Behind the Headlines: Sentencing After Fatal Crashes
Slides: Behind the Headlines
Meeting summary
The meeting was chaired by Olly Glover (Vice Chair of the All-Party Parliamentary Group for Cycling and Walking), focused on the launch of a report titled “Behind the Headlines: Sentencing After Fatal Crashes.”
The report was jointly prepared by the All-Party Parliamentary Group for Transport Safety and the Cycling and Walking Group, and presented by Professor Sally Kyd (University of Leicester).
Report Focus
- Examined 200+ cases of deaths caused by driving offences in England and Wales (2023–2024).
- Explored sentencing trends, consistency in application of guidelines, and the justice system’s response to road deaths.
- Highlighted the role of the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) in charge selection, judicial discretion, and systemic issues in investigations.
Key Findings
- Sentencing Guidelines
- New guidelines (July 2023) appear to be applied fairly consistently.
- Increase in maximum penalties (up to life imprisonment) has raised public expectations, but life sentences remain rare.
- Sentences of 10–15 years are now more common compared with earlier years.
- Conviction & Plea Patterns
- 79% guilty pleas, slightly above the national average.
- Limited plea bargaining compared to previous years.
- Some concerns about overcharging and inconsistent CPS decisions (cases sometimes downgraded mid-process).
- Aggravating & Mitigating Factors
- Speeding, intoxication, and killing a vulnerable road users (pedestrians, cyclists, motorcyclists) were central aggravating factors.
- Youth of drivers often treated as a mitigating factor.
- Suspended sentences appeared in some controversial cases, raising questions of consistency.
- Disqualification from Driving
- Judges are required to impose bans, but application is inconsistent.
- Lifetime bans are extremely rare (only one case in sample; just five nationally since 2017).
- Concerns about lack of enforcement mechanisms for disqualified drivers.
- Systemic Issues
- Police underfunding and shortage of forensic collision investigators causing delays of up to five years in some cases.
- Variability in how bans are calculated and communicated.
- Wider societal “motornormativity” (cultural acceptance of driving risks) influences outcomes.
Recommendations
- Strengthen resourcing for road policing and investigations.
- Make driving disqualification a mainstream sentencing tool, not a secondary add-on.
- Greater use of lifetime bans, supported by technology (e.g., tagging, vehicle monitoring).
- Ensure all fatal driving cases are tried in Crown Court.
- Address delays by investing in forensic investigation capacity.
- Promote cultural shift: driving as a responsibility, not a right.
- Consider redefining “careless” vs “dangerous driving” to reduce ambiguity and better deter risky behaviours.
Discussion Highlights
- Concerns about rehabilitation vs punishment balance.
- Agreement that driving bans could be more effective than custodial sentences in many cases.
- Calls for policy reform and possibly a Royal Commission to review driving offence definitions.
- Debate around automated vehicles: questions of liability and safety readiness.
- Emphasis on public safety over convenience, challenging the notion of driving as an entitlement.