Student who killed her sister in car crash spared jail after judge rules she has been punished enough

First topic message reminder :

The daughter of a driving instructor who killed her teenage sister in a horror crash has been spared jail after a judge accepted no sentence could punish her more than her "incalculable" loss.

Criminology student Meliha Kaya, 22, was "far in excess of the speed limit" as she drove her 16-year-old sister Elif and a friend back from the George pub in Wanstead, east London, on February 13, 2016, experts believe.

Her Mini swerved on to the wrong side of the road, collided with a BMW and went over a low wall, hitting a tree on the 30mph Chigwell Road in east London at around 1.10am.

The teenager was found seriously injured and died at the scene. Her sister, then 19, was left in a life-threatening condition and spent weeks in hospital, the Old Bailey heard on Friday.

Elif was the only one wearing a seat belt and had asked to sit in the front seat for the journey, despite normally sitting in the back, prosecutor Julian Evans said.

Passenger Ayla Osman, 24, was also left with life-changing injuries. On the day of her trial earlier this week, Meliha Kaya tearfully pleaded guilty to causing death and serious injury by her dangerous driving.

Sentencing her to a suspended jail term, the judge said: "Nothing she can ever do will repair that loss to herself and her family. No sentence I can impose can punish her as much as this."


https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/06/22/student-killed-sister-car-crash-spared-jail-judge-rules-has/

Tommy Monk wrote:It wasn't an accident... it was causing death by dangerous driving...!!!


That is a serious criminal offence!!!


And punishable by a custodial sentence of up to life imprisonment!!!

Best hand yourself in to the police then, because you cannot tell me you’ve never gone over the speed limit.
Or maybe you’ll wait until you kill someone by doing so and hand yourself over willingly and do your time without complaining.

Don’t be a hypocrite.

Tommy Monk wrote:It wasn't an accident... it was causing death by dangerous driving...!!!

That is a serious criminal offence!!!

And punishable by a custodial sentence of up to life imprisonment!!!

Tommy, there's been no legal finding as to causation.  The court would have to connect any speeding to the event of the accident...something it never did.  No witness testimony ever substantiated such a connection.  No accident reconstructionist took the stand to say that speeding was a cause, or even a contributing factor.  It's only your rush to a prejudicial (premature) conclusion that leads you to make the connection between the speed and the accident.

Once the defendant chose to accept the verdict, the record froze and the necessary facts were disregarded or cast away.  Only the charging document mentions speeding, and then only relatively: "far in excess".  No facts; just a guess. One expert even said, it was just a guess.  Let's assume her speed exceeded the limit by 1-mph.  That's "far in excess" of .05-mph...indeed, it's double.  Yet, few accidents are caused by 1-mph.  No facts establish speed was a contribution to the accident.

Didge wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:It wasn't an accident... it was causing death by dangerous driving...!!!


That is a serious criminal offence!!!


And punishable by a custodial sentence of up to life imprisonment!!!

Actually it was an accident

There was no intent to crash the car and kill her sister

No... it was dangerous driving...!


And causing death and serious injury by dangerous driving...!


If there was intent to kill involved then it would also be murder!

Original Quill wrote:

Lord Foul wrote:I would agree in the main Quill, with most of your points, however it should be noted that she was in fact subjected to a 2 year custodial sentence for the death and 1 year for the injury......SO the judge clearly considered there to be some fair degree of recklessness involved....

the fact he then suspended those sentences for 12 months is his recognition that DESPITE the recklessness involved and the criminal responsibility thereto attached, he consideres that she has already been "punished enough", and that "actuating" that sentence would be "excessive" to the ends of justice.

that is my take on it....

Well, the judge had no choice.  Despite the fact that the defendant pleaded guilty, she didn't admit to any aggravating circumstances, or any circumstances whatsoever, and the court has no evidence of causation.  

She admitted only to speeding, which we all do now and then.  The speeding did not fit into the cause of the sister's death.  So, it's a speeding ticket, nothing more.

What are you talking about, you idiot!!!???


Speeding IS an aggravating circumstance... and she admitted to it!!!


If she wasn't speeding and driving like a lunatic then she wouldn't have crashed at high speed and her sister & other passenger would have both got home safe & well...!!!

Quill... what are you talking about here...


"Tommy, there's been no legal finding as to causation.  The court would have to connect any speeding to the event of the accident...something it never did.  No witness testimony ever substantiated such a connection.

Once the defendant chose to accept the verdict..."



She admitted speeding...!!!


She admitted causing death and serious injury by dangerous driving...!!!


A defendant does not have any choice to 'accept the verdict' before it is given by the jury...!!!


She was guilty as charged, and had no choice but to plead guilty due to her guilt plus the evidence against her!!!

Tommy Monk wrote:She admitted speeding...!!!

But there is nothing connecting speeding with the accident.  Your court would need a record from an accident reconstructionist to show that speeding played a part in the cause of this accident.

Tommy Monk wrote:She admitted causing death and serious injury by dangerous driving...!!!

 

No, she admitted to the charges in a criminal proceeding.  At best, the charges are speeding.

The cause of the accident is another matter.

Tommy Monk wrote:A defendant does not have any choice to 'accept the verdict' before it is given by the jury...!!!

Precisely.  I've been preaching this to you...criminal law is separate from civil law.  She was charged criminally, only with speeding.  In order to link this to the death, you need a factual determination as to the causation of the accident.  Causation is a factual finding.

The experts couldn't even agree on the actual speed, let alone whether it contributed.

Tommy Monk wrote:She was guilty as charged, and had no choice but to plead guilty due to her guilt plus the evidence against her!!!

She pleaded only to the allegations of the charging document.  No cause...no crime.  Guilty as charged ... only of speeding.  The experts could not even establish what was the speed.  Without that, it's impossible to say that speeding even figured into the cause of death.

You have lost the plot...!


She was charged with causing death and serious injury by dangerous driving... and found guilty of both charges!!!


She was driving on the wrong side of the road when she crashed into another car before hitting the wall and tree...

and she was sentenced to a 2 year custodial sentence.....

Tommy Monk wrote:You have lost the plot...!


She was charged with causing death and serious injury by dangerous driving... and found guilty of both charges!!!


She was driving on the wrong side of the road when she crashed into another car before hitting the wall and tree...

Victor wrote:and she was sentenced to a 2 year custodial sentence.....

Tommy, I assume all your questions are answered.

No... I still think suspended sentence is too lenient...!