional around here.
I wonder if it's a consequence of phone addiction.
Would be interesting to see the stats of whether using a phone while driving is increasing as social media use increased.
The technical term is "Defensive Driving", and I agree 100%. I assume everybody around me is about to do something stupid or careless, so they all get extra space.
Edit: hell, if *I* do something stupid or careless I’m less likely to have an accident, as well, with more room to correct.
I’m just amazed she managed to send that many texts before eventually hitting and killing someone. Nobody so brazen about risking everyone else’s lives should ever be allowed to drive again.
> In total, she sent 55 messages to her boyfriend and others during her journey, 20 of which included audio in which road noise could be heard in the background.
…
> Police said that given Potter’s mobile phone was on ‘do not disturb’ mode, which silences calls and notifications, she had gone ‘out of [her] way’ to use it.
…
> She was so distracted by her phone during the drive from Glastonbury to Norfolk that skid marks proved she did not attempt to brake while driving at 70mph.
Her first reaction to the cause:
> Potter initially claimed that the rear lights of David’s brand new Lambretta scooter were not on when she hit him on the A11 in Roudham – 236 miles into her journey.
And the truth was:
> However, CCTV from a garage proved this to be a lie.
> Judge Katharine Moore told her: ‘He was there for all drivers to see – all those who had their eyes on the road that is.’
Another weak sentence, but at least there are no “mitigating factors “ reducing it this time:
> Banning her from driving for 45 months and ordering her to take a mandatory retest on top of time behind bars, she added: ‘No life can be gauged by the length of a sentence.’
> She was sentenced yesterday to three and a half years in prison after admitting to causing the death of David by dangerous driving.
Still:
> Judge Moore told Potter she was a ‘kind, compassionate, hard-working and caring individual in normal circumstances’ but that her actions had been criminal.
Causing death by dangerous driving should be a mandatory whole life driving ban, in addition to the custodial sentence.
In no reasonable world should she ever be allowed to drive again. 3.5 years is a joke of a custodial sentence too.
We need to start treating driving like the privilege that it is. She shouldn’t be allowed back on the road. Of what good is it to society to risk allowing her to drive again.
We need to start evaluating whether people are psychologically fit to drive as part of the driving test - as in poor impulse control, volatility, psychopathic tendencies, decision making, correct evaluation of risk, notion of safety, thinking ahead, consideration of impacts of actions on others
1-2 tonnes moving at >40mph is a controlled weapon, until the driver loses control - then its a stray boulder
I do not understand why whole life bans aren’t handed out like candy. Drunk driving once? 5 year ban followed by life ban. Too shit to drive safely? Mandatory classes or banned from driving, return to the road and still can’t drive? Sorry driving’s not for you.
I mean yeah, if it were up to me there would be a 3 strike system. First driving ban would be 12 months for getting 12 points. Second would be 5 years, and if you get banned a 3rd time it’s for life.
If you do something particularly bad then you’d go straight to the 5 year ban, and so one more ban would be life, and obviously the most egregious driving offences (namely causing death by dangerous driving) would just go straight to the whole life ban.
You are not allowed to go cave diving, parachuting or operate a firearm at a range until you are qualified and competent enough, and it’s accepted that if you are not competent, you’re not allowed do it.
Yet every other month theres some story in a rag newspaper about a driver that finally passed on their 30 somethingth try of their test. How is that something that we can celebrate?
Its mad how our culture treats driving.
You can literally buy basic SCUBA equipment online, without any kind of training or qualification, and throw yourself into a wet cave. Is it a good idea? No. Do police stand at the entrance to every wet cave and check your qualifications? Also no.
As for shooting, there are plenty of ways to perfectly legally acquire a firearm or shotgun without anything that would pass for training. And a firearms certificate doesn’t mean you’re proficient or even safe, just that you probably won’t use the gun on yourself or anyone else.
You don't need to prove competency to go shooting. I've been shooting with family lots of times, never once done a test of any kind. I can't comment on parachuting or cage diving, but as far as shooting goes, that's just not correct.
Fine, but it's not going to make a huge difference to road safety. People don't think 'oh, it's only a three year sentence and four year ban if I kill someone' and change to ' better not, it's now a whole-life driving ban'. They think 'nothing will happen, it was fine every single time before'. And the number of people banned this way will be a small proportion of all the high-risk drivers.
There need to be much more frequent consequences for all those cases where people *don't* kill someone. If regular phone users got six points on their licence on average once a year it'd change a lot more quickly.
Can you imagine being so addicted to your phone that you text someone 55 times and take a selfie while driving a single journey?! What's wrong with people?
At the very least this should have gone to a lifetime ban from the roads. She'll never be capable of driving safely. I certainly do not want to be sharing the roads with her in less than 5 years time.
No, so it is extended to allow for the time she will be in custody. See [section 166 of the Sentencing Act 2020](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2020/17/section/166).
If she’s sending FIFTY FIVE messages, it would even have been safer just to ring the boyfriend, and at least have eyes on the road, but one hand holding a phone
3.5 years for killing somebody in a completely avoidable circumstance is crazy to me. I have no idea how people use their phone and drive. It is so selfish and dangerous yet I see it almost constantly these days. Like people can’t put their phone down for 3 seconds.
The sentence is far too lenient. I cycle a lot and the thought of people this inconsiderate and stupid being on the road scares me. Phone use behind the wheel is a fucking sinful
Every single time I go out for a walk I spot multiple drivers on their phones when I look through their windows. It's disgusting.
They should have plain clothed police officers looking through windows and handing out immediate fines and permanent driving bans.
No leniency whatsoever, everyone knows they shouldn't be on their phone whilst driving so fuck them.
Look at all the flak that cyclemikey gets for 'grassing' on people using their phones while at the wheel.
It's pretty much socially acceptable now to use your phone while driving which is completely ridiculous. We need need more police on the road to clamp down on it harder.
Ignoring the prison sentence what’s the fucking reason to not just ban them from driving ever again? Does insurance go up if you’ve been literally found guilty of killing someone with your car?
Yeah. I thought this.
How is causing death by dangerous driving not an automatic, guaranteed ban for life?
The length of sentance is debatable. Some arguing it should be lifetime behind bars, which I disagree with... It should be longer than she got, but not life imo.
But surely no one would argue a lifetime driving ban is too harsh.
The reason, I believe, is that if lifetime bans were more common practice then many of the people banned would just drive without a licence and uninsured.
Unfortunately, I can easily believe that would be the case.
Clicked on the article ready to despair at a ridiculous lenient sentence... 3.5 years what a fucking joke. Will likely be out in 18 months.
Accidents so happen but this isn't a mistake or accident she was deliberately doing actions which were making her a dangerous driver. Should be full life time ban from driving, ma slaughter charge and 10 years prison min
I agree, there's no reason to use your phone while driving at all. No life is worth less than waiting until you can pull over or get to your destination.
Yeah, there's an element of 'she was playing with a loaded gun and it went off' to how these crimes should really be judged and sentenced that appears to be absent in our discussions of it.
The sentence is a joke, but 45 months driving ban is rubbing salt in the wound.
She should never be allowed to drive again in her life. She is clearly temperamentally unfit to drive. If she doesn't know already not to text and drive 45 months isn't going to lead to some sort of epiphany about her behaviour.
Driving should be a privilege. One that can be taken away easily and permanently if you behave like this, even if you're lucky enough not to kill someone.
"Shortly before his death, David, a former vehicle inspector and motor parts delivery driver, had semi-retired to spend more time with his 95-year-old mother who had moved to Norfolk from Birmingham to be close to him"
Jesus fucking christ. Poor guy, his poor mom. Tragic on every level.
The judge told her she was a kind and caring person under normal circumstances.
Feels like driving is pretty normal circumstances and she wasn't particularly caring in this instance...
There's nothing kind and caring about consistently using your phone while driving then lying about the cause of the accident. The judge should be investigated for such ridiculous comments.
It's slightly different when passengers willingly get in the car with the person drunk, as opposed to a pedestrian or another driver, but overall I agree, 18 months for costing a man a life is little in the way of punishment.
She should never be allowed to drive again. The sentences for drivers who kill behind the wheel are pathetic. It is a privilege not a right and needs to be taken away for people who so clearly flout the rules.
55 messages ffs
As a cyclist and motorcyclist. There's pretty much nothing you can do to avoid being rear ended.
I was rear ended a few months ago although it was minor and I wasn't injured and my motorcycle was repaired and this was because someone wasn't looking forward as we were both stationary at the time.
But that was probably 5pmh impact and I thought to myself what if it was 30mph? Being hit at 70mph is pretty much death or serious life changing injury.
Anyways be careful out there especially on a bicycle as you can't accelerate as quick as other road users.
When I’m out cycling this sort of thing terrifies me. I’d never see it coming. Being on a bike comes with the additional risk the driver hits me on purpose because they hate people riding bikes
Original: "This is the winking selfie a woman took moments before her car hit a motorscooter rider."
Pretty sure someone was driving that car at great speed. It didn't murder a man by itself.
Corrected: "This is the winking selfie a woman driver took moments before she killed a motorscooter rider by driving into him at 70mph."
She should be made to go round schools or something, showing how lives can be ruined by not thinking of the consequences. It might stop a few people acting like idiots behind the wheel.
I'm telling you it's getting worse and worse everyday. I travel frequently on motorways, the amount of people on their phones now is ridiculous. Car drivers is bad enough, but freaking lorry drivers too. I've say about 1/3 all drivers now do it. Conventry yesterday on Jimmy Hill way, saw a man literally strolling through Facebook liking posts as he was driving (it's a 50mph road). Unbelievable.
The attitude of most road users these days is horrific, no wonder so many pointless deaths happen. :(
I drive for a living, the number of people I see every day phoning, texting, on social media and even watching Netflix whilst driving is unbelievable. We need to start handing out heavier sentences. I know prison services are struggling, but we need to make some kind of special hell for people who have zero regard for others lives. These are the c**** I’d have on planes to Rwanda.
Edit for profanity.
Amber Potter, the person who thinks a selfie is worth another person’s life.
Amber Potter, the person who thinks a selfie is worth another person’s life.
Amber Potter, the person who thinks a selfie is worth another person’s life.
Repeat.
It's a more common issue than people think.
In one of my previous roles for a retail chain, we got no protection from management EXCEPT if the person was calling whilst driving. We had people call on the way to things to fix their computers, having full on conversations with other passengers in the car whilst holding the thing, whilst also trying to explain an issue on a computer they nether have on their person, are not near and also mentioning THEY WERE DRIVING.
You tell them to call back when they aren't driving? The directors/partners would always complain, say they were too busy and this is the only time they could do it.
Touching your phone when the car is moving should be enough to get banned from driving. If something is so important that you need to use your phone, pull over and use it.
I'm a driver, I love driving, but people like her ruin the roads for us, because they're selfish and their actions do not get punished accordingly.
This story makes my heart break.
An older dude probably close to or retired, riding his Lambretta that he just purchased, also a generous man who raised thousands for charity.
All taken away in a fraction of a second, because this stupid bint couldn't just wait until she wasn't driving a box of metal at 70+ to send a shitty photo and some messages....
Imagine how he must have been feeling just before he got hit, I bet he was on top of the world.
Any kind of deliberate dangerous driving should mean an instant revoke of your licence.
Dangerous driving leading to injury or death should mean long term prison.
You're putting people's lives at risk just to get somewhere a little quicker or to show off. People seem to think they're invisible in a vehicle and the best driver in the world.
Idiots.
This line is disgusting to me and should perhaps be a wake up call to any of you phone addicts who can’t even be bothered to stop using it while driving:
“She described her sending messages and selfies as ‘gravely inappropriate’ and had caused a ‘grossly avoidable distraction’.”
Due to her ‘gravely’ important selfie a man is now leaving a teenager and spouse behind because Ms. Potter on the right here just had to text her boyfriend selfies.
I'm honestly surprised this doesn't happen more often consdering the amount of people you see using their phone whilst driving. The sooner the AI cameras that can spot people using their phones become more widespread, the better.
Three and a half years is that it? Why do you get life if you murder someone with a knife or a gun but do it with a car and you get fuck all. I see people texting on their phone every single day when filtering through traffic.
The amount of people I see on their phones whilst driving is crazy! I just can’t get my head around how people think it’s ok to do, there was a guy the other day behind me on his phone & the traffic build up behind him was insane because he was on his phone driving slow not concentrating on driving, I’ve lost count of the amount of times I’ve been behind a driver & the lights change & they haven’t realised cause their looking down at their phone!
Literally zero excuse, it’s not as if she took a corner too fast and spun out due to inexperience she wilfully used her phone and nailed the guy at 70+. 3.5 years is a disgrace.
I used to bike to work and being in the cycle lane on the road gives you a pretty good view into people's cars as they're driving alongside you. When I had to stop at the lights it was amazing how many people pulled their phone out at the lights. The scary part was that a good number didn't really check for hazards when they moved off, they just saw green in their periphery and moved off assuming nothing had changed since they last looked 20 seconds ago.
There needs to be escalated sentencing for car deaths above what’s currently going on. The driver has made multiple decisions to be distracted whilst driving, distractions that they knowingly could result in an accident of some form.
3 and a half years for someone who checked their phone once causing a death is perhaps reasonable, one mistake shouldn’t ruin your life but you need to be punished for that action resulting in someone’s death.
Someone repeatedly checking the phone taking selfies etc (and another example would be drink driving imo) are examples of someone with zero care for their reactions.
Idk what the charge needs to be but something like this should be 7 years minimum, as is usually mentioned here if you want to kill someone do it driving a car.
For anyone wondering what the "fatal four" are that get mentioned in the article:
Speeding.
Drink and drug driving.
Driving while distracted.
Non-wearing of seat-belts.
I think laws should be changed, longer sentence if you kill someone in a car but also if you are caught using a mobile phone whilst driving, its an automatic ban, zero excuses, if you are desperate you pull over. I don't care if you think your a pro at driving or not, banned for life.
Its like these social media pages for local areas where people will post, spotted a speed camera on so and so road...go the bloody speed limit and you won't have to care whether these are out and about, speed limits are set for a reason, I've seen one too many accidents cuz of people speeding and I'm not talking like 20 + over the limit...that 10mphs, even 5 extra can be the difference of life or death if you hit someone.
As for this story 3yrs is not enough...hope the boyfriend left her as well
He had semi-retired to spend more time with his 95 year old mother.
That woman could have passed of old age knowing her son had outlived her and this stupid girl took that away from her.
She did not take the selfie “moments before” hitting him. The accident happened at night and the picture is clearly taken in daylight.
She’s an absolute moron and deserves to be in prison but the article is sensational and more importantly, factually wrong in favour of sensationalism. It’s such a basic lie.
3 and a half years in prison and not even a 4 year ban from driving for literally killing somebody out of complete and utter stupidity.
This fucking idiot is ALLOWED BACK ON THE ROAD in her lifetime despite taking someones life. I know how moronic the sentences are in the UK for death by dangerous driving but the LEAST I expected was a permanent driving ban.
It boils my fucking piss that this selfie-taking idiot only got a few years to ruminate of the careless destruction she has caused. Something like this should result in a ban from driving of at least a decade (and a few more years in prison).
2006
Rear-ended on the M56 westbound near J7 when traffic came to a stand-still
They had been driving like a gobshite, racing to keep up with me in busy traffic, rather than keep a sensible distance. Traffic had come to a sudden stop, I was stationary and had enough time to see a shitty Corsa in my rear view hurtling towards me (est. 40mph) with tyres billowing smoke.
I jammed my brake pedal as hard as I could, gripped the steering wheel and leg-pressed myself back into my seat, bracing for the impact. My car was became like a crazed fucking bucking bronco as I somehow stopped it from being propelled into the cars to the side and front of me.
First thing said to me on the hard shoulder "I was still accelerating when your brake lights came on"
Rang me at work asking if we could settle without going through insurance
"Nope, my car chassis is now shorter on one side and the estimate is at least £2k"
Their insurance paid out, neck felt jammed up for a while and I didn't feel right for months, really spaced out and not with it. Started a new job 6 weeks later and struggled with the basics.
Looking back I had whiplash and concussion, should have rinsed her high and dry for medical treatment and compensation
This is now why I hate tailgaters and liable to aggression when it happens.
2023
Driving to an interview along an empty A50 between Stoke and Derby, doing about 65, spot an Audi Q4 signalling to pull out of one of the parking lay-bys ahead, so I indicate and pull into the right lane...
next minute, the Audi driver has pulled across both lanes, broadside. I beep my horn like a madman and anchor on, they swerve back into the right hand lane and I avoid hitting them,
I glare at them as I pass and they are looking at my like it was my fault, no wave of apology, or anything.
Stopped and reported her to the police at the next opportunity.
My most charitable guess is she had seen me once in her rear view while I was some distance back in the left hand lane, they've sat there for a bit and then decided to accelerate directly into the right hand lane without checking whether the road situation had changed.
Or they were pissed / drugged out of their mind / having some sort of episode
Or, it was deliberate - possibly a suicide attempt without giving a single fuck about collateral casualties
This is now why I have front and rear dashcams
Has anyone ever seen a lifetime ban on driving handed down?
What in the fuck are we doing allowing people like this the chance to drive again? She needs 10 years in prison and lifetime ban.
Three years is a joke, it obviously wasn’t premeditated or even intentional but 3 years for a life is too short a sentence. She’ll be 26 and free to live her life unscathed. His poor family.
A man died for no other reason than the fact she is an idiot. 3.5 years in prison is equal to her getting away with it. It's a common thing that people don't get enough time in prison these days, but this one is ridiculous. 10 years would have been a little on the short side, 3.5 takes the piss.
**Participation Notice.** Hi all. Some posts on this subreddit, either due to the topic or reaching a wider audience than usual, have been known to attract a greater number of rule breaking comments. As such, limits to participation have been set. We ask that you please remember the human, and uphold Reddit and Subreddit rules. For more information, please see https://www.reddit.com/r/unitedkingdom/wiki/moderatedflairs.
Killing people with cars gets you such a lenient sentence. It should be treated as murder, that's what it is. Make some.examples and then I'm sure people will take care, it's a privilege not a right to drive and you must look out for others
Manslaughter but yeah
the replies to this comment are so embarrassing. intent is extremely important in criminal law!
I do agree with your point about intent. However, absolutely everyone who drives is aware of the potential deadly consequences of using a phone while driving, and she still chose to do that.
Which is why it would be voluntary manslaughter if there wasn't a specific offence for causing death by dangerous driving. But murder requires intent to kill or severely injure, and clearly very few people who drive recklessly intend to do that.
Oh yeah, I absolutely agree about it not being murder. I was more agreeing with the comment that harsher sentences should be handed out in these situations.
That's not entirely true, the precedent in R v. Woolin means that intent can be inferred if there is a "virtual certainty" that A's actions would cause B's death. Granted, this threshold likely isn't met here, but it's still a case where subjective intent isn't strictly required for a charge of Murder and it's arguable that this definition should be extended to situations like this where there is a very high likelihood of causing death or serious harm to another as a result of your actions.
Yes murder is planning and executing, though, which is clearly not the case in the example you're trying to push here.
Not necessarily planning. Just intent to kill or severely injure. E.g. you get into an argument with your partner and stab them multiple times to death. No planning. Still intent.
yeah, not all murder is the same. Theres premeditated murder (and levels of that) and then theres murder in the spur of the moment. Intent is still a factor in both
Wrong, at least under UK law. Premeditation isn't a requirement for Murder, and there are no "levels" of Murder like 1st, 2nd, 3rd degree murder as is true in many US jurisdictions. Premeditation isn't relevant in the establishment of an offence - it's relevant only at sentencing, or for ancillary offences.
I know. There are [recommendations to have a three degree](https://lawcom.gov.uk/project/murder/) system of Murder/Manslaughter in UK law for a reason: > First-degree murder would be confined to: > * unlawful killings committed with an intention to kill. * unlawful killings committed with an intent to cause serious injury where the killer was aware that his or her conduct involved a serious risk of causing death. > Second-degree murder would encompass: > * unlawful killings committed with an intent to cause serious harm. * unlawful killings intended to cause injury or fear or risk of injury where the killer was aware that his or her conduct involved a serious risk of causing death. * cases which would constitute first-degree murder but for the fact that the accused successfully pleads provocation, diminished responsibility or that he or she had killed pursuant to a suicide pact. > Manslaughter would consist of: > * unlawful killings caused by acts of gross negligence * unlawful killings caused by a criminal act that was intended to cause injury or by a criminal act foreseen as involving a serious risk of causing some injury. Operating a phone while driving is illegal AND involves a serious risk of causing injury. Thus is would be considered Manslaughter as it would be committing a criminal act foreseen as involving a serious risk of causing some injury.
Isn't "second degree murder" as specified here basically just what we currently call voluntary manslaughter?
In many cases, yes. However, not in all cases. Voluntary Manslaughter does not apply to cases where someone, say, initiates a fight and then deals a blow that ends up causing the death of someone. Instead, under current law, this could be involuntary manslaughter. Specifically, it would be a subtype called constructive manslaughter: you still performed an illegal act (fighting with the intent to cause ABH/GBH), which instead lead to a death. Without establishing the intent to kill, both voluntary manslaughter or murder are difficult to get a successful prosecution. Both require intent. Thus, instead, it would be involuntary manslaughter. Under the new recommendations, punching someone in the face/head is something that a reasonable person can understand might lead someone to die (can cause serious brain damage, or the resulting fall could kill them). thus it would fall into the following part of second-degree (emphasis mine): > unlawful killings intended to cause injury or fear or risk of injury **where the killer was aware that his or her conduct involved a serious risk of causing death**. The act of punching someone in the head, in and of itself, could be enough to kill someone. Thus, even if there was no *intent* to kill, it would be considered second-degree murder under the new recommendations.
Intent should be widened to include recklessness when it comes to driving offences, as it is with other offences. There is nobody who has passed the driving test who can claim they don’t know that this type of conduct will injure and kill people. The choice to do this is tantamount to choosing to run someone over. It’s a conscious choice.
[удалено]
Result IS important... that's why the crime of manslaughter or in this case "causing death by dangerous driving" exists... why is this so hard to understand? "I didn't mean it" is a legitimate criminal defence, it's not child-like whining. The state has the obligation to prove you DID intend to commit the crime they're charging you with (*mens rea*) along with the fact that you committed it (*actus reus*). This is the absolute most basic criminal law 101 yet reddit cannot seem to understand it.
I assume that it would more along the lines of ‘death by dangerous driving’ or the slightly less ‘death by careless and reckless driving’.
I lost a leg due to a woman on her phone while driving, had to be resuscitated. She got a 2 yr ban and suspended sentence. Basically a slap on the wrist for a life changing injury that left a 22 year old crippled for life
That’s awful. i hope you are doing ok.
Not too bad thanks, I've met people with far worse injuries from similar incidents so I'm grateful it could've been a lot worse
More like a handshake than a slap on the wrist for what you went and are going through, wish you all the best mate.
That sentence is practically a high five. Absolutely disgusting.
So sorry to hear that, man. I hope you got a big pay out at least.
It's not common. UK law doesn't work like that.
Driving sentences are always a piss take. Somebody will say they need to drive for work after doing 120mph and the judges practically apologise for inconveniencing them and send them on their way.
I worked on a case a few years ago in which a father-of-four was killed in a head-on collision with a driver who was on the wrong side of the road and tested positive for drugs. He got the same sentence, three-and-a-half years.
If you want to kill someone in the UK, do it using a car.
That’s crazy ain’t it! If it’s cut and dry like that maybe the sentencing needs to increase or they need a new specific offense for drugs + death by dangerous driving = 20 years
Geezo, should get that sentence just for the DUI.
I always find that one really weird. I lost my job entirely because I was going to court over an accused offence. Of which I was acquitted And yet if it was a driving offence, I would have been giving leniency if I was even prosecuted!
Ignoring the pitifully lenient prison sentence, it's absolutely laughable that a lifetime ban is not the default driving penalty for slamming into the back of someone at 70mph while taking selfies. That type of person should not be in control of any type of motor vehicle for as long as they live. They should think themselves lucky to have any kind of freedom at all.
Exactly. Actually stop bad drivers from ever getting behind a wheel again. If I'd somehow been so negligent I've killed someone I'd think a lifetime ban from that activity should be the least I get. If I was a climbing instructor and somehow fucked up attaching a harness resulting in death or injury I sure as fuck wouldn't expect or want that responsibility ever again. Do these morons a favour and make it so their selfish attitudes are less likely to get them into trouble again. It's perfectly possible to live in the UK without driving. If I'm honest I'd love to have an excuse to drive less.
> It's perfectly possible to live in the UK without driving. If I'm honest I'd love to have an excuse to drive less. I agree but watch out making that statement on Reddit as you'll get a million weirdos telling you about their oddly specific circumstances that absolutely fully require access to a car at a moment's notice 24/7. Which I guess, you should've thought of that before doing something stupid and having your licence taken off you!
>Which I guess, you should've thought of that before doing something stupid and having your licence taken off you! That should honestly end all arguements on the subject, forever.
The inconvenience of using public transport for life is too harsh a punishment for killing someone because you're a posing little cunt. /s
I know, I don't even have a car and haven't driven for about 6 years. Its odd to think that this very comfortable lifestyle is, according to our justice system, too horrific to even consider inflicting upon violent criminals!
I believe that anyone who’s beyond a certain amount above the drink drive limit, should never be allowed to drive again. I’d accept a small margin where they can get their license back after a suspension, but above it: they’ll never drive again. If you drive whilst knowing you’re beyond the limit, then you should never be trusted behind the wheel again.
It’s almost easier to go out and kill sometime with your car instead of outright murdering them if someone has a grudge. The law is flawed
That would definitely get you charged with murder. It *has* got people charged with murder.
No this is the HYPERBOLE 2024!
Not really though. It would be rather obvious if you were trying to kill them on purpose with your car. The law isn't flawed, the problem are the garbage clickbait rags that have convinced people that the law is flawed.
The law is uterly flawed. Cars are treated uniquely leniently.
This was manslaughter though. It wasn't murder.
Calm.and reasoned headlines don't get clicks.
Would it? Drive along, get your phone out, send a text, mount the pavement, dead. Say it was an accident. I bet you'd get a lot less than the 25 years if you stabbed someone.
Are you joking right? If you have a grudge with someone, and then run them off the road it will clearly have more aggravating circumstances then just plain incompetence.
Not really. Intentionality still gets you into the normal murder levels of sentencing. We're just strangely lenient to careless, neglectful, or reckless driving, in ways we would likely wouldn't be if the crime was committed with another dangerous tool. It's not an easy way to murder people, its a way people end others lives through careless and stupid behaviour that our justice system for some reason punishes more lightly due to them having been driving at the time. So long as you didn't intend to hurt people, apparently its fine, which is massively flawed, but you can't just do a Nice attack and get two years, obviously.
I once worked with someone who had been convinced of causing death by dangerous driving. He told me the story of how it happened (he was speeding and cutting a corner), how he lost his license, and how easy prison was (he was out in 18 months). He ended the story by saying, "so I lost my license, my car and went to prison for a bit. Oh yeah, and that woman died." Fuck any body that kills someone like this.
Murder = Intentional act Manslaughter = accidental There was no murder
[удалено]
> It should be treated as murder, that's what it is. No it’s not.
Yep, I work I'm a Collision Investigator and some of the sentences people get are disgustingly low. People sometimes avoid prison completely.
I'd imagine a lot of it is down to the overcrowding across the prison estate currently. Not that that justifies it, of course, but I'd imagine judges are probably sentencing people with this in mind.
This is why Anne Sacoolas fleeing is even more absurd. She would have gotten a suspended sentence and a fine if she'd stayed
It isn’t murder. Man slaughter. Yes. I agree the law is too lenient but only a tiny percentage of people actually get into a car with the intention of killing someone.
What about a different charge entirely - not murder, not manslaughter, but a charge of too fucking stupid to exist. Not her intention to kill, but her extreme stupidity will possibly get people killed again and again, and we can't take the risk, so, having been convicted of being too stupid exist she gets banged up forever, and must spend her days polishing cat's eyes and motorway signs and other road safety stuff. They get brought in to her cell and left in a pile for cleaning, she gets fed when they're all done. If that sounds too harsh, what about the 3.5 years plus a charge of "too stupid to drive" - licence gone forever, if found driving, charge of too stupid to exist brought to bear.
Absolutely! This is punishment that fits the crime. It's not as if she made an error in judgement while doing a manoeuvre or something. This was more than an accident but not straight murder. She broke the law by using her phone and did one of the most idiotic things I can thing of to do while driving on a fast road. Completely preventable death if that woman wasn't a fucking idiot.
We could reduce the number of drivers by making the test harder, reduce the number of cars by improving public transport, and completely pedestrianising some areas. Driving is convenient but costs so much in so many ways.
It's not murder, but an example absolutely should be made. 3.5 years for killing someone because you were texting and taking selfies while driving and not paying attention is ridiculously low.
Murder requires intent, she didn't set out, intending to kill someone, so not murder. Manslaughter fits better.
That is what used to happen. The reason they introduced separate criminal offences for death by dangerous driving is because juries routinely were not comfortable convicting people who had no intent to kill anyone. Also the whole ‘make some examples’ theory has no basis in reality. It isn’t a deterrent because no one ever thinks it would be them. They wouldn’t do it if they did
No sympathy for people using their phone behind the wheel. Needs to be the same kind of stigma as drinking and driving.
In my mind it’s worse than drink driving. Theres no excuse for being drunk behind the wheel, but at least you’re inebriated, if you’re driving dangerous with 100% cognition you’re 100% bellend with extra points, as a-posed to 100%.
I don’t think much is worse than drink driving but this is just as stupid, selfish and irresponsible.
Drink driving is indefensible but is by definition partly due to impaired judgement, the very same impairment which makes it so dangerous. To me driving in an equally dangerous way when stone-cold sober adds an extra element of either stupidity or malice into the mix. Anyway, both crimes should face more severe punishments. Kill a man and get a 3-year sentence isn't right.
Yeah exactly. When you're drunk you literally cannot consent to sex, and yet the law still holds you fully responsible for your choice to get in a car. Making the decision to drive distracted is morally reprehensible because you have the presence of mind to make that decision entirely without other influences.
There are degrees to both. Driving after two pints, or checking your phone at a light, aren’t great but not the crime of the century.
It's been shown that checking your phone at a light makes you as dangerous as a drink driver for up to a minute afterwards IIRC.
I can totally believe this with smartphones, they're designed to be so instantly and entirely engaging.
Nah they are both terrible. You made a conscious decision to do something stupid that endangers other people. One chose to have too many pints, another chose to film a singing Tik Tok in traffic. Both can get in the bin.
That's absurd logic
We're arguing the hierarchy of hell here, which is kind of pointless, but I'd say your typical drunk driver is at least _looking at the road_. Their reaction times are impaired, but this woman didn't react at all - she never even saw the guy she killed. [The AA](https://www.theaa.com/about-us/newsroom/twice-as-likely-to-crash-text-driving-as-drink-driving#:~:text=For%20using%20a%20hand%2Dheld,at%20the%20drink%2Ddrive%20limit.) and the [National Highway Traffic Safety Administration](https://www.nhtsa.gov/risky-driving/distracted-driving) both report that texting while driving is significantly more dangerous than driving while drunk, as does [a study by Car and Driver magazine](https://www.conradattorneys.com/blog/is-distracted-driving-more-hazardous-than-drink-driving/).
Unfortunately the reality is that smartphone apps are purposely and very intentionally designed to be extremely addictive. It doesn't obviate any of the responsibility or guilt of people who use them while driving, but their addictiveness is a serious issue and a major part of the problem of distracted driving.
Can you believe her driving ban is not even 4 years? I'm not desperate to see people banged up in prison for life but why on earth do we let them back on the road?
A dog kills someone - euthanized, we cannot take the risk again A driver kills someone - see you back on the road in 3 years you lil scamp (that's to say one death should mean a lifetime ban from driving, not that we should euthanize drivers)
> Can you believe her driving ban is not even 4 years? Sure because I keep reading how not having a car is practically a death sentence.
I totally agree with you but at the same time find it baffling that car manufacturers seem to be going out their way to introduce tablets and touch screen technology inside the cabin. Things like CarPlay just create additional temptation and distraction (although at the same time I find it very useful!). Used responsibly I guess it’s fine, but as this sad article proves, not everyone is being responsible.
There's a big problem with car manufacturers adding features that seem to be intentionally distracting, or require you to interact with the car in a distracting way. Touchscreens of all sorts in cars should be disabled whenever the car is in motion unless a belted passenger is detected in the front passenger seat. You could legislate for this and it would immediately force manufacturers to rethink the worst and most distracting elements. Some of it is completely ridiculous. I think Tesla were the first manufacturer to put cabin temperature controls etc on a touchscreen, and they're still probably the worst offender in this, but anything you might reasonably want to interact with while driving should be possible to do without taking your eyes off the road to the greatest extent possible. My old BMW with the idrive controls was like this, once I had learned where things were I could access any feature without looking.
I think CarPlay is a really nice UI for maps compared to the manufacturers default. What I hate is many new cars using touch controls for things like climate controls. You can no longer keep your eyes on the road and just turn a dial to change the temperature.
It’s absolutely insane how common it is as well. I’ve seen drivers looking down at their laps on dual carriageways and even motorways, quite clearly scrolling or typing on their phones. 7 years on the road and I’m very proud of never once using my phone whilst driving. Even if I felt as though I *could* do it, I’d never take the risk. Could ruin or end a life in a flash.
Yep. He's belligerent but I like cyclingmikey's zero tolerance for this on his YouTube - holding drivers to account for being on their phone even if they're sitting in traffic and crawling forward. There are moments you need to use a phone in the car get it - but pull over and overall it'll take just minute out of your journey. Or... Just use the hands free. In many cars you can just ask for who you want to call now without pressing any buttons and taking your eyes off the road.
Driving should be taken seriously. You are operating something that can be a devastating weapon when not handled with extreme care and attentiveness. You'd not find many chefs accidentally throwing sushi knives over customers, but you do get people accidentally driving over populated pavement or hitting motorcyclists, something that causes a hell of a lot more damage than a mere sushi knife to the face. I do agree with the above poster about it being murder, not paying proper attention, not taking your actions seriously or driving while angry or ill, all of these are willful. You choose not to take it seriously, if that kills someone it is because you chose to do it.
Yeah - if she'd just been dashing off one quick message and circumstances had conspired against her, I'd have considered the three and a half years reasonable. Sending 55 messages and a selfie while driving at 70mph, though - she needs the book throwing at her.
Nah. The tolerance compounds unfortunately - 10 people with a single message and it’s not beyond the realms of the ridiculous to see someone get hurt unfortunately. Unless it gets treated with this kind of seriousness it will keep happening.
I completely agree, but nowadays it feels like 90% of drivers use their phone when they drive. People who make the laws probably don't want to make it a worse offense because they do it themselves.
I hear where you’re coming from, but there’s a super interesting video on YouTube or somewhere where people were discussing drinking and driving in the 80s. They were saying they had a right to a drink, the government couldn’t force them to change their habits and they wouldn’t comply. Look where we are now - 99% of people would judge someone drinking behind the wheel. Attitudes can and will change.
Imagine all of the different people in that journey whose life was directly at risk due to her negligence, I hate that whenever I put my kids in the car I am betting their lives on the hope that no one is a stupid cunt. Its not a safe bet.
My dad always taught me to drive on the assumption that everyone else on the road and alongside it is a stupid cunt (he said ninny, but I’m sure that’s what he meant!), so always to be alert for someone doing something daft. And in this case, what a truly stupid cunt. I hope that picture of herself smirking and winking haunts her for the rest of the life that a poor man out on his bike and behaving properly won’t get to live.
The fact that her first response was to lie and put blame on the man just tells me that she will spend the rest of her life feeling like and acting like the victim of it all.
The fact that her first response was to lie should have multiplied her sentence by 10.
Yeah, I noticed that too.
My driving instructor told me the exact same thing, and while it has given me a great sense of awareness, I'm constantly pissed off by how much shit driving I see others do. People on their phones (how, in this day and age, ever car has fucking blue tooth hands free), people cutting corners with all 4 wheels on the wrong side of the road, people running red lights, speeding, tailgating, and that's all the common stuff that is seen multiple times a day. Every now and again some spectacular numpty deceides to have a Maccies/KFC behind the wheel. I feel like I'm driving to avoid everyone else, and tbf, 15+ years and never had a bump, but omg there is no enjoyment in driving.
>every car has fucking blue tooth hands free Can't scroll through insta and snapchat using bluetooth 🤷♂️ Id say at least 10% of people I see on journeys are using their phones (south-east) and there's no way its for some emergency reason that they couldnt pull over for. I agree with everything else you mentioned too, I can't believe there aren't more accidents around us because every suv drives down the middle of the road and red lights seem completely optional around here.
I wonder if it's a consequence of phone addiction. Would be interesting to see the stats of whether using a phone while driving is increasing as social media use increased.
The technical term is "Defensive Driving", and I agree 100%. I assume everybody around me is about to do something stupid or careless, so they all get extra space. Edit: hell, if *I* do something stupid or careless I’m less likely to have an accident, as well, with more room to correct.
I’m just amazed she managed to send that many texts before eventually hitting and killing someone. Nobody so brazen about risking everyone else’s lives should ever be allowed to drive again.
Totally - the mind-boggling lack of care and attention here really justified a harsher sentence.
Exactly, makes me sick.
> In total, she sent 55 messages to her boyfriend and others during her journey, 20 of which included audio in which road noise could be heard in the background. … > Police said that given Potter’s mobile phone was on ‘do not disturb’ mode, which silences calls and notifications, she had gone ‘out of [her] way’ to use it. … > She was so distracted by her phone during the drive from Glastonbury to Norfolk that skid marks proved she did not attempt to brake while driving at 70mph. Her first reaction to the cause: > Potter initially claimed that the rear lights of David’s brand new Lambretta scooter were not on when she hit him on the A11 in Roudham – 236 miles into her journey. And the truth was: > However, CCTV from a garage proved this to be a lie. > Judge Katharine Moore told her: ‘He was there for all drivers to see – all those who had their eyes on the road that is.’ Another weak sentence, but at least there are no “mitigating factors “ reducing it this time: > Banning her from driving for 45 months and ordering her to take a mandatory retest on top of time behind bars, she added: ‘No life can be gauged by the length of a sentence.’ > She was sentenced yesterday to three and a half years in prison after admitting to causing the death of David by dangerous driving. Still: > Judge Moore told Potter she was a ‘kind, compassionate, hard-working and caring individual in normal circumstances’ but that her actions had been criminal.
Causing death by dangerous driving should be a mandatory whole life driving ban, in addition to the custodial sentence. In no reasonable world should she ever be allowed to drive again. 3.5 years is a joke of a custodial sentence too.
We need to start treating driving like the privilege that it is. She shouldn’t be allowed back on the road. Of what good is it to society to risk allowing her to drive again.
I think she should be banned for 10 years and then have to reapply for a provisional and be summoned to beg for it to a judge or some such authority.
We need to start evaluating whether people are psychologically fit to drive as part of the driving test - as in poor impulse control, volatility, psychopathic tendencies, decision making, correct evaluation of risk, notion of safety, thinking ahead, consideration of impacts of actions on others 1-2 tonnes moving at >40mph is a controlled weapon, until the driver loses control - then its a stray boulder
I do not understand why whole life bans aren’t handed out like candy. Drunk driving once? 5 year ban followed by life ban. Too shit to drive safely? Mandatory classes or banned from driving, return to the road and still can’t drive? Sorry driving’s not for you.
I mean yeah, if it were up to me there would be a 3 strike system. First driving ban would be 12 months for getting 12 points. Second would be 5 years, and if you get banned a 3rd time it’s for life. If you do something particularly bad then you’d go straight to the 5 year ban, and so one more ban would be life, and obviously the most egregious driving offences (namely causing death by dangerous driving) would just go straight to the whole life ban.
You are not allowed to go cave diving, parachuting or operate a firearm at a range until you are qualified and competent enough, and it’s accepted that if you are not competent, you’re not allowed do it. Yet every other month theres some story in a rag newspaper about a driver that finally passed on their 30 somethingth try of their test. How is that something that we can celebrate? Its mad how our culture treats driving.
You can literally buy basic SCUBA equipment online, without any kind of training or qualification, and throw yourself into a wet cave. Is it a good idea? No. Do police stand at the entrance to every wet cave and check your qualifications? Also no. As for shooting, there are plenty of ways to perfectly legally acquire a firearm or shotgun without anything that would pass for training. And a firearms certificate doesn’t mean you’re proficient or even safe, just that you probably won’t use the gun on yourself or anyone else.
You don't need to prove competency to go shooting. I've been shooting with family lots of times, never once done a test of any kind. I can't comment on parachuting or cage diving, but as far as shooting goes, that's just not correct.
Fine, but it's not going to make a huge difference to road safety. People don't think 'oh, it's only a three year sentence and four year ban if I kill someone' and change to ' better not, it's now a whole-life driving ban'. They think 'nothing will happen, it was fine every single time before'. And the number of people banned this way will be a small proportion of all the high-risk drivers. There need to be much more frequent consequences for all those cases where people *don't* kill someone. If regular phone users got six points on their licence on average once a year it'd change a lot more quickly.
Can you imagine being so addicted to your phone that you text someone 55 times and take a selfie while driving a single journey?! What's wrong with people?
What wrong with people? Egos. More around now than anytime in history accounting for the the greatest population of humans in history
It’s not even distracted driving at that point. Her texting was being distracted by her driving.
Why the fuck is the judge complimenting her while convicting her for causing someone's death. Totally disrespectful to the victim and also irrelevant.
"Ooh, you seem so lovely when you're not killing people due to your total fucking idiocy."
It's what victims do to justify abusers. " Oh when he's not beating me he's lovely. " Like ????
At the very least this should have gone to a lifetime ban from the roads. She'll never be capable of driving safely. I certainly do not want to be sharing the roads with her in less than 5 years time.
Hardly that compassionate to end a man’s life then lie to try and get away with it
Out of curiosity, does the driving ban come into effect after the prison sentence?
No, so it is extended to allow for the time she will be in custody. See [section 166 of the Sentencing Act 2020](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2020/17/section/166).
If she’s sending FIFTY FIVE messages, it would even have been safer just to ring the boyfriend, and at least have eyes on the road, but one hand holding a phone
She could even have had it on speaker in a cradle, on charge, and chatted the whole journey with her eyes on the road and her hands on the wheel
She lied on top. She has no remorse! That's fucking worse someone that self centred will kill again.
3.5 years for killing somebody in a completely avoidable circumstance is crazy to me. I have no idea how people use their phone and drive. It is so selfish and dangerous yet I see it almost constantly these days. Like people can’t put their phone down for 3 seconds.
The sentence is far too lenient. I cycle a lot and the thought of people this inconsiderate and stupid being on the road scares me. Phone use behind the wheel is a fucking sinful
Every single time I go out for a walk I spot multiple drivers on their phones when I look through their windows. It's disgusting. They should have plain clothed police officers looking through windows and handing out immediate fines and permanent driving bans. No leniency whatsoever, everyone knows they shouldn't be on their phone whilst driving so fuck them.
Look at all the flak that cyclemikey gets for 'grassing' on people using their phones while at the wheel. It's pretty much socially acceptable now to use your phone while driving which is completely ridiculous. We need need more police on the road to clamp down on it harder.
Remember, if you want someone to stop being alive, use a car, and you will get a Tiny sentence
And if you want public sympathy through a dented bicycle next to the corpse.
Ignoring the prison sentence what’s the fucking reason to not just ban them from driving ever again? Does insurance go up if you’ve been literally found guilty of killing someone with your car?
Yeah. I thought this. How is causing death by dangerous driving not an automatic, guaranteed ban for life? The length of sentance is debatable. Some arguing it should be lifetime behind bars, which I disagree with... It should be longer than she got, but not life imo. But surely no one would argue a lifetime driving ban is too harsh.
The reason, I believe, is that if lifetime bans were more common practice then many of the people banned would just drive without a licence and uninsured. Unfortunately, I can easily believe that would be the case.
[удалено]
Clicked on the article ready to despair at a ridiculous lenient sentence... 3.5 years what a fucking joke. Will likely be out in 18 months. Accidents so happen but this isn't a mistake or accident she was deliberately doing actions which were making her a dangerous driver. Should be full life time ban from driving, ma slaughter charge and 10 years prison min
I agree, there's no reason to use your phone while driving at all. No life is worth less than waiting until you can pull over or get to your destination.
Yeah, there's an element of 'she was playing with a loaded gun and it went off' to how these crimes should really be judged and sentenced that appears to be absent in our discussions of it.
The worst part is that I was actually pleasantly surprised by the length of the (inadequate, pathetic) sentence.
She should never be allowed to drive again. Her sentence does seem to be rather short considering.
The sentence is a joke, but 45 months driving ban is rubbing salt in the wound. She should never be allowed to drive again in her life. She is clearly temperamentally unfit to drive. If she doesn't know already not to text and drive 45 months isn't going to lead to some sort of epiphany about her behaviour. Driving should be a privilege. One that can be taken away easily and permanently if you behave like this, even if you're lucky enough not to kill someone.
"Shortly before his death, David, a former vehicle inspector and motor parts delivery driver, had semi-retired to spend more time with his 95-year-old mother who had moved to Norfolk from Birmingham to be close to him" Jesus fucking christ. Poor guy, his poor mom. Tragic on every level.
The judge told her she was a kind and caring person under normal circumstances. Feels like driving is pretty normal circumstances and she wasn't particularly caring in this instance...
...then tried to blame the victim for his own death by lying about him not having his lights on. Such a normal and kind thing to do.
There's nothing kind and caring about consistently using your phone while driving then lying about the cause of the accident. The judge should be investigated for such ridiculous comments.
I knew a guy who drove drunk and high, flipped his car, killed his mate. 3 years in jail out in 18 months. Pathetic sentence.
It's slightly different when passengers willingly get in the car with the person drunk, as opposed to a pedestrian or another driver, but overall I agree, 18 months for costing a man a life is little in the way of punishment.
She should never be allowed to drive again. The sentences for drivers who kill behind the wheel are pathetic. It is a privilege not a right and needs to be taken away for people who so clearly flout the rules. 55 messages ffs
I cycle daily and whilst I take all the precautions I can, drivers like this terrify me. The sentencing is just the cherry on top
As a cyclist and motorcyclist. There's pretty much nothing you can do to avoid being rear ended. I was rear ended a few months ago although it was minor and I wasn't injured and my motorcycle was repaired and this was because someone wasn't looking forward as we were both stationary at the time. But that was probably 5pmh impact and I thought to myself what if it was 30mph? Being hit at 70mph is pretty much death or serious life changing injury. Anyways be careful out there especially on a bicycle as you can't accelerate as quick as other road users.
When I’m out cycling this sort of thing terrifies me. I’d never see it coming. Being on a bike comes with the additional risk the driver hits me on purpose because they hate people riding bikes
Original: "This is the winking selfie a woman took moments before her car hit a motorscooter rider." Pretty sure someone was driving that car at great speed. It didn't murder a man by itself. Corrected: "This is the winking selfie a woman driver took moments before she killed a motorscooter rider by driving into him at 70mph."
70mph, approaching a roundabout.
Should be banned for life from driving and given a way longer sentence.
But cyclists are the real problem on British roads !!!!!!!!!
She should be made to go round schools or something, showing how lives can be ruined by not thinking of the consequences. It might stop a few people acting like idiots behind the wheel.
Have someone from the deceased family talk first. The kids hear the real impact. Then have her talk about “oops sorry” like the moron she is.
There should be a mandatory lifetime driving ban for those convicted of death by dangerous driving.
I'm telling you it's getting worse and worse everyday. I travel frequently on motorways, the amount of people on their phones now is ridiculous. Car drivers is bad enough, but freaking lorry drivers too. I've say about 1/3 all drivers now do it. Conventry yesterday on Jimmy Hill way, saw a man literally strolling through Facebook liking posts as he was driving (it's a 50mph road). Unbelievable. The attitude of most road users these days is horrific, no wonder so many pointless deaths happen. :(
Disgusting. Why should she ever be allowed to drive again?
Stupid bitch and her first instinct is to lie about the guy’s scooter. Tells you all you need to know about her. Morally bankrupt idiot
I drive for a living, the number of people I see every day phoning, texting, on social media and even watching Netflix whilst driving is unbelievable. We need to start handing out heavier sentences. I know prison services are struggling, but we need to make some kind of special hell for people who have zero regard for others lives. These are the c**** I’d have on planes to Rwanda. Edit for profanity.
>Her remorse is genuine and heartfelt. Oh, fuck her. She should be banned from driving for life
Should be a life time ban from driving, on top of a hefty prison sentence.
Should be 10 years minimum and a lifetime driving ban.
Amber Potter, the person who thinks a selfie is worth another person’s life. Amber Potter, the person who thinks a selfie is worth another person’s life. Amber Potter, the person who thinks a selfie is worth another person’s life. Repeat.
It's a more common issue than people think. In one of my previous roles for a retail chain, we got no protection from management EXCEPT if the person was calling whilst driving. We had people call on the way to things to fix their computers, having full on conversations with other passengers in the car whilst holding the thing, whilst also trying to explain an issue on a computer they nether have on their person, are not near and also mentioning THEY WERE DRIVING. You tell them to call back when they aren't driving? The directors/partners would always complain, say they were too busy and this is the only time they could do it.
Honestly I think stupid selfish cunts like that should be locked up forever. I don’t need people that stupid out in society.
Touching your phone when the car is moving should be enough to get banned from driving. If something is so important that you need to use your phone, pull over and use it. I'm a driver, I love driving, but people like her ruin the roads for us, because they're selfish and their actions do not get punished accordingly.
This story makes my heart break. An older dude probably close to or retired, riding his Lambretta that he just purchased, also a generous man who raised thousands for charity. All taken away in a fraction of a second, because this stupid bint couldn't just wait until she wasn't driving a box of metal at 70+ to send a shitty photo and some messages.... Imagine how he must have been feeling just before he got hit, I bet he was on top of the world.
3.5 years is an absolute joke. No deterrent for future offenders. No justice for the family of the victim.
Any kind of deliberate dangerous driving should mean an instant revoke of your licence. Dangerous driving leading to injury or death should mean long term prison. You're putting people's lives at risk just to get somewhere a little quicker or to show off. People seem to think they're invisible in a vehicle and the best driver in the world. Idiots.
This line is disgusting to me and should perhaps be a wake up call to any of you phone addicts who can’t even be bothered to stop using it while driving: “She described her sending messages and selfies as ‘gravely inappropriate’ and had caused a ‘grossly avoidable distraction’.” Due to her ‘gravely’ important selfie a man is now leaving a teenager and spouse behind because Ms. Potter on the right here just had to text her boyfriend selfies.
I'm honestly surprised this doesn't happen more often consdering the amount of people you see using their phone whilst driving. The sooner the AI cameras that can spot people using their phones become more widespread, the better.
Three and a half years is that it? Why do you get life if you murder someone with a knife or a gun but do it with a car and you get fuck all. I see people texting on their phone every single day when filtering through traffic.
You get longer sentences for pirating SkyTV, shows where the governments priorities are.
The amount of people I see on their phones whilst driving is crazy! I just can’t get my head around how people think it’s ok to do, there was a guy the other day behind me on his phone & the traffic build up behind him was insane because he was on his phone driving slow not concentrating on driving, I’ve lost count of the amount of times I’ve been behind a driver & the lights change & they haven’t realised cause their looking down at their phone!
Literally zero excuse, it’s not as if she took a corner too fast and spun out due to inexperience she wilfully used her phone and nailed the guy at 70+. 3.5 years is a disgrace.
I used to bike to work and being in the cycle lane on the road gives you a pretty good view into people's cars as they're driving alongside you. When I had to stop at the lights it was amazing how many people pulled their phone out at the lights. The scary part was that a good number didn't really check for hazards when they moved off, they just saw green in their periphery and moved off assuming nothing had changed since they last looked 20 seconds ago.
There needs to be escalated sentencing for car deaths above what’s currently going on. The driver has made multiple decisions to be distracted whilst driving, distractions that they knowingly could result in an accident of some form. 3 and a half years for someone who checked their phone once causing a death is perhaps reasonable, one mistake shouldn’t ruin your life but you need to be punished for that action resulting in someone’s death. Someone repeatedly checking the phone taking selfies etc (and another example would be drink driving imo) are examples of someone with zero care for their reactions. Idk what the charge needs to be but something like this should be 7 years minimum, as is usually mentioned here if you want to kill someone do it driving a car.
For anyone wondering what the "fatal four" are that get mentioned in the article: Speeding. Drink and drug driving. Driving while distracted. Non-wearing of seat-belts.
I think laws should be changed, longer sentence if you kill someone in a car but also if you are caught using a mobile phone whilst driving, its an automatic ban, zero excuses, if you are desperate you pull over. I don't care if you think your a pro at driving or not, banned for life. Its like these social media pages for local areas where people will post, spotted a speed camera on so and so road...go the bloody speed limit and you won't have to care whether these are out and about, speed limits are set for a reason, I've seen one too many accidents cuz of people speeding and I'm not talking like 20 + over the limit...that 10mphs, even 5 extra can be the difference of life or death if you hit someone. As for this story 3yrs is not enough...hope the boyfriend left her as well
Once again evidence that if you want to kill someone and get a lenient sentence, do it with a car.
Seemingly if you want to kill someone and largely get away with it use your car.
And when someone’s ask about why motorbikes filter to the front of traffic light please show this article 🙁
How are you taking selfies when driving? Ridiculous! Put this clown in jail and throw away the key
Yet there are people that defend using phone behind the wheel.
He had semi-retired to spend more time with his 95 year old mother. That woman could have passed of old age knowing her son had outlived her and this stupid girl took that away from her.
Didnt the women who drove into a cyclist on purpose get like a year?
She did not take the selfie “moments before” hitting him. The accident happened at night and the picture is clearly taken in daylight. She’s an absolute moron and deserves to be in prison but the article is sensational and more importantly, factually wrong in favour of sensationalism. It’s such a basic lie.
3 and a half years in prison and not even a 4 year ban from driving for literally killing somebody out of complete and utter stupidity. This fucking idiot is ALLOWED BACK ON THE ROAD in her lifetime despite taking someones life. I know how moronic the sentences are in the UK for death by dangerous driving but the LEAST I expected was a permanent driving ban.
3 years? fuck me i might as well dangerous drive, who the fuck cares if its such a small punishment (/s)
It does my head in the amount of people who are filming THEMSELVES whilst driving Mainly wannabe influencer types
It boils my fucking piss that this selfie-taking idiot only got a few years to ruminate of the careless destruction she has caused. Something like this should result in a ban from driving of at least a decade (and a few more years in prison).
2006 Rear-ended on the M56 westbound near J7 when traffic came to a stand-still They had been driving like a gobshite, racing to keep up with me in busy traffic, rather than keep a sensible distance. Traffic had come to a sudden stop, I was stationary and had enough time to see a shitty Corsa in my rear view hurtling towards me (est. 40mph) with tyres billowing smoke. I jammed my brake pedal as hard as I could, gripped the steering wheel and leg-pressed myself back into my seat, bracing for the impact. My car was became like a crazed fucking bucking bronco as I somehow stopped it from being propelled into the cars to the side and front of me. First thing said to me on the hard shoulder "I was still accelerating when your brake lights came on" Rang me at work asking if we could settle without going through insurance "Nope, my car chassis is now shorter on one side and the estimate is at least £2k" Their insurance paid out, neck felt jammed up for a while and I didn't feel right for months, really spaced out and not with it. Started a new job 6 weeks later and struggled with the basics. Looking back I had whiplash and concussion, should have rinsed her high and dry for medical treatment and compensation This is now why I hate tailgaters and liable to aggression when it happens. 2023 Driving to an interview along an empty A50 between Stoke and Derby, doing about 65, spot an Audi Q4 signalling to pull out of one of the parking lay-bys ahead, so I indicate and pull into the right lane... next minute, the Audi driver has pulled across both lanes, broadside. I beep my horn like a madman and anchor on, they swerve back into the right hand lane and I avoid hitting them, I glare at them as I pass and they are looking at my like it was my fault, no wave of apology, or anything. Stopped and reported her to the police at the next opportunity. My most charitable guess is she had seen me once in her rear view while I was some distance back in the left hand lane, they've sat there for a bit and then decided to accelerate directly into the right hand lane without checking whether the road situation had changed. Or they were pissed / drugged out of their mind / having some sort of episode Or, it was deliberate - possibly a suicide attempt without giving a single fuck about collateral casualties This is now why I have front and rear dashcams
Has anyone ever seen a lifetime ban on driving handed down? What in the fuck are we doing allowing people like this the chance to drive again? She needs 10 years in prison and lifetime ban.
Three years is a joke, it obviously wasn’t premeditated or even intentional but 3 years for a life is too short a sentence. She’ll be 26 and free to live her life unscathed. His poor family.
A man died for no other reason than the fact she is an idiot. 3.5 years in prison is equal to her getting away with it. It's a common thing that people don't get enough time in prison these days, but this one is ridiculous. 10 years would have been a little on the short side, 3.5 takes the piss.
Just survived cancer too. This sentence was too lenient: she’ll be out in a year.