This is the latest on that guy we were discussing …
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/4757802.stm
… at least he was jailed, although perhaps it should be for longer!
3 years…not bad considering some of the sentences being handed down lately. But still not enough for snuffing out a life AND trying to cover it up as well.
Dafydd Evans… he wont be the only Dafydd in the prison villiage me reckons…
There is no justice in that sentence at all.
Feeling sorry for both men and their families 
No winners there.
People might drive more cautiously if they thought they would get locked up for killing someone instead of a slap on the wrist!!
The most gauling thing about this affair is the cowardly way he tried covering up what he did. We can all make mistakes, but as bikers we are more aware (or should be more aware) of what are mistakes can do to ourselves and then to others, by and large we live with the consequences of our actions and take our punishment when due. I don’t know of any genuine biker who would behave like this and whilst I feel for both families (I do agree there are no winners here), I kinda hope he gets his justice inside.
"Evans’ barrister Hefin Rees told the court on Tuesday that his client was a broken and shattered man, who had lived like a hermit since the accident. "A jail sentence would have “a very severe effect” on him, said Mr Rees. As well as the suicide warning, Evans had expressed thoughts of self-harm during interview. “There is no doubt that he is absolutely terrified,” said Mr Rees. "
Boo-hoo, my heart bleeds. Just about time killing people while drinking and driving merited a custodial sentence. Pity it’s not a longer one, as he lied about his drinking, fled the scene of a fatal accident caused by himself, and then tried to blame the third, now deceased, party. Deserves everything coming to him from the other inmates.
A shame his mate didnt get some bird for helping him, but in the current climate [the jails are all full] him getting 3 years is actually a result.
Burglars “used” to get 3 years as a standard for domestic burglaries, my barrister mate has just defended a junkie up for his 3rd domestic burglary in a year who has been eventually sent down, but only because he didnt turn up for his drug testing . . . . if he had turned up and failed it would be no problem, it’s just not turning up for the test that is jailworthy !! [no, really] Also I recently saw a smack dealer caught with 75 deals on him getting community service !!
I was listening to someone (a police accident investigator) talk about this sort of thing a couple of weeks back.
And (deep breath) it was fairly contentious, but I have to agree with him.
He made points along the lines of:
a) no jail sentence, irrespective of length, will right the tragic wrong done here
b) he is going to have to live with this for rest of his natural. And that, unless the guy is a vicious killer or nutcase, is unlikely to be easy.
c) he may be a posh, arrogant yadda yadda yadda but that isn’t a crime.
d) Traffic fatalities are usually the result of a single mistake, a small error or perhaps crime, that on it’s own will 99.99999999999% of the time go unnoticed and effect no-one. But occaisonally this happens. And I for one cannot say that I have always been in full control of my car from the age of 17. There will have been many times I have picked up the phone, a cup of coffee, a map, changed tapes etc etc when something could have gone wrong.
e) I am not putting drink-driving into the above section.
f) the justice system is tailored to punish based on the offence, not the result. That is why these type of cases always draw critism because the punishment doesn’t fit the outcome (ie death). But how can it? Is it right that a mistake or minor crime (using the phone) that people do on almost every trip (and we are included in this) and get away with, should this time be punished so much more harshly?
I’ll finish by suggesting, as the plod did, that for example, if anyone drives past the same junction every morning on the commute and answered the phone always at that point they would be committing a minor’ish offence, say due care or worst careless driving. Then after 300 mornings, someone stops sharply, steps out etc and there is an accident leading to a fatality. The crime is the same, the result different. How can the punishment be massively different?
Phew.
and on a related note, the same accident investigator highlighted a major cause of accidents at junctions, and I suspect one that may have been a factor here:
When the average driver (oh yes, that means us too) is sitting at a T junction waiting to pull out, they will spend 0.3 of a second to judge and calculate the distance of an approaching vehicle.
Yes, this has been scientifically measured, 0.3 of a second. That’s not the head turn time (unless it’s a van 
) but the processing time. Now this is not possible to do accurately of course.
What happens is the driver will see the car coming and ASSUME how fast it is going, and that is inevitably going to be how fast they would be travelling. There is an arguement that suggests drivers won’t even look any further up the road than a car travelling at the expected speed would have to be in order for it to be a problem. So if a car doing 60 would have to be less than 200yrds up the road to be a problem, any vehicle further back than that 0.3 estimate of position is not even SEEN!!!
So us on our skinny bikes doing, ahem, 90+ will come as a nasty shock. And that’s for someone who might expect to do 60/70. To a wrinkly, more happy at 45, you may be travelling at twice the speed they think you are. And don’t get me started on their jam-jar glasses.
Sorry to go on and get serious (normally save for IAM nights), but it is important that we consider this the next time we approach a junction at speeds significantly higher than normal traffic (not necessarily speed limits you may note).
Too right as well!
Andrew, you list many points, but you fail to pay acknowledgement to the fact that this low life tried his devious best to cover-up what he’d done.
Yes, an unfortunate accident can happen to anyone at anytime, but the actions of that drunk driver after an accident of this severity were deplorable.
A custodial sentence is most definitely appropriate on this occasion.
Absolutely, I wasn’t disagreeing with the outcome here 
Just trying to explain why he didn’t get longer.
He clearly acted badly, and drink driving is deplorable, and I hope he gets taught the error of his ways in the communal showers.
I was just trying to explain perhaps why the sentences given out are sometimes seen as very lightweight, especially when some poor kid has been killed.
Absolutely Andrew, well said.
2nd that.
Some very fair points Andrew.
In my opinion two offences were committed here;
-
excess alcohol
-
Careless drive.
However the careless element can be removed as no doubt the lack in concentration was down to the alcohol.
If we nick a drink driver who had driven carelessly the careless is always dropped by CPS as the argument is the alcohol effected the driver.
this is not the case with ‘Dangerous drive’ so don’t confuse the two.
The real crime in my eyes here is the blatant attempt at perverting the course of justice afterwards…thankfully the Judge saw through it.
The three years sentence has happened as this fatality falls under the umbrella of the Road Traffic Act and the severest penalty is 10 yrs…
…of course with his pre-sentence reports this would have had a reducing effect on the sentence hence the three years.
the only good to come out of this(if any) is the family attitude, and i thoroughly commend thier dignity throughout this terrible experience…they can finally get on with life.
RIP , Darren.