Surprise, surprise - on a phone at the time 
Anyone got any idea what the sentence is likely to be for him?? Iām estimating between 5-7 years, but got a feeling heās looking at more.
Hopefully it will be 20yrs minimumā¦And a ban from hgv driving for lifeā¦Scumā¦
Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk
I suspect they are going to throw the book at him in an effort to get the message across that using your phone whilst driving is deadly.
However, I suspect car drivers will just look at that and think they are different as they are only driving a tiny little carā¦
20+ at least, another fing dhead off our roads, a lot of lives wrecked after that, hope they are copingā¦
selby newcomer:
Anyone got any idea what the sentence is likely to be for him?? Iām estimating between 5-7 years, but got a feeling heās looking at more.
According to the official guidelines, the starting point for a Level 3 offence (his use of a hand-held mobile - an āavoidable distractionā puts it in this category, although if he was shown to have made multiple calls and/or text messages it could be bumped up to Level 2) is 3 years, with a range of 2-5 years. The fact that he is (or rather, was) a professional LGV driver should push his sentence towards the upper end of that range, likewise the fact that several deaths were involved. Knock a few months off for the early Guilty plea and I think it will be around 4 1/2 years inside for him. Mind you, if he was wearing the ānobber hatā shown on the BBC News page at the time, his sentence should automatically be increasedā¦
A level 2 offence would have a starting point of 5 years with a range of 4 to 7 years.
A wise decision to remand him in custody, or heād be off back home. I noticed the report mentioned in cab footage. The driver must be seriously deficient in the mental department to use a phone knowing he was being filmed.
He looks a picture of intelligence though, with that silly hat and chain.
Crashes like these show how much of a distraction talking on a phone can be. The sooner hands free becomes illegal as well (and they will) the sooner other road users and pedestrians will be far safer. Bring it on asap.
^^
+1
Hands free cab phones etc should all be banned. No reason at all we canāt go back to having a pager.
Is it true these Eastern Europeans can go home, take their LGV over a weekend and come back here with a pass and start driving? F**kin hope not ! 
Uncle Albie:
Crashes like these show how much of a distraction talking on a phone can be. The sooner hands free becomes illegal as well (and they will) the sooner other road users and pedestrians will be far safer. Bring it on asap.
Sat Navs are just as much, if not more, of a distraction than mobile phones.
Some of the locations drivers have them is beyond belief.
Driving nights you see them on top of the dash clearly in their line of view they are even worse when you look down in cars bright screens lighting the whole compartment up.
Uncle Albie:
Crashes like these show how much of a distraction talking on a phone can be. The sooner hands free becomes illegal as well (and they will) the sooner other road users and pedestrians will be far safer. Bring it on asap.
Below Iāve copied a few sentences from the article highlighted below
oxfordmail.co.uk/news/147924 ā¦ _children/
Mr Ward Jackson said: "One of the issues a sentencing judge will have to think about is how long the defendant was distracted by his mobile phone.
"This was at least seven-and-three-quarter seconds as shown by dash cam video.
"The best evidence shows simultaneously the defendant looking repeatedly at his mobile phone.
"Another angle through the windscreen shows the fast-approaching queue of vehicles.ā
I cant see where it says he was either talking hand held or hands free, though it doesnāt say that he was texting, the way they describe the distraction recorded by the on board camera, texting or viewing social media seems a more likely scenario.
I will stick my neck out, and disagree with you about hands free.
This accident appears to be about not having eyes on the road, not about the so called distraction caused by your brain having to hold a conversation and control a vehicle, there is a big difference, regardless of what the research tries to tell us. If the researchers try to sell the public a theory, at least make it plausible, other wise the whole debate on distracted driving in the minds of many is just corrupted.
I believe that this guy will justifiably get a big sentence as the sentencing has been sent to the High Court, well from what I heard on the news.
Diesel Tug:
Is it true these Eastern Europeans can go home, take their LGV over a weekend and come back here with a pass and start driving? F**kin hope not !
I used to work with a Slovakian who went home during a weeksā holiday and did his class 1. He passed and left for a job via an agency running parts into BMW at Oxford. FWIW he was mad in a class 2 so Iām glad Iām yet to see him since going onto artics. Smoked like a chimney in everybodysā trucks aswell, the dirty git.
Just read the link to the Oxford Mail; Going by the Omsā picture of him, If Iād been interviewing him Iād be writing his rejection letter as soon as heād left my office. Some people can be judged by appearance, unless your judgement is clouded by the need to get bums on driving seats.
moomooland:
Uncle Albie:
Crashes like these show how much of a distraction talking on a phone can be. The sooner hands free becomes illegal as well (and they will) the sooner other road users and pedestrians will be far safer. Bring it on asap.Sat Navs are just as much, if not more, of a distraction than mobile phones.
Some of the locations drivers have them is beyond belief.
Driving nights you see them on top of the dash clearly in their line of view they are even worse when you look down in cars bright screens lighting the whole compartment up.
You are probably correct but that is not what is being discussed here and now.
eddie snax:
Uncle Albie:
Crashes like these show how much of a distraction talking on a phone can be. The sooner hands free becomes illegal as well (and they will) the sooner other road users and pedestrians will be far safer. Bring it on asap.Below Iāve copied a few sentences from the article highlighted below
oxfordmail.co.uk/news/147924 ā¦ _children/
Mr Ward Jackson said: "One of the issues a sentencing judge will have to think about is how long the defendant was distracted by his mobile phone.
"This was at least seven-and-three-quarter seconds as shown by dash cam video.
"The best evidence shows simultaneously the defendant looking repeatedly at his mobile phone.
"Another angle through the windscreen shows the fast-approaching queue of vehicles.ā
I cant see where it says he was either talking hand held or hands free, though it doesnāt say that he was texting, the way they describe the distraction recorded by the on board camera, texting or viewing social media seems a more likely scenario.
I will stick my neck out, and disagree with you about hands free.
This accident appears to be about not having eyes on the road, not about the so called distraction caused by your brain having to hold a conversation and control a vehicle, there is a big difference, regardless of what the research tries to tell us. If the researchers try to sell the public a theory, at least make it plausible, other wise the whole debate on distracted driving in the minds of many is just corrupted.
I believe that this guy will justifiably get a big sentence as the sentencing has been sent to the High Court, well from what I heard on the news.
Sorry Eddie but I did not realise I had said that this paticular driver had taken his eyes off the road.
All I said was in my opinion hands free can be just as much of a distraction and can and has caused serious accidents.
If the Judge wanted to go to town on this guy - he could dish out six years per victim - 24 yonks, eligable for parole in 16ā¦
The in-cab driver facing camera evidence was used against him.
āOne in the eye from Seven Eyeā then?
Cāmon though folks seriously - Iām a rareity Iām sure when I donāt even look at my phone whilst driving. Itās in my bag, out of reach, face down so even it lighting up is out of eyeshot and not distracting me in any way.
āWhy donāt you answer the phoneā?
I constantly get asked.
āIām on the roadā say I.
āWe know - but we wanted to tell you to turn around and come back - how do we do that if you donāt answer?ā
āEasy. Donāt make such balls-ups to send me out with the last pallet missing in the first place hmm?ā
The A34 is a road you just CANNOT take your eyes off the road - even for a second, let alone āSeven Secondsā.
How many truckers have come to grief on this road by this point, regardless of how much traffic is on it, all hours of the day and nightā¦?
Winseer:
Cāmon though folks seriously - Iām a rareity Iām sure when I donāt even look at my phone whilst driving. Itās in my bag, out of reach, face down so even it lighting up is out of eyeshot and not distracting me in any way.
Thatās very commendable, but I donāt need to look at my phone to answer it on my ear piece, its just a tap of the ear and āhelloā the if its one a these spam calls tap of the ear to knock it off. If its work to out line a change to my run or line up the next run, a brief outline, to which I can agree to, make changes to or refuse, then I say text all the details (references addressās company name etc,) and close the call with another tap of the ear. I know the text is coming so I have no desire to look at it until its convenient to do so, how hard is that. Do my eyes leave the road, no, Is that any more taxing than talking to a passenger when driving my car, no.
It makes me wonder how for all those years, we managed to use CBās with out all this carnage, well I suppose the answer is, that though its the phone causing the distraction, well in the case this thread is referenced to, the fact is, its about irresponsible driving.
Uncle Albie:
Sorry Eddie but I did not realise I had said that this paticular driver had taken his eyes off the road.
All I said was in my opinion hands free can be just as much of a distraction and can and has caused serious accidents.
Uncle Albie:
Crashes like these show how much of a distraction talking on a phone can be. The sooner hands free becomes illegal as well (and they will) the sooner other road users and pedestrians will be far safer. Bring it on asap.
Fair comment, I can see you didnāt directly reference this particular case, but the post made in this thread, about that particular accident, I hope you can understand why I read it in that manner, and came to that conclusion 
I do disagree about the hands free though, mainly because I believe its down to bad driving. The stance put out by researchers is that a passenger will assess the situation and temper the conversation accordingly, but in my experience this doesnāt always happen, even if the passenger holds a driving licence and therefore should have more idea of when to shut up. How many times have you had to ask a passenger to shut up, plenty I would reckon, so why not do this when talking on a phone on hands free, and if they fail to shut up end the call simples