S I R,—Mr. Brian Inglis in his 'Criminals in Cars'
has asserted that:
Magistrates who would send a woman to gaol for stealing a few shillings will often let off a
• drivel on' a manslaughter charge with a homily to the effect that the knowledge that he has killed . will be punishment enough.
Such an assertion can only be made by a tierson who is labouring under the impression that charges of manslaughter can, by law, he dealt with summarily by a bench of magistrates. Manslaughter is, in fact, an' indictable offence which can only be tried before a judge and jury at assizes. I have yet to read of .a High Court' judge doing no more than to deliver a, homily to a motorist convicted of this very serious offence,.
It is the refusal of juries to convict persons charged . with motor manslaughter and driving under the in- fluence of drink which 'is giving the guilty motorist, on so many occasions, an escape from his just deserts and has allowed him to remain as a menace on the roads. Section 11(.1) of the Road Traffic Act, 1936, by creating, the. Offence of causing death by reckless or dangerous driving, has, 1 am glad to say, to some extent remedied • this. `there-but-for-the-grace-of- Ged-go4' attitude adopted by the average jury in driving case.—Yours faithfully,
• Singapore
Previous page
