Sentancing differences?

[Jim Goose]

Two different states, but similier circumstances?

http://news.ninemsn.com.au/national/...elbourne-crash

Two drag racing Melbourne hoons who engaged in a show of bravado before a high speed crash that resulted in the death of a teenager have been jailed.

Damian Rodi and Jarrod Rooke spoke to each other at a set of lights before racing down Ferntree Gully Road in suburban Wheelers Hill in February 2007.

Rooke's turbo-charged Mitsubishi Lancer was travelling at between 114km/h and 126km/h in the 80km/h zone when it struck a taxi turning right.

A passenger in Rooke's car, 15-year-old Mitchell Cairnduff, was killed.

Two more of his passengers and a passenger in the taxi were seriously injured.

Jailing the pair on Friday, Victorian County Court Judge Rachelle Lewitan said the driving was dangerous and had far-reaching consequences.

"This is not a case of momentary or casual lapse of attention, but it involved competitive driving in a show of bravado," she said.

Judge Lewitan said the moral culpability of both men was high.

Rooke, 27, of Wheelers Hill, was jailed for four years and he must serve two years before being eligible for parole.

Rodi, of Rowville, was imprisoned for three years and three months with a non-parole period of 18 months.

The court heard Rodi, 21, had shown no remorse for the crash because he did not feel he was responsible for it.

Both men were found guilty by a jury of dangerous driving causing death and three counts of dangerous driving causing serious injury.

They were cleared of the more serious charge of culpable driving.

Outside court, Mitchell's father Brian Cairnduff said the sentence should send a message to drivers that if they kill someone they will go to jail.

"Society has had enough of hoon drivers," he told reporters.

"In four years and three years respectively (Rooke and Rodi) will get out and they will have to rebuild their lives where as we don't get that chance.

"No term would be long enough as far as I'm concerned."

Mitchell would have celebrated his 19th birthday next Tuesday.

As Rooke was led from the court dock by prison guards, Mitchell's mother Andrea spoke to him.

"I said I hope he is guilty for the rest of his life," she told reporters.

"We didn't know he was in the car. We dropped him off at 7.30 at a friend's house and he was dead two hours later.

"It is imperative that kids should tell their parents where they are, you think they are somewhere and they are not."

The other one involves two deaths:

http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=1052608

Drug-affected driver Glenn Ewan Spark doesn't remember the crash that killed a Sydney mother and daughter.

But the shattered family of Christine Michelle Paterson and her daughter Christine Sarah, both of Sackville Reach, will never forget that day.

In sentencing 25-year-old Spark to at least 11 years and three months jail for the manslaughter of the two women, Judge Helen Syme on Friday said it was a "disaster waiting for a place to happen".

According to the agreed facts, Spark stole a high-powered sports car the night before the crash.

On the morning of September 6, 2008, Spark, who had not slept for two days and was withdrawing from methamphetamines, was pursued by police on Windsor Road, in northwestern Sydney, reaching high speeds.

Even after police stopped the chase, witnesses saw Spark going "flat out" before he collided head-on with the Patersons' car, killing the 39-year-old mother and her 18-year daughter instantly.

Having lost his wife and daughter, David Paterson said no jail sentence would be long enough for Spark.

"There's no such thing as closure. I've still got to go on. So does my son," Mr Paterson told reporters outside the NSW District Court in Sydney.

The judge said there was an element of premeditation in Spark's actions. He'd stolen and driven it several times in the hours leading up to the fatal crash.

"The ingestion of the drugs and the decision to take and drive a high-force car were all decisions made deliberately," Judge Syme said.

"He was, in effect, a person for whom a motor vehicle accident was almost inevitable."

The judge noted Spark, who was unlicensed and on parole after serving time for car theft, did not remember the police pursuit or the collision.

She took into consideration the victim impact statements given by the women's family.

"This family's existence has been completely shattered ... by the actions of the offender," she said.

Spark, who was supported by family members, remained composed as the judge sentenced him to a maximum term of 15 years.

Outside court, Valerie Doran sobbed and held a black and white photograph of her only daughter and eldest granddaughter.

"That's my beautiful girls and they've been taken away from me," she said.

Spark will be eligible for parole on January 9, 2020.

=============================

Rooke, 27, of Wheelers Hill, was jailed for four years and he must serve two years before being eligible for parole.

Rodi, of Rowville, was imprisoned for three years and three months with a non-parole period of 18 months.

The court heard Rodi, 21, had shown no remorse for the crash because he did not feel he was responsible for it.

While in one case the woman killed two people while on a bender, 11yrs for the death of two people is getting there, but these two idiots from Melb, "he didnt feel responsible for it" ??? I mean this guy deserves to become the play thing in some jail cell. The puny sentence is a slap on the wrist.

[RG]

Victorian sentencing is nothing more than a sick joke. This has been known for quite some time.

[Scaffy]

I'm in no way saying it's right, but all we get to see is a newspaper article in which there may be some facts. All the facts and circumstances of each case are not known to us, so it's hard to comment. I've seen prosecutors/defense lawyers misquoted by the newspapers many times before, even to the extent of a quote that was meant to be by a defense lawyer, when in fact it was by a prosecutor.

But these cases aren't really comparing apples to apples. You have what appears to be a serious repeat offender vs some stupid kid that made a very, very bad decision. Who knows, maybe the taxi turned right in front of him at a set of green lights, or ran a stop sign and pulled out in front of him? If this were to happen to you and you were doing 10km/hr over the speed limit, would it be your fault because you were exceeding the speed limit, or the taxi's fault because he pulled out in front of you?

Don't get me wrong, I'm not making excuses, merely adding some food-for-thought.

[Jim Goose]

Originally Posted by Scaffy

I'm in no way saying it's right, but all we get to see is a newspaper article in which there may be some facts. All the facts and circumstances of each case are not known to us, so it's hard to comment. I've seen prosecutors/defense lawyers misquoted by the newspapers many times before, even to the extent of a quote that was meant to be by a defense lawyer, when in fact it was by a prosecutor.

But these cases aren't really comparing apples to apples. You have what appears to be a serious repeat offender vs some stupid kid that made a very, very bad decision. Who knows, maybe the taxi turned right in front of him at a set of green lights, or ran a stop sign and pulled out in front of him? If this were to happen to you and you were doing 10km/hr over the speed limit, would it be your fault because you were exceeding the speed limit, or the taxi's fault because he pulled out in front of you?

Don't get me wrong, I'm not making excuses, merely adding some food-for-thought.

Um, well your comments sounds like you are making excuses for a couple of morons street racing.... Damn silly Taxi then for being on the road.

[FGII-XR6]

It's quite obvious from his post he is not making excuses for street racers but pointing out how easy it is to judge different situations inaccurately without having all the facts at hand, no one here was in the court to hear all the circumstances in this case so no one here can fairly compare the 2 sentences.
the way I see it scaffy has a different view of things to you and has the inteligence to see that there could be more than meets the eye here ( after all journalists only print what look good) how dare he point this out, shame on you scaffy

Originally Posted by Jim Goose

Um, well your comments sounds like you are making excuses for a couple of morons street racing.... Damn silly Taxi then for being on the road.

[pauljh74]

Originally Posted by Scaffy

You have what appears to be a serious repeat offender vs some stupid kid that made a very, very bad decision. Who knows, maybe the taxi turned right in front of him at a set of green lights, or ran a stop sign and pulled out in front of him? If this were to happen to you and you were doing 10km/hr over the speed limit, would it be your fault because you were exceeding the speed limit, or the taxi's fault because he pulled out in front of you?

I agree that the taxi contributed if he turned in front of the cars - even if they were speeding 30-40km/h. That road is straight and part of judging whether it is safe to turn is watching the closing speed of the approaching cars. If they are speeding, then you wait, if they are going slow, you have an opportunity. Never assume oncoming cars are going under or near the speed limit - use your own eyes. Of course the excessive speed increased the chances of a collision, but other drivers should still turn when safe.

On the comparison of the 2 cases - the second is significantly more serious - you have car theft, drug use and then a car chase with police on top of already being on parole for car theft and not even licensed. The double fatality is the only common event - but the circumstances leading up to it are different in severity.

[GasoLane]

Originally Posted by Jim Goose

Sentancing differences?

The main difference is Sentencing

[reece1]

from not knowing all the details and only reading the above post i think the sentences of the kids is fair, i think while it very sad for the family involved and the victim was very young they were all in the car together having fun doing the wrong thing till the unfortunate happened. where as the other case is completly different and the sentence if anything is not long enough. your comparing apples to oranges.

[Burnout]

Sentencing in these cases varies for a number of reasons, firstly these sentences were handed down in two different states, where the judicial authority (The Judge) has to abide by the sentencing legislation in each state. (Yes they do vary.)
Another thing is the judicial authority is bound to abide by precedent in these matters, (Past sentencing for similar offenses in cases like the case before the judge).
Next the judicial authority is to take into account the severity of impact upon the victim & relatives (if any) in the case.
Next the judicial authority takes into account any mitigation of behalf of the defendant or defendants.
The judicial authority may then take into account the record, if any of the defendant.
Before a sentence may be formulated, if sentencing the defendant, the judicial authority must provide reasons for the sentence or sentences.
The judicial authority would also be aware when sentencing that the defendant may appeal the sentence and therefore the sentence must stand the scrutiny of a higher court, (the appeals court).

See it's easy isn't it!

[3vXT]

^^^ Thats not very mob like. Where is your burning pitchfork?

[BPXR6T]

They got of lightly. The copper I was talking to the other day was telling me its typically 5 years for culpable driving. He was telling me the local prison treat that type of offender pretty well too. Learn a trade, day release with a trustee for work etc.

[Scaffy]

@Jim Goose: if that is how you comprehend what I have written, then there's nothing more I have to say to you. Others are able to see what I'm saying. At the end of the day though, they were doing the wrong thing and if they weren't, this tragedy would not have happened. Maybe the car after the taxi would've pulled out in front if them if they were doing 80 and there could still have been a fatality. We'll never know. I'm sorry I didn't give you the response you were expecting.

@BPXR6T: They were cleared of culpable driving. I think it's a great idea to rehabilitate people who've been incarcerated. I'm pretty sure that just about every prison in the country has rehabilitation programs in different areas, from beahvioural/anger management and cognitive skills to trades and university degrees. Isn't it better to try and teach these people new skills so when they are released they have a better chance of reintegrating into society and not falling back into old habits?

[BPXR6T]

^didn't say there was anything wrong with it.

[Scaffy]

I wasn't sure, but felt I'd share my view in any case

edit - before others jumped on saying they should get nothing and be locked up in solitary confinement for the entirity of their sentEnce. Because that works, doesn't it?

[Full Noise]

The way I see it is that the clown from Rowville was charged with dangerous driving causing death, also three counts of dangerous driving causing serious injury so the penalty was four years. He may have been street racing, however, the taxi made a right hand turn in front of him.

It doesn’t matter if he was doing 50 or 150 kph, he was still oncoming traffic. I live about three minutes away from where this accident happened and still can’t understand why the taxi made the right hand turn. Personally, I would have waited the extra two seconds. I’m not making excuses for the bloke who was racing, I just can’t see the sense in killing someone to prove a point.

The report states that Jarrod Rooke was travelling between 114 and 126 in the 80 zone. 12 kph is a big margin for error from the police investigators who usually can narrow the speeds down to a lot less than that.

Put simply, at 34 kph, you will travel 9.44 metres a second. At 46 kph, you travel 12.78 metres a second so there’s a 12 kph “grey area” or 3.34 metres a second variance. The way I see it, it’s the copper’s having a bet each way.

Depending on how long it took the taxi to actually turn right across Ferntree Gully Road (three lanes) there could have still been an accident even if Jarrod Rooke was travelling at 80 kph (22.22) metres a second, all be it a minor one. At 114kph, the distance is 31.67 metres a second. I’m sure that the courts would have taken all of this into account.

The other clown from Sydney, while “coming down” from amphetamines was being pursued by police at high speed and after the chase was called off, hit another vehicle head on killing two people, so he was charged with two counts of manslaughter.

No amount of jail time will stop the grief that these families are going through. Hopefully, while in jail, these people can think about their actions and “hopefully” come out of it understanding what they have really done to all of the families involved (their own included) and hopefully make some positive contribution to society.

These are both tragic cases and as Burnout has mentioned, the penalties for these two different offences vary from state to state.