Jail term for Ferrari crash deaths

gcg2503 · 24-02-2009, 10:45 AM

http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/sto...82-661,00.html

A MAN has been jailed over an impromtu street race during which two people in a different car died when their Ferrari crashed.

Neil Muirhead, 44, driving a Ford GT sedan, began an impromptu street race with the Ferrari on the Warburton Highway at Lilydale in July 2006.

The County Court heard the two cars sped out of sight of other vehicles before the Ferrari lost control at 160km/h and slammed into a tree.

The driver Paul Estcourt, 33, and passenger Angela Taylor, 27, were killed.

A jury found Muirhead guilty of culpable driving over the death of Ms Taylor and reckless conduct endangering the life of Mr Estcourt.

Judge Lisa Hannan said while estimates of Muirhead's speed varied among witnesses there was no doubt it was well above the 80km/h speed limit.

"Your conduct cannot be described other than as outrageous," she said.

"The speed at which you were travelling in the circumstances of this case made disaster almost inevitable."

Judge Hannan accepted Muirhead's behaviour was out of character and unlikely to happen again, but she said general deterrence was an important sentencing consideration.

She said she must also consider Mr Estcourt's actions in determining culpability because he had been as equally reckless as Muirhead.

Muirhead was jailed for four years and eight months with a minimum of three years.

EDManual · 24-02-2009, 10:57 AM

gee! Thats quite a penalty!

So If I was to have a drag to 100 in say a 90 zone and stop, and the other guy keeps going to 200 and crashes I go to jail?

What a joke!

XplosiveR6 · 24-02-2009, 11:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EDManual

gee! Thats quite a penalty!

So If I was to have a drag to 100 in say a 90 zone and stop, and the other guy keeps going to 200 and crashes I go to jail?

What a joke!

Agreed, sure he is guilty of reckless driving, no one would doubt that. but guilty of causing the death of the people in the other car is outrages! That is the farrari drivers responsibility, he diddnt have to race, the GT driver wasnt putting a gun to his head.

RG · 24-02-2009, 11:08 AM

While I agree that the bloke in the GT was stupid for engaging in a street race and does indeed need to be punished, I hardly think this sentencing makes any sense. It screams of example making and political gain to me as I fail to see how the GT driver is responsible for what the Ferrari driver decided to do.

Unless the Ferrari driver was forced against his will to drive in such a manner I do not see this as being a fair or just outcome.

Stattic · 24-02-2009, 11:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EDManual

gee! Thats quite a penalty!

So If I was to have a drag to 100 in say a 90 zone and stop, and the other guy keeps going to 200 and crashes I go to jail?

What a joke!

id have to agree, if the guy hadnt have died there is no way he would have gotten a jail term, he would have just lost his license. the person that was driving the ferarri had full responsibility for his accident and the life of his passenger, if he had of survived i would have definitely said he should be in jail but the gt driver should not.

the gt driver should have been given improper use of a motor vehicle/speeding fines, the ferrari driver (if he had of survived) would have been given culpable driving causing death

GT0132 · 24-02-2009, 11:15 AM

This sentence will be appealed without a doubt.

Unless the Ford made contact with the Ferrari then I can';t see how the Ford driver can be responsible for the deaths

gcg2503 · 24-02-2009, 11:18 AM

agreed GT0132

surely they must have collided for the penalty to be imposed to such a degree

otherwise, i cant see the sense in it

there was no coercion on the part of the gt driver forcing the ferrari driver to race

this makes no sense at all to me

EDManual · 24-02-2009, 11:35 AM

Think of similar incidents just to see how unreasonable this is :

A 60 year old in a manual camry does a wheel chirp taking off, so a p plater in his silvia does a massive drift into a pole.

A lady taking her kids to school likes to take off fast from the lights in her Prado. A P Plater in his v8 torana notices this takes off, passes her and crashes into a pedestrian.

These 2 people have no proof they werent racing or showing off do they?

3 years in the slammer for the old boy and the lady!

XR06T · 24-02-2009, 11:35 AM

so if someone crashes near me its my fault. welcome to the US of A people, where no-one is responsible for their own actions!

balthazarr · 24-02-2009, 11:47 AM

Wow.

~5 years... how many years would the driver of the Ferrari have received if he'd survived? 10, 20, more?

Yes, the GT driver was an idiot, but how anyone could possibly argue that he was responsible for the deaths in the other car

:

TZENU · 24-02-2009, 11:47 AM

And here i am thinking that i would be the only one to say the jail sentence doesn't seem fair.... considering he didn't force the ferrari to race. The ferrari CHOSE to race

dave289 · 24-02-2009, 11:50 AM

the gt driver should ONLY be charged with street racing as this apperars to be the case.there seems to be witnesses to back this up.If someone cant control there car at 160kms and crashes, then it is his own fault and no one elses, as mentioned no one forced him to put his foot down, it was his decision and no one elses. So basically there is no actual speed radar and no proof of the speed they were doing, so I guess this guy has been put in jail for allegedly speeding.

:

XR Martin · 24-02-2009, 11:51 AM

The Jury was obviously stacked with members of the Pedestrian Council

EDManual · 24-02-2009, 11:53 AM

Whats with the jury letting this decision get passed? I wouldnt have if I was on it thats for sure.

The general public are fools, they have been brainwashed to thinking 5 km over is mad.

XR Martin · 24-02-2009, 11:56 AM

I wonder if the situation was reversed? GT crashed and the Ferrari survived?
Ferrari owner would have hired a hot shot lawyer and got off scott free perhaps?

StookEB · 24-02-2009, 12:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EDManual

Whats with the jury letting this decision get passed? I wouldnt have if I was on it thats for sure.

The general public are fools, they have been brainwashed to thinking 5 km over is mad.

The Jury only decide if the defendant is guilty "Beyond a Resonable Doubt".
The Jury dont have anything to do with the sentencing process.

The driver of the Ferarri chose to continue the race past the 80km/h speed limit, he deserves all he gets IMO.
As the judge said, its a "deterant" for others. He was doing involved in a race which included speeds of 160km/h in an 80km/h zone. What would have happened if he had hit other cars or pedestrians? You'd all be crying muder, sentence him to life!!!
The judge noticed would could have happened in that type of situation and made a decision accordingly!!!

Poidevin · 24-02-2009, 12:07 PM

Ridiculous charge, the GT driver should only have been charged with speeding and maybe had his license suspended. The ferrari driver was fully aware what would happen if he lost control at 160km/h, also I bet the ferrari driver never had any 'defensive driver' training and didnt know how to handle the ferrari at more that 110. This charge was just the judge and jury making an example of a 'hoon' again it just shows us that the Australian law system is quite flawed.

**ebxr8240** · 24-02-2009, 12:08 PM

The Jury or judge are Holden fans ??

geehaa · 24-02-2009, 12:10 PM

Wow - what a result. Surely that would be appealed...

:

RG · 24-02-2009, 12:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EArulz

The Jury only decide if the defendant is guilty "Beyond a Resonable Doubt".
The Jury dont have anything to do with the sentencing process.

The driver of the Ferarri chose to continue the race past the 80km/h speed limit, he deserves all he gets IMO.
As the judge said, its a "deterant" for others. He was doing involved in a race which included speeds of 160km/h in an 80km/h zone. What would have happened if he had hit other cars or pedestrians? You'd all be crying muder, sentence him to life!!!
The judge noticed would could have happened in that type of situation and made a decision accordingly!!!

But this is where we run into issues, you can't be charged with one crime and have what might have happened if something happened taken into account.

He did not hit any other car, pedestrians or echidna's so therefore the sentencing is not fit punishment.

StookEB · 24-02-2009, 12:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Poidevin

Ridiculous charge, the GT driver should only have been charged with speeding and maybe had his license suspended.

So if you were witness to a guy who did 160 in an 80 zone, what would you be thinking?? that he only deserves to lose his license??

The only way to stop people being stupid is tough sentences.
Giving them "advanced driver training" will help them survive the incident but wont stop them performing the act in the first place.
Its his fault, he deserves whatever he gets.

StookEB · 24-02-2009, 12:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Russell

But this is where we run into issues, you can't be charged with one crime and have what might have happened if something happened taken into account.

He did not hit any other car, pedestrians or echidna's so therefore the sentencing is not fit punishment.

Sorry bad wording on my behalf....and yes I agree you cant be charged for things that might have happened.

We dont know every fact though, we only know what the news has told us. This can be a biased oppinion of what happened.

geehaa · 24-02-2009, 12:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EArulz

The Jury only decide if the defendant is guilty "Beyond a Resonable Doubt".
The Jury dont have anything to do with the sentencing process.

How do we know a jury was even involved?

Quote:

Originally Posted by EArulz

What would have happened if he had hit other cars or pedestrians? You'd all be crying muder, sentence him to life!!!

But that didn't happen...

geehaa · 24-02-2009, 12:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EArulz

Its his fault, he deserves whatever he gets.

So, do we know that he caused the Ferrari to crash? If not, you're wrong.

As previously posted, if there was contact then, yeah, I'd probably agree but the article doesn't comment on that.

StookEB · 24-02-2009, 12:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by geehaa

How do we know a jury was even involved?

But that didn't happen...

I cant remember Legal Studies very well, somebody else will have to help with the Jury part.
Theres was an oppurtunity for it to happen by the sounds of the situation. He endangered lives, I agree 3 years is a tough sentence but the judge felt it neccesary. So I'm sticking by his decision on this occasion...

RG · 24-02-2009, 12:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by geehaa

How do we know a jury was even involved?

A jury found Muirhead guilty of culpable driving over the death of Ms Taylor and reckless conduct endangering the life of Mr Estcourt.

Celtic Beast · 24-02-2009, 12:22 PM

I'm astonished with this decision. Do any of you know if the GT came into contact with the Ferrari at any point?

**ebxr8240** · 24-02-2009, 12:25 PM

Its the perception of witnesses also ??
What if the GT could prove he accelerated to 80 kph then slowed down ??
Not saying that's the case.. BUT when witnesses find that people have died etc..
The perception of the accident would have been expained much worse..
I bet this won't be the last we hear of this..

geehaa · 24-02-2009, 12:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EArulz

I cant remember Legal Studies very well, somebody else will have to help with the Jury part.
Theres was an oppurtunity for it to happen by the sounds of the situation. He endangered lives, I agree 3 years is a tough sentence but the judge felt it neccesary. So I'm sticking by his decision on this occasion...

I just read an article on news.com.au

"Witnesses reported seeing the cars tailgating and speeding over the crest of a hill before the crash. Muirhead's car did not hit Mr Estcourt's Ferrari before it hit the tree."

It does not justify the street race, of course, but I think it's a tough result

geehaa · 24-02-2009, 12:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Russell

A jury found Muirhead guilty of culpable driving over the death of Ms Taylor and reckless conduct endangering the life of Mr Estcourt.

Note to self - read articles