There are times when I absolutely despair at our justice system. I am not, by nature, a hanger and a flogger and, in very general terms, believe in restorative justice, whereby, and here I quote from Wikipedia, “offenders are encouraged to take responsibility for their actions to repair the harm they’ve done – by apologizing, returning stolen money, or community service”. But sometimes, even I hang my head in disbelief. Justice must not only be done, but seen to be believed rather than done. The death of the young rugby player Dan Hickey says to me that justice has not been done, far from it.
You may remember this story. On 29 August 2015, Dan Hickey from Bishopston, Bristol, was struck by a vehicle driven by one Tayo Jones and then left for dead. A cowardly hit and run incident. On Friday, a life sentence was handed down, but a life sentence only for the family and friends of Dan Hickey. Jones was sentenced to three and a half years imprisonment by Bristol Crown Court which, if he behaves himself, will probably end up being two years. Is that long enough?
Not only was Tayo Jones directly responsible for the death of a fine young man, at the time of the incident he disqualified from driving, as well as being uninsured and unlicensed. It gets worse. Two weeks before the crash, Jones had received a suspended prison sentence for possessing cannabis with intent to supply. And when he was on ball, he committed a public order offence with a member of staff at Bristol Temple Meads railway station. Mr Jones, it seems, was not a very nice person.
So, the question is this: what would a fair sentence have looked like? I’m struggling here, but I would suggest that a couple of years behind bars does not resemble what I would call a fair sentence. What happens in two years time? Jones leaves prison, hopefully rehabilitated and full of regret for what he has done. I certainly hope so. My immediate reaction, and indeed my considered reaction, is that he has almost got away with murder, although by legal definition this was not murder.
Dan Hickey was 24, that’s all. He was in a a good job, his life prospects were excellent, but now that has all gone and it’s gone forever. Not only is his life over, his family will have to live with the consequences of Tayo Jones’ actions for their rest of their lives. They are the ones with a life sentence.
I am not saying that Jones should have been put in prison and have the key to his cell thrown away, but I cannot get over the reality that the family and friends of Dan Hickey will have to live without their beloved son and what might have been and Jones will be soon be walking free.
Where’s the justice, here?
2 comments
I suggest the reason you find no solution is that there isn’t one. You don’t want to hang or flog, but think three and half years too little. Game Theory shows we want to inhabit a world where most are nice (doves) and we limit the ‘hawks’ by having some ‘punitive hawks’ to allow the doves to predominate. The justice system has to do our dirty work by punishing those who cheat the system, and this young man, whose actions showed him to be self-centered and reckless’ is obviously a cheat by those standards. The question you raise is how much punishment do we need to have judiciously administered in our name.
The answer must be enough to deter others, and also enough to make us feel satisfied, but we can’t really define what satisfied means in this context. If we all met him we would know more. I would like to think he is contrite to some degree, and that the accident was an aberration. But he may still be unrepentant, and in fact may show no remorse at all. In that extreme case I could imagine wanting to lean a bit further than I normally would in the hanging and flogging direction, but unfortunately there is another factor. We now know that some brain abnormalities cause a lack of empathy, and indeed some people are born with no capacity for empathy at all. They function in society by copying the behaviour of those lucky enough to be born normal. So knowing it is wrong to drive away from the scene of an accident (where swift medical attention might make a big difference) could be something a few people (about 1% of the population) are genetically programmed to be incapable of understanding.
If we punish these people severely it might send a message, and act as a deterrent, but is it right to ignore the fact that they themselves are victims of bad luck in the lottery for good genes?
Even if genetic factors (nature) are not to blame, nurture is another problem. This man may have been badly parented, so the ‘blame’ might lie with them, although they too may have been badly parented.
These are a few of the reasons your conundrum is unsolvable, but there is one pragmatic step we could and should take. Driving away in the hope of avoiding the consequences is becoming depressingly common (illogically, because of all the cameras in public places). We could have a tariff published by the Government; if you commit a driving offence you will be sentenced accordingly; if you injure someone and drive away without calling for help, a mandatory five years will be added to your sentence, and if they die, fifteen years will be added. This a bit draconian, but might be an incentive to do the decent thing – stop, help the victim, and face the music.
Great delivery. Outstanding arguments. Keep up the amazing spirit.
Comments are closed.