Man who killed cyclist given eight month prison sentence

People say things like "I live 582,820,402 miles from my job" like it just happened like that, and there were never any choices involved. There was no other job they could have had, no place else they could have lived.

They talk about driving as if we were all born with wheels and internal combustion engines, and to take those away is tantamount to a cruel amputation.

I'd rather be a fish out of water than human remains in a coffin.

Killers do not get to wail like they've been victimized. At least when his family visits him it will be for more than to weep and leave fresh flowers.

Chico Mwamba mowed down an OAP on a ped. crossing and just got a 160 quid fine and not even a day's ban. I would say that he must have been pretty dangerous, so why the inconsistency of sentencing?

Meanwhile in Leeds, the chap who biffed Chris Kirkland the goal keeper get 16 weeks in prison.

so causing the death of someone is worth 2 whacks of a footballer!

Just imagine if he had been a premiership footballer (and a proper one not a goalie) he would have probably got a year in sing-sing

Those who depend on their cars for their work should drive particularly carefully.

The argument that they should be allowed to continue driving because otherwise they will have difficulty getting to work doesn't cut it when they have shown themselves unable to operate their vehicle safely and have killed another person through carelessness or lack of skill.

He can move or get another job, and if he gets around by bike for 2 years, then when he gets his license back in 2 he will better understand the importance of safe and considerate driving on public roads.

I have to agree with Ragtag is not nearly enough for taken away anothers life, but considering some of the other sentences handed out for similar incidents (as reported on this site) it is a (small) step in the right direction.

This is almost as much an insult as just giving the guy a fine, but it light of earlier cases at least it's a step in the right direction.

To be fair to the defence lawyer, they would say that, it's kind of their job to get their client off with the least time/fine, so take it with a pinch of salt. The judge on the other hand needs to be clearer on what message they are sending.

"It was carelessness to the point of dangerousness.

It was a bit past the point of dangerousness surely since the driver killed someone due to his rubbish driving. And who cares if he'd be a fish out of water in prison.

"He would be like a fish out of water if sent to prison." WTF is that supposed to mean? He is too posh? Gets claustrophobia? Doesn't like sharing a room? Must have breakfast in bed?

'Carelessness _to the point of_ dangerousness'

'to the point of'!?

I reckon it went a bit beyond that to have resulted in another person's death.

We really are in thrall to the automobile aren't we!

"Manson's lawyer Paul Tubb had argued for leniency,..."
Mr Tubb; He killed another human being and got only 8 months in prison from which he'll be out in 4 less any other time he spent in custody.
He'll also be in one of the lowest category holiday camps because he's not a murderer, just careless.
I think that's lenient enough, don't you?

"Manson's lawyer Paul Tubb had argued for leniency, saying that his client "now faces losing his job, which involves a 50-mile round trip each day.

"He would be like a fish out of water if sent to prison.""

That's sort of the point isn't it Mr Lawyer?