In June 2014, my barrister received a solicitors letter telling me I had to take certain comments off my blog, as it was ‘detrimental’ to their clients case. On advice from the Police I complied with the request and also didn’t post anything further. To everyone who was following my blog and the legal debate, please accept my sincere apologies.
Aspects of the British justice system will be questioned and debated again, as will all writerly stuff, mine and mainly others.
I believe that ethically and morally in today’s society, the boundaries of responsibility are starting to blur. In todays ‘blame’ culture, it’s always ‘someone else’s’ fault, often despite overwhelming evidence.
Paula wrote on the blog a few days ago ‘I have a 26 year old son of my own who I have observed driving around late at night while I have lain awake worrying. If he had been the driver of that car that night I would not have let him get behind the wheel of a car again until he faced up to his responsibilities’
This I feel has given a different perspective to the debate now. Who should take the responsible lead in this hypothetical situation where a person is killed by a young driver in a car accident? Should the driver’s parents take the moral high ground as adults and frog march the driver to the nearest police station to make a confession? This in effect would be a form of ‘self-policing’ the last question about removing the license. Or should they take the low ground and for example provide the driver with another car until the case goes to court?
Often in these cases when the offender eventually does get to the police station by invite, they can just say ‘no comment’ in the interview, and that’s a whole new debate for perhaps later.
So, the moral maze questions for today are?
1. As a responsible person, if your child was the driver of a car that had killed or seriously injured someone, would you agree with Paula, and act responsibly by ‘grounding’ the offender until the case goes to court?
2. Regardless of the fact that the other passengers have a choice about getting into a car, ultimately, the driver needs to take full responsibility for their actions. Would you agree that a driver needs to consider his passengers safety, firstly and foremost, whether paying or non-paying?
Despite being English, I have found myself over the last six months starting to question the viability of some of the legal aspects that we live by in the UK.
If a driver has a car crash, and someone is killed in the car, particularly when no other cars are involved, should the driver be allowed to continue driving until the court case or should the licence be removed straight away?
If a driver blows positive on a breath test, should that person be allowed to continue driving until after the court case or should the licence be removed straight away?
I clearly believe that the answer to both questions is ‘take the licence away’ otherwise I wouldn’t have asked them. I would however be interested in other people’s views on anything to do with dangerous driving, or drunk driving. For example if a member of your family is killed in a car accident, there is no legal redress for you as a victim, unless you are a dependent you are not protected by English law. In other areas of the law where someone is killed by someone else, and it’s not premeditated, i.e. a fight breaks out in a bar and someone is killed accidently, it is still classed as ‘manslaugher’ a lower charge of murder, should this be applied to dangerous or drunk driving?
There are many other laws that just seem wrong or out dated, such as ‘joint enterprise’ but that is a separate discussion and covered very well by the new BBC single drama called ‘Common’
This is my first post and expect that I’m talking to myself, but should anyone read this I would welcome your opinion.