Connect with like-minded education professionals and have your say on the issues that matter to you.
Don't forget to look at the how to guide.
Discussion in 'Personal' started by peakster, Jan 23, 2019.
Now let's hope they throw the s***bag in jail
No doubt they will, but I'll wager a few quid it wont be for very long regardless of the headline sentence.
Not that I consider him in the least innocent, but let's get the trial over first. However, in the light of his previous actions remanded until the trial is reasonable.
He's had the trial, he didn't bother to turn up for it. He has been found guilty by his peers and sentenced. Job done.
Stupid computer had a funny turn!
Thank you. I haven't really been paying attention.
Surely there should be another trial for breaking bail conditions - I'd hope they add a couple of years onto his sentence.
Perhaps they could arrange for him to do his sentence in Siberia.
Seems a bit harsh. Although I don't know the full details, from what I gather he took her out for a spin in his boat, they crashed/both ended up in the water and whilst he was able to cling on and survive, she was not.
I'm not even sure how they're classing it as manslaughter either. I thought manslaughter had to be the result of a act that was criminal by itself.
This helps explain why he was found guilty of manslaughter due to negligence:
"The pair headed out on his 1980s, red, 14ft Fletcher Arrowflyte GTO which he'd bought from Gumtree. The court heard the boat was badly maintained.
Witnesses for the prosecution, who examined it after the accident, said it had a number of pre-existing defects, including "poor and sloppy steering" and a "partially opaque" windscreen.
On the night of the accident, Shepherd sped along the Thames towards the Houses of Parliament at 30 knots - well above the 12 knot limit for that part of the river.
It was cold and dark. He'd taken champagne on board, and according to his account, he let Charlotte take over the steering on their way back for a "thrill".
Prosecutor Aftab Jafferjee QC described that decision as "sheer madness".
Not long after Charlotte took the controls the boat crashed and capsized by Plantation Wharf.
It's thought it hit a floating piece of timber or tree.
Steven Morrissey, who lives in a flat close to Wandsworth Bridge, said in a witness statement he heard Shepherd calling out.
"He just kept saying, 'Help me, help me, somebody help me.' It was just 'help me' - not 'us', or 'her'."
Shepherd was found clinging to the upturned hull of the boat near the bridge at about 23:40. Charlotte was found in the water close by just before midnight.
She was taken to hospital where she was pronounced dead, with a post-mortem examination later finding she had died from cold water immersion.
When emergency crews spoke to Shepherd after he was pulled from the water they said he appeared extremely confused and drunk. Jurors heard how he asked them where Charlotte was, but he couldn't remember her name."
I think as the boats owner he was responsible for her safety, the boat was a bit dodgy to start with I think and they weren't wearing life jackets so he took her into a dangerous situation. Also, I don't think he made much effort to try and save her, just looking out for himself.
But the point is, it is not a criminal offense to drive a "dodgy" boat, not wear life jackets, only save yourself and not your passenger etc. I'm just comparing it (in my head) to a speeding driver of a car who survives an accident that kills their passenger. That is not manslaughter, it's causing death by dangerous driving.
'Death by dangerous driving' is punishable by a prison sentence of up to 14 years.
Jack Shepherd was convicted of the manslaughter by gross negligence
I don't know the details or how they reached those conclusions. I seem to remember that there is an offence of "failing to assist" or similar, if you deliberately or negligently don't help someone who will suffer death or injury by your inaction, but I don't know if that applied here.
He admitted to being drunk. It will all come out over the next few weeks/months. Apparently he is going to contest the extradition from Georgia. Admittedly I know little about it, but there must have been evidence for a prosecution and he did abscond during the trial.
Reading that, he wasn't even driving the boat when they crashed and he was found clinging to the upturned hull... hardly in a position to help somebody else. I'm now really confused why it was considered manslaughter and why he was sentenced to six years imprisonment.
(I'd just like to add, if it was six years for skipping bail, I'd have little issue, but the six year sentence seems to be just for allowing his date to drive his speedboat.)
Do you need a licence to drive a speedboat? If not, then if I lend my bicycle to a drunk friend who gets killed at a road junction - can I be held responsible ?
There was something on the radio earlier today about this, the law was changed not so long ago so that people can be tried in their absence. He didn't even turn up to his own trial and so offered no evidence or defence.
I don't know what the laws are for driving boats, other than the owner is responsible for the safety of the vessel. They both boarded it after drinking, they drove it at well above the speed limit for that part of the river, he allowed her to drive it while knowing she was drunk and had no experience in doing so and in the dark, he was right next to her. She died, as far as I can see he's pretty culpable.
Maybe if he'd have turned up instead of running away the sentence would have been lower, he's now appealing the sentence (at public expense) while in another country having not bothered to attend the trial.
edit: ...and to add insult to injury, his basis for fighting possible extradition is that the victims father works in the prison service in some capacity and he therefore thinks he won't be treated fairly, that somehow the father will contrive to harm him in some way - on the basis of zero evidence.
He comes across as a life-long spoilt brat and sociopath.
Gross negligence manslaughter means that he was negligent (as in the civil courts) but it lead to death (gross) rather than injury. It therefore becomes a criminal, rather than civil, case. He was the skipper and it was his boat.