- Joined
- Jan 8, 2010
- Messages
- 72,131
- Reaction score
- 58,867
- Location
- NE Ohio
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Liberal
A doctor who killed a morbidly obese woman on his way to a medical team bonding course was fined £5,000 and banned from driving for three years.
He was not sent to prison because, if the woman had been of average size, she would have survived the impact.
Her weight was so great that both the ambulance and the air ambulance called to the scene were unable to transfer her to hospital, and eventually a helicopter from RAF Kinloss took her to Ninewells Hospital in Dundee.
No I don't agree with this. While it seems like there was no wrong doing, and this was just a horrible accident, I don't think that the victims weight, causing her inability to be transported to receive the medical treatment she needed should effect the sentencing of the guilty party. It would be like saying someone should receive a lesser sentence because they murdered a terminally ill patient, who was going to die soon anyway.
Yes, the ruling is correct IMO. I don't know much about the laws of Scotland, but I suspect that most courts here in the US would rule the same way. If you like, replace the fact that she was morbidly obese with some other frailty that is less emotionally charged. Would it be fair to charge someone with manslaughter (or whatever the applicable death-related crime would be) if they could not have reasonably expected that their actions would kill someone? I don't think so.
the question is, would he have been charged with something else had she been "normal" and died anyway. .
according to the article, if she had been "normal" she probably would not have died. her immense fatness not only contributed to the severity of her injuries, it prevented her from being transported to a hospital in a timely manner. therefore, if she had been of normal weight/girth not only would she have not been as severely injured, it would not have taken them 4 hours to get her to hospital.
Fine for doctor who killed an obese woman | Dundee and Tayside | STV News
Do you agree with this ruling?
In US courts, criminals must "take people as they find them." Someone guilty of negligent homicide could not, for example, say, "Well, if she hadn't been 80 years old, she'd have survived."
But in this case, I'm reading between the lines and assuming that her injuries were likely not fatal. She died of her injuries only because it took four hours to get her in-hospital medical care. 29 stone is the equivalent of 406 pounds. (Actually, it's hard to believe they couldn't transport her in an ambulance.
He was fined the equivalent of $8,000. What purpose would it serve if he was incarcerated? Here in the States, that finding would then translate to next-of-kin being able to file a civil suit -- and win.
Justice served.
as i said, it doesn't matter. had he not hit her, she would not have died. he should be charged as such.
He was charged as such. And he was found guilty. We're discussing punishment here, not whether or not he was convicted.
probably does NOT count. if a man ran someone over and they died, what would he be charged with? that's the question, and that's the only fair way to look at this.
Fine for doctor who killed an obese woman | Dundee and Tayside | STV News
Do you agree with this ruling?
and my point is that he should receive the same punishment as anyone else who killed a person. if he struck an old lady with a bad heart would you say the same thing?
For a Class F Felony, the penalty is a fine of up to $25,000, or imprisonment of up to 12-1/2 years, or both; however, for a repeat offender, the term of imprisonment may increase up to 2 years with prior misdemeanor convictions, and up to 6 years with a prior felony conviction.
Not sure how it is in Scotland, but in the U.S., we have sentencing guidelines....a minimum to a maximum depending upon extenuating circumstances. There is no "same sentence as anyone else." All circumstances are different -- within guidelines.
i don't think a lighter sentence was warranted. had the victim been an infant would you think the same way?
i don't think a lighter sentence was warranted. had the victim been an infant would you think the same way?
had the victim been an infant, properly restained in a carseat, it wouldn't have been killed.
coulda, shoulda, woulda......the guy was charged and, just like everyone else, extenuating circumstances were taken into account during his sentencing.
he was treated like everyone else who is involved in a car crash where someone dies.
what????? do you want him to spend the rest of his life in prison for murder? would that make you "happy"?
we have no way of knowing that. again, what if the victim was a frail old lady?
and i never said he should spend the rest of his life in prison, just that he should get the same puishment as anyone else who accidently kills someone with their car. the victim's obesity is beside the point.
we have no way of knowing that. again, what if the victim was a frail old lady?
and i never said he should spend the rest of his life in prison, just that he should get the same puishment as anyone else who accidently kills someone with their car. the victim's obesity is beside the point.
OK, how about this scenario: A guy accidentally rear-ends someone at a traffic light, causing a minor neck injury. Just to be safe, the victim calls an ambulance to go to the hospital...and on the way there, the ambulance is hit by a train, killing her. Should the guy who rear-ended her be charged with her death, just because his accident indirectly led to her death? No, of course not. At most, he should be charged with causing a minor neck injury. Same logic applies in THIS case. It wasn't his initial action that caused her death, it was a result of the rescue squad.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?