IveToldYouOnce

PC Dave Phillips - Verdict

Recommended Posts

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-35860607

 

Male driver found guilty of manslaughter................I don't quite get why it wasn't murder, but there you go.

 

Still.  The other chap in the car got 6 years for burglary and aggravated TWOC, so you'd like to think the driver would get a proper stretch..............and no half-measures as he went not out........

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

20 years - sounds like the judge might have 'disagreed' with the jury's verdict of not guilty of murder and handed down what in todays society is seen as a 'stiff sentence' of 20 years for manslaughter.

 

(I read somewhere a couple of weeks ago that the average sentence served for manslaughter in the uk is now about 6 years and murder about 14.)

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He's already been inside at least once, and when he got out he committed crime almost straight away.

 

So, a short stay didn't work - although it's reasonable to assume that while he was there he didn't commit offences and create misery into decent people's lives.

 

Although, he said himself that he acted the way he did so as to not go back.  So.  It worked in as much as he didn't want to go back, but didn't work so much that he decided that crime was ok for him to commit.  And he killed a decent bloke because he wasn't prepared to deal with the consequences of his actions.  What a piece of crap.

 

Maybe at least 10 years will sort him out.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reading the articles about this makes for very sad/angry reading.

 

Offender had 33 previous. At 19 years of age.  33.

 

Killed Dave, then dumped the car, burnt his clothes, showered, and gave away his phone.......

Apparently told the passenger in his vehicle "watch this" moments before running over Dave Phillips..........which, for some reason, the jury never heard.........

 

Manslaughter.............

 

We should be grateful that he's been given 20 years...........although he'll still be young when he comes out..........

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not the outcome that I was hoping for and whatever the sentence it was never going to be enough. However being objective I suspect the Judge has gone for as long a stretch as he dare without entering appeal territory under our pitiful sentencing laws. I feel on balance the gravity of the offending has been respected by the judiciary in light of the verdict returned by the jury. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Justice is not perfect and does not always provide justice. I suppose that we have to, reluctantly, accept the verdict.

I what I do know is that, if you hurt one of us then everybody feels the pain. It is how our family works.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What i cant understand is why the jury werent allowed to hear STUARTS version? Im pretty sure that if they did it would have changed the outcome.

 

   I should imagine it was because he was a co-accused (not a compellable witness) and therefore once he had pleaded guilty there was no legal mechanism to admit what he had to say unless he agreed to give evidence. The way the jury would have been able to hear the evidence would have been for example if both men had blamed the other for being the driver and gone for a 'cut throat' defence. Somebody with better legal qualifications than me will correct me if I am wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was especially galling to read the defendant's solicitor blaming the government for abandoning him to a life of crime. Next thing he'll be suing for damages. Where was his family during his formative years (though that's a daft question as some of them were convicted of assisting him in covering his tracks). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's the cancer of modern society- It's always someone else's fault , and to hold someone fully accountable for their evil is wrong.

He will always be a threat to others. I hope he stays inside until his dying day.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

   I should imagine it was because he was a co-accused (not a compellable witness) and therefore once he had pleaded guilty there was no legal mechanism to admit what he had to say unless he agreed to give evidence. The way the jury would have been able to hear the evidence would have been for example if both men had blamed the other for being the driver and gone for a 'cut throat' defence. Somebody with better legal qualifications than me will correct me if I am wrong.

 

I think you are probably correct.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But it does appear that he had vital evidence to give, but, for some legal reason, he was not able to give it.

Do we know if he wanted to give evidence and the judge ruled it prejudicial following legal argument and therefore inadmissible, or whether the CPS opted not to use the evidence of a co-accused willing to take the stand (hopefully not the case) or did he simply refuse to give evidence and was non compellable?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There are 27 hidden replies in this thread that you do not currently have access to as a Guest User of our forum. To unlock the forum register for an account for FREE today by clicking HERE

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.