I think he got off lightly!!

See this? I don't think this should be allowed
"However I am indebted to those who have written to the court on your behalf, which shows a better side to you. It seems when you put your mind to it, you are a caring individual."
Click to expand...
You're allowed to kill a horse, almost kill a teenager, run away and hide evidence and then get a light sentence because you're a nice man the rest of the time??? What the hell????
 
Utterly appalling, and an insult to the young girl and her parents. She has to live with that nightmare of what happened for the rest of her life. I think the judge needs to sit on a horse and ride it down a road and see exactly how vulnerable it feels.

The judge said “You are allowed one judicial mistake in your life and this is yours“……. eeeerrrrrrr NO. A mistake is not realising your speed has crept to 34mph in a 30mph, or forgetting your mot ran out 2 days ago - not running into the back of a horse, fleeing the scene, burning the evidence, then lying about it!! I’ve no doubt he went to the police off his own back because he could see the net closing in on him and realised he’d get a better chance in court by pleading guilty.

Interesting to know if he’d ploughed into someone walking/ running on the road or a cyclist would he still have received a suspended sentence(?). Looking back over cases of drivers v vulnerable road users, drivers do seem to get more lenient sentences where a horse is involved and I don’t understand why.
 
Roxylola said:
Is there a way to make a complaint about a judge? As a member of the public not involved.
Click to expand...
I don’t know, but I did “google” the judge - out of interest, wandering whether he was a city guy who had no understanding of horses/ riders, and in 2019 he was listed amongst 3 others as one of the most lenient judges in Britain ! He’s had numerous appeals against the light sentences he’s given out.

How are we supposed to get the general public to respect road safety around horses when there is no just punishment for these types of incidents !
 

Ask for a Crown Court sentence to be reviewed

How to complain to the Attorney General's Office if you think someone's sentence is too low - and what happens if the Court of Appeal get involved
www.gov.uk www.gov.uk

well according to this you can't complain cos its not serious enough in the first place......Try the local MP? But then it has to come from someone in his/her constituency
 
Goldenstar said:
To the worse thing is he used to own a horse how could he just leave the scene .
Click to expand...
Leaving the scene is one thing. In a literal panic I can see how it would happen. To then torch your own van then call the police and report it stolen is NOT fight or flight panic reflex. Hes full of sh*t.

He probably had a share in a racing syndicate or something and is just saying that to get more sympathy. Even then, if I ran over someone's mum, I couldn't just be like "I had a mum once too, so I'm extra extra sorry I promise"
 
"Interesting to know if he’d ploughed into someone walking/ running on the road or a cyclist would he still have received a suspended sentence(?). Looking back over cases of drivers v vulnerable road users, drivers do seem to get more lenient sentences where a horse is involved and I don’t understand why."
Lizziebell - I agree with you. If it was any other vulnerable road user it would be a ban and jail term. I always think when a horse is involved the sentence seems leaner. Basically it's ok if you kill the horse and even more ok to hurt the rider because they are on the horse.
The day will come when a driver who has killed a horse will sue owner for distress and win. Then horses are off the road for good, as you won't get insurance.
 
He should have been banned for at least a year, 6 points on his licence , how pathetic. It’s about time the judges got tough and gave out more fitting punishments… he should have also had a very hefty fine and paid compensation to the victim for her loss , injury and effects on her mental state, poor girl must be devastated… the sentences in this country for many crimes are too lenient IMO ….
 
lizziebell said:
Utterly appalling, and an insult to the young girl and her parents. She has to live with that nightmare of what happened for the rest of her life. I think the judge needs to sit on a horse and ride it down a road and see exactly how vulnerable it feels.

The judge said “You are allowed one judicial mistake in your life and this is yours“……. eeeerrrrrrr NO. A mistake is not realising your speed has crept to 34mph in a 30mph, or forgetting your mot ran out 2 days ago - not running into the back of a horse, fleeing the scene, burning the evidence, then lying about it!! I’ve no doubt he went to the police off his own back because he could see the net closing in on him and realised he’d get a better chance in court by pleading guilty.

Interesting to know if he’d ploughed into someone walking/ running on the road or a cyclist would he still have received a suspended sentence(?). Looking back over cases of drivers v vulnerable road users, drivers do seem to get more lenient sentences where a horse is involved and I don’t understand why.
Click to expand...
Neither do I. Perhaps the idea that horse owners and riders are all monied toffs and can always buy another is still alive and well.
The judiciary might benefit from some education on the cold, wet, skint, heartbreaking reality of people's involvement in the world of horses.
 
Problem is that under the law horses are a 'possession' in the same way that you have a TV or a bicycle. There is no legal difference, as I know from when my horse and 6 others were killed in an arson 27 years ago.

Not that it makes any difference as horse owners aren't in these circumstances after the money, but for the death of a horse you aren't entitled to any payout from the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board (or whatever it's called now). The owner may have gotten a small payout for her physical injuries but there will be no element of payout for mental trauma, even if treatment for mental impact is advised by a medical professional (as it was in my case and for the other horse owners).

Also there is no official support available to the bereaved owner as there would be for the death of a person. No Family Liason Officer or similar.

That poor owner - and others similarly affected - would get nothing from any branch of the state. We were all just left to our own devices and that owner would have had her own serious injuries to contend with at the same time.

I really do feel that there ought to be some recognition under the law of the significant impact the death of a pet has on the owner when that death is the result of a crime such as this.
 
The article is so badly written and so much information is missing that although I find the sentence too lenient for the numerous crimes committed, I don't think I can form a very strong opinion...

For example, there is one reference to a "Patrick Kelly"; no explanation of who he is (defence for the convicted, perhaps). Neither is there any mention of the "tariff" for these offences.

Even if the judge considered that the offence of preventing the course of justice was of "minimal culpability" and caused the last level of harm, he could have given a sentence of up to nine months in custody, according to the guidelines published by the Sentencing Council.

The rider should definitely follow this up with a civil case for the loss of her horse and for physical and mental trauma.
 
reynold said:
Problem is that under the law horses are a 'possession' in the same way that you have a TV or a bicycle. There is no legal difference, as I know from when my horse and 6 others were killed in an arson 27 years ago.

Not that it makes any difference as horse owners aren't in these circumstances after the money, but for the death of a horse you aren't entitled to any payout from the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board (or whatever it's called now). The owner may have gotten a small payout for her physical injuries but there will be no element of payout for mental trauma, even if treatment for mental impact is advised by a medical professional (as it was in my case and for the other horse owners).

Also there is no official support available to the bereaved owner as there would be for the death of a person. No Family Liason Officer or similar.

That poor owner - and others similarly affected - would get nothing from any branch of the state. We were all just left to our own devices and that owner would have had her own serious injuries to contend with at the same time.

I really do feel that there ought to be some recognition under the law of the significant impact the death of a pet has on the owner when that death is the result of a crime such as this.
Click to expand...

I agree entirely with what you say. The Law does need to change to keep up with modern day life and happenings. Im so very sorry about the loss of your horse, how absolutely devastating and heartbreaking.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top