@ 45:10 The judge asks if "Shunted" is a motor racing term... This was 1975. James Hunt had his first win in the Hesketh at the Dutch GP. The whole country was watching James Hunt. The Hesketh team was financed by Lord Hesketh. He bought a single March chassis & the virtually built that car in a shed with a fraction of the cost of the big teams. The car was beating the March works team, Ferrari ect. & everyone was cheering on this tiny team of giant killers who loved to party. They went on to win the world championship in 76. Because of his driving style he was known as "Hunt the Shunt" using the British slang term "shunt" which meant a crash. (Amongst the drivers "shunt" was spelled with a C 😆) So "shunt" didn't start out as a motor racing term but when this Crown Court was shown James Hunt was a national hero who everyone knew. So the judge's question there is a nod towards the Hunt the Shunt mania of that & following years.
It's like "Murder, She Wrote" series. The homicide rate in that town was worse than the Congo. Fulchester has every social and criminal issue and it all ends up in court. Anyone employed in legal work can make a good living in Fulchester.😋
I'd never move to fulchester ,midsomer, nor camberwick green or trumpton, as thankfully these places do not exist in real life, and it's a bit of a pointless so called "joke"
If the defendant was found guilty of causing death by dangerous driving , those who survived the crash were also guilty of manslaughter. Not guilty on all counts .
Another classic. And of course Maurice Roeves and Richard Wilson were to meet again 10 years later in the BBC series Tutti Futti. ("When did you get the guppies Vincent?")
Miss Ampthill was played by Alison Hughes and not Elizabeth Sladen (Sarah jane Smith in Dr. Who). their voices are remarkably similar though I have to say.
Takes me back to my school days when the teachers referred to us lads by our surnames. I don't think that goes on these days. Except, perhaps, in the likes of Eton and Harrow?
Yup, I was in a big standard secondary school (left in 1980) and it was surnames between the kids and from the teachers. We even had a "quad"! It was a secondary with pretentions! 😆
The two students contradict each other. The first one said it was a few minutes before they worked out what the teacher in the car behind was doing (because he had a 'clapped out mini') but the second student said that the teacher's car was right behind from the very moment they left the pub car park. Also, even if the mini was 'clapped out', it would still likely be far more agile than a Hillman (also a small car) carrying three people. Finally, I was quite surprised that neither of the two other students received a single injury. They were in a small car that rolled over and their driver died but they escaped without a scratch. Almost certainly they would have suffered serious injury themselves, and the charge should have reflected that. Indeed, one could argue that if the teacher was guilty of manslaughter against the deceased, he was also guilty of attempted manslaughter of the other two students whom he knew to be in the car. The teacher was extremely lucky to get away with 18 months prison. He should have just stayed at the pub and phoned the police to report the criminal damage to his car. Chasing and bumping a car he knew to be carrying two other people in was recklessly dangerous.
In the U.K. what are the sentencing guidelines for manslaughter? Are judges apt to be lenient and give probation when in a case like this, the defendant is not a menace to society and does not pose a great deal of risk to public safety overall?
There's the sentencing council guidelines which leave judges with brackets starting at the top with life (which in theory could mean a whole life tariff but if such is needed then the charge should've been probably included with MS as an alternative if premedmeditation can't be shown) through to middling offences of 7 to 14 years (e.g. after a particularly bad fight with some level of mutual blame) down to the lowest which could be a fine, suspended sentence, probation (with or without a tag curfew) to an unconditional discharge for exceptionally unlucky case with unforeseeable consequences but still liable for blame ("egg shell" skull rule in personal injury law.) Or there is also negligent manslaughter, usually a corporate health and safety charge in the UK, where someone who has responsibility for the conditions that lead to loss of life but doesn't bother to ensure safe conditions. It comes with an unlimited fine and possibly up to 5 years if the company directors/management are charged personally. It's too much to describe in a YT reply! Wikipedia has an OK overview but ideally find a 1st year course textbook on manslaughter as a crime.
In theory a lot of offences like GBH or larceny can lead to a whole life tarriff but judges are bound by 2 main sentencing guideline principles: a 1/3 reduction for an initial guilty plea (proportinately less for a later plea) or departing significantly from the guidelines but have to give very strong reasoning when guidelines provide a lower sentence such as unusual circumstances. Departing from sentencing rules is one of the most common appeals by defendants.
you're comment doesn't seem to have any context anymore (perhaps it was originally a reply to a comment that has since been deleted) you say "it's Peter sutcliffe" - what was?
I don't think it is Peter Sutcliffe -- it looks a bit like him but if you look at photos of Sutcliffe from around that time there are subtle differences -- different shape of face, Sutcliffe has beard in the middle of his chin, and he also has no hair covering his ears, unlike the juror.
Only 18 months and a fine of £250 for killing someone! That's nothing for taking someone else's life. I think that the sentences generally in the UK are far too lenient.
If he were fined £250 for the dangerous driving that would be an unduly lenient penalty in my opinion, I was fined nearly the same amount for a section 5 Public Order offence!
In manslaughter cases sentencing is almost entirely at the judge's discretion, except for the sentencing guidelines but even there's still a huge variation. In Ireland, a manslaughter question can land you with more time because the sentence is again up to the judge and could be longer than what a Justice minister allows for a murderer on a life sentence (still life but could end up with total less time inside) because the judge can't give a mandatory minimum in murder cases.
Question: why is it that everytime a witness begins their testimony, the lawyer states are you this person of this address? Why would they ask a witness to put themselves in danger by asking this,?
I'm really enjoying this series, I was just a bit too young for it the first time round. Thank you for uploading!
@ 45:10 The judge asks if "Shunted" is a motor racing term...
This was 1975. James Hunt had his first win in the Hesketh at the Dutch GP. The whole country was watching James Hunt. The Hesketh team was financed by Lord Hesketh. He bought a single March chassis & the virtually built that car in a shed with a fraction of the cost of the big teams.
The car was beating the March works team, Ferrari ect. & everyone was cheering on this tiny team of giant killers who loved to party.
They went on to win the world championship in 76.
Because of his driving style he was known as "Hunt the Shunt" using the British slang term "shunt" which meant a crash. (Amongst the drivers "shunt" was spelled with a C 😆)
So "shunt" didn't start out as a motor racing term but when this Crown Court was shown James Hunt was a national hero who everyone knew. So the judge's question there is a nod towards the Hunt the Shunt mania of that & following years.
Based on this series I would never move to Fulchester; it's only a bit better than Midsomer.
😂😂😂
It's like "Murder, She Wrote" series. The homicide rate in that town was worse than the Congo. Fulchester has every social and criminal issue and it all ends up in court. Anyone employed in legal work can make a good living in Fulchester.😋
Certainly much more dangerous than Camberwick Green, another enjoyable series from the same time period.
I'd never move to fulchester ,midsomer, nor camberwick green or
trumpton, as thankfully these places do not exist in real life, and it's a bit of a pointless so called "joke"
I am thinking along the same lines
Superb portrayal of barrister Parsons by Richard Wilson. Very good episode, too. Sole gripe: the ads that keep popping up. Thanks for posting
If the defendant was found guilty of causing death by dangerous driving , those who survived the crash were also guilty of manslaughter. Not guilty on all counts .
This would be such a good series for ITV daytimes to pick up again - cheap to shoot, informative, entertaining.
I suppose this would be called "road rage" today. Brilliant episode.
Mr Manning then loved the legal elelment so much he decided to become a prison office at slade prison
After a brief stint at tge Manchester Sanitation and Cleansing Depot.
Peter sutcliffe is on the jury.
Thanks for the upload, Jez.
19 years old? He looks mid 40s! Life was hard in the 70s I guess.
That's what I was thinking, but maybe it's the dead who's 19. Deffo can't be the accused 🤔
One of the more obvious verdicts in the Crown Court series?
Victor in his younger years....I don't believe it!
Richard Wilson was 39 when he made this episode
Another classic. And of course Maurice Roeves and Richard Wilson were to meet again 10 years later in the BBC series Tutti Futti. ("When did you get the guppies Vincent?")
I'll always remember you VD.
Ha! Slade Prison's Mr Barraclough & none other than Mr Sarah Jane Smith in the cast. I think Peter Sutcliffe is on the jury. How ironic.
JKMMOC wonder if it is? Totally grose if it is!
He wouldn't have been eligible for jury service, as he already had a conviction for Going Equipped to Steal.
😂😂😂😂
Miss Ampthill was played by Alison Hughes and not Elizabeth Sladen (Sarah jane Smith in Dr. Who). their voices are remarkably similar though I have to say.
It seems strange to see Nr Barraclough and Victor Meldrew in their "past lives"!
Takes me back to my school days when the teachers referred to us lads by our surnames. I don't think that goes on these days. Except, perhaps, in the likes of Eton and Harrow?
Yup, I was in a big standard secondary school (left in 1980) and it was surnames between the kids and from the teachers.
We even had a "quad"! It was a secondary with pretentions! 😆
You are “Smithers Minor” AICMFP.
Some really good actors in this. ☺️👌
constable sounds like an aussie
"til the church comes in the way" ... love it !
The two students contradict each other. The first one said it was a few minutes before they worked out what the teacher in the car behind was doing (because he had a 'clapped out mini') but the second student said that the teacher's car was right behind from the very moment they left the pub car park. Also, even if the mini was 'clapped out', it would still likely be far more agile than a Hillman (also a small car) carrying three people. Finally, I was quite surprised that neither of the two other students received a single injury. They were in a small car that rolled over and their driver died but they escaped without a scratch. Almost certainly they would have suffered serious injury themselves, and the charge should have reflected that. Indeed, one could argue that if the teacher was guilty of manslaughter against the deceased, he was also guilty of attempted manslaughter of the other two students whom he knew to be in the car.
The teacher was extremely lucky to get away with 18 months prison. He should have just stayed at the pub and phoned the police to report the criminal damage to his car. Chasing and bumping a car he knew to be carrying two other people in was recklessly dangerous.
Mr manning ended up doing porridge!
In the U.K. what are the sentencing guidelines for manslaughter? Are judges apt to be lenient and give probation when in a case like this, the defendant is not a menace to society and does not pose a great deal of risk to public safety overall?
There's the sentencing council guidelines which leave judges with brackets starting at the top with life (which in theory could mean a whole life tariff but if such is needed then the charge should've been probably included with MS as an alternative if premedmeditation can't be shown) through to middling offences of 7 to 14 years (e.g. after a particularly bad fight with some level of mutual blame) down to the lowest which could be a fine, suspended sentence, probation (with or without a tag curfew) to an unconditional discharge for exceptionally unlucky case with unforeseeable consequences but still liable for blame ("egg shell" skull rule in personal injury law.) Or there is also negligent manslaughter, usually a corporate health and safety charge in the UK, where someone who has responsibility for the conditions that lead to loss of life but doesn't bother to ensure safe conditions. It comes with an unlimited fine and possibly up to 5 years if the company directors/management are charged personally. It's too much to describe in a YT reply! Wikipedia has an OK overview but ideally find a 1st year course textbook on manslaughter as a crime.
In theory a lot of offences like GBH or larceny can lead to a whole life tarriff but judges are bound by 2 main sentencing guideline principles: a 1/3 reduction for an initial guilty plea (proportinately less for a later plea) or departing significantly from the guidelines but have to give very strong reasoning when guidelines provide a lower sentence such as unusual circumstances. Departing from sentencing rules is one of the most common appeals by defendants.
Thanks Jez.
It's peter Sutcliffe.it's the year he started his murder spree. So they must of got him from public in Barnsley.because that's peter Sutcliffe.
you're comment doesn't seem to have any context anymore (perhaps it was originally a reply to a comment that has since been deleted)
you say "it's Peter sutcliffe" - what was?
@@5ynthesizerpatel i think he's referring to one of the jury members
I don't think it is Peter Sutcliffe -- it looks a bit like him but if you look at photos of Sutcliffe from around that time there are subtle differences -- different shape of face, Sutcliffe has beard in the middle of his chin, and he also has no hair covering his ears, unlike the juror.
The bloke in the checked jacket? Looks too tall and broad to be Sutcliffe. He was a small and weedy man.
Peter Sutcliffe was not from Barnsley I must hasten to add. None of his unfortunate victims were found anywhere remotely near the town either..
Only 18 months and a fine of £250 for killing someone! That's nothing for taking someone else's life. I think that the sentences generally in the UK are far too lenient.
Imagine if this took place in the US!
If he were fined £250 for the dangerous driving that would be an unduly lenient penalty in my opinion, I was fined nearly the same amount for a section 5 Public Order offence!
It is 40 years ago
@@kathleencampbell1138Almost 50 years ago xxx
In manslaughter cases sentencing is almost entirely at the judge's discretion, except for the sentencing guidelines but even there's still a huge variation.
In Ireland, a manslaughter question can land you with more time because the sentence is again up to the judge and could be longer than what a Justice minister allows for a murderer on a life sentence (still life but could end up with total less time inside) because the judge can't give a mandatory minimum in murder cases.
This looks a good one.
Is that Julie Goodyear in the jury?
What a waste of public funds. Why have a jury if the judge can take over like that. Load of rollocks
take over how?
Fulchester modern day Inglewood LA
Straight out of Fulchester.
Thanks jezz.Easy time for being found guilty of a crime.
thanks. Interesting but tricky to follow at times. should have just called the police, too much male ego and posturing, if you ask me.
45:34 Peter Sutcliffe on the jury
Question: why is it that everytime a witness begins their testimony, the lawyer states are you this person of this address?
Why would they ask a witness to put themselves in danger by asking this,?
Procedures may have changed nowadays - this was the mid 1970s, about 45 years ago.
We don't do that now unless the location is relevant to the trial.
Seems life was cheap then too .
I don't! Believe it! 😂
Man, British judges can be major a**h****! 😣😣😣😣😣
Dennis The Menace
Baraclough 😁