Lawes, R v

For sentencing causing death by careless driving, driving at a speed inappropriate to the prevailing conditions and thereby losing control on bends falls within the middle guideline category of other careless driving. It is not merely momentary inattention without aggravating features.

The aggravating factor of more than one person killed concerns two independent persons. A court must not reject a suspended sentence as no real punishment simply because an offender is respectable. A suspended custodial sentence carries requirements and remains a substantial sentence. Sentencing in this area remains highly fact-sensitive.

The appellant pleaded guilty to causing the death of PC Dee Weatherley by careless driving. While negotiating bends on a wet road in darkness, she lost control of her car after driving too fast for the conditions and collided with the deceased's vehicle. PC Weatherley, who was pregnant, and her unborn child died.

At the Crown Court at Oxford, HHJ Compston imposed six months' immediate imprisonment, a three-year driving disqualification and an extended re-test requirement. The appellant appealed only the custodial sentence. The central issues were the appropriate guideline category and whether the custodial term should have been suspended.

1. Appeal allowed to the extent indicated. The Court replaced the immediate six-month custodial sentence with six months' imprisonment suspended for 18 months. It imposed 250 hours' unpaid work and participation in restorative justice if possible. The driving disqualification and extended re-test were unaffected because they were not appealed.

2. The appellant's driving was too fast for the wet and dark conditions. That carelessness caused her to lose control while negotiating bends. The case therefore fell within the middle category of the Definitive Sentencing Guidelines for Death by Driving: other careless or inconsiderate driving. It did not fall within the lowest category of momentary inattention without aggravating factors.

3. There were no additional aggravating features. The guideline reference to more than one person being killed was intended to address two independent persons, not the death of a pregnant person together with her unborn child. The Court gave weight to the admissions at the scene, early guilty plea, long accident-free driving record, remorse, and otherwise exemplary personal history.

4. The judge erred by treating suspension as a mere absence of punishment for a respectable offender. A suspended sentence would necessarily have carried requirements, including the unpaid work and supervision proposed. In all the circumstances, suspension was the just response; the criminal court was to impose just punishment, not revenge or brute outrage at a tragic consequence.

5. R v Karl Campbell [2009] EWCA Crim 2459 was factually different and was not intended to lay down specific sentencing guidelines. The Court stressed that its own decision was likewise not general guidance, because the facts are crucial in sentencing this offence.

• Court of Appeal (Criminal Division): Appeal against sentence allowed in part; immediate custody was replaced by a suspended sentence: [2009] EWCA Crim 2767.
• Crown Court at Oxford: On 26 November 2009, HHJ Compston imposed six months' immediate imprisonment, a three-year driving disqualification and an extended re-test requirement following a guilty plea to causing death by careless driving.