Driver's easy sentence for killing cyclist is revoked.
Sorry, I know this is a direct news story, but its a win for cyclists everywhere.
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/new-brunswick/story/2007/11/15/ho...
New Brunswick's highest court has overturned the sentence given to a drunk driver who struck and killed a cyclist.
Peter Leon Howe, 42, originally received a two-year conditional sentence under house arrest after pleading guilty to impaired driving causing death and leaving the scene of an accident.
Howe struck Robbie MacRitchie in 2006 while the 23-year-old was riding his bicycle down the shoulder of a Fredericton road at night.
Howe, 42, was behind the wheel after drinking 24 beers and half a bottle of whiskey.
The Crown appealed the sentence, arguing that the trial judge erred in not giving enough weight to deterrence.
Jail time is the only way society will get that message that this kind of crime is unacceptable, Crown prosecutor Bill Corby said during the appeal hearing in October.
New Brunswick's Court of Appeal ruled Thursday that Howe should spend 3½ years in prison. He has been given credit for the time he's already served, meaning Howe will now spend two years and 10 months in jail.
"We are of the view that the sentencing judge committed errors in principle in imposing sentence and, as a result, the appeal is allowed," the judgment states.
The reasoning of the decision is to follow.
Not sure if it will help his alcoholism but we need deterrents.
The victim may have saved a life earlier by taking away the keys from another drunk.
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/new-brunswick/story/2007/03/23/nb...
Not to diminish the cyclist's death, but I can't imagine riding after a few drinks. It takes as much if not more mental alertness to ride a bike, at least it's probably only yourself who is liable to be hurt.
In Toronto we take public transit or the availability of cabs for granted, it's a whole different world for many people when they're partying.
"Not to diminish the cyclist's death, but I can't imagine riding after a few drinks. It takes as much if not more mental alertness to ride a bike, at least it's probably only yourself who is liable to be hurt."
I really do not get what your point is. There was zero evidence that the cyclist was drunk or having difficulty riding after what he did drink. According to the posted story he was still legal to drive, it was his personal belief to never drive when he touched alcohol regardless of the amount. He got killed not because of his drinking but because someone else did not know how to handle alcohol.
Why is there this absurd need all of the time to find fault with the victim, even if it depends on using the most irrelevant information?
Of course I'm not blaming the victim, never said he was impaired.
It has no bearing on his death, I never said it was relevant to it.
I'm giving my thought to his idea that it's safe to cycle when you've had a drink, especially at night.
I'm giving my thought to his idea that it's safe to cycle when you've had a drink, especially at night.
And if he had been walking when killed?
No one has yet to point to any evidence that the cyclist was impaired even in the slightest. The drinking on the cyclist's part is totally irrelevant.
If one is the type of person that becomes ga ga after one drink you might have a valid point, there is nothing here at all to support your insinuation.