The UK Government has said it will not remove the distinction between causing death by careless driving and dangerous driving, despite calls from Caerphilly MP Wayne David.
Mr David was granted a debate in the House of Commons on Tuesday February 7, calling for a change in the law after the deaths of three young men from Bargoed in 2015.
Ryan Gibbons, 20, Rhys Jones, 18, Joe Daniels, 18, all from the Bargoed area, were passengers in a white Seat Ibiza on October 11 2015, when it crashed into a telegraph pole on Aberdare Road, Merthyr Tydfil.
Mr Gibbons, a father-of-one, and best friend Mr Jones died at the scene, while Mr Daniels died 30 days later from his injuries.
The car’s driver, John Spencer Graham, 21, admitted three counts of death by careless driving and was jailed for ten months for each charge at Merthyr Tydfil Crown Court on Friday, August 12 last year. Charges of death by dangerous driving against Graham were dismissed by the judge.
Speaking before the debate, Mr David, said: “The horrific accident that caused the death of three young men has highlighted the need for the law to be changed. I am calling upon the Government to remove the distinction between careless driving and dangerous driving. It is also important for the sentence in such cases to reflect the gravity of the crime.
“It is surely wrong that someone who has caused the death of three people should be convicted of an offence which is deemed ‘careless’.
“I am calling upon the Government to acknowledge that there is a lack of public confidence in the law as it relates to driving offences that cause death and injury. I would hope that the Government begins a consultative process on this issue, with a view to changing the law.”
The debate followed the UK Government’s consultation on driving offences and penalties relating to causing death or serious injury, which received more than 9,000 responses before it closed at the beginning of February.
However, the UK Government rebuffed Mr David’s calls.
Justice Minister, Sam Gyimah, told the debate: “I know that there was a particularly tragic case in [Mr David’s] constituency when three young men were killed by a driver who was subsequently convicted of causing death by careless driving.
“I extend my deepest sympathies to the families and friends of those three young men who died when they were just at the beginning of their adult lives.
“Our law needs to reflect that while the harm caused in homicide cases and fatal driving offences is the same, because someone has died, the offender’s culpability for the death may be significantly different.
“The consultation examined the option for a single bad driving offence.
“It set out in detail why the Government are not persuaded of a case for change. Those who propose a single test have said that it will lead to more convictions and longer sentences.
“[We] do not believe that that is necessarily the case. That is because the maximum penalty for the single offence would have to be broad enough to cover the most serious cases – we have proposed a life sentence for causing death – and also the least serious when the driver’s culpability for the death is very low.
“If we do not have a distinction in the offences between the seriousness of the offending, it is possible that the conviction rate may actually fall because juries might be reluctant to convict a driver in lesser cases – one where they can imagine themselves in the same position – for an offence with a very serious maximum penalty.”
Surely careless driving and dangerous driving are one of the same, the driver is putting the lives of others at risk by driving in such a way as to not consider the safety of others. The word ‘careless’ is wholly inappropriate in the context of road deaths caused by bad driving, and insulting to bereaved families. The maximum penalty for causing death by careless driving is 5 years, which the driver Mr Graham should have been given, and on all three counts, a total sentence of 15 years, a sentence of 30 months is a disgrace, he took away the lives of 3 young men and destroyed their families yet Mr Graham will probably be a free man in 12 months.
The offence is one of dangerous driving, and I am not for one moment suggesting this is a trivial concern. But whether somebody is harmed as a result is a matter of luck, and being in the wrong place at the wrong time. Unless the driver is deliberately intending to cause harm (which would be an entirely different crime), he needs to be prosecuted for the crime he has committed.
For example, let’s say I knock back half a dozen pints and then drive down Cardiff Road at 50 mph. Absolutely, the courts should throw the book at me. But why should I get off more lightly simply because I got lucky and nobody happened to get in the way?
The question is not whether such drivers should be sentenced for the consequences of their actions, but why they get off so lightly having behaved so irresponsibly, thanks simply to luck.