Crash couple outrage

Nicola Dowling

April 13, 2007

James Clarke at court.

James Clarke at court. 1/2 Play Slideshow

THE family of an elderly man killed by a careless driver reacted with fury after the motorist walked free from court with a 12-month ban and £300 fine.

Francis Dugdale, 70, died and his wife June was left needing 24-hour care after they were knocked over by James Clarke in Romiley, Stockport.

But Francis's son, Gregory, slammed the sentence as `outrageously inadequate' and revealed the driver had failed to send them a letter of apology or explanation in the 15 months since the incident.

Magistrates in Stockport heard the devoted couple, from Romiley, who had eight children together and from previous marriages, had been crossing the road after a meal and a few drinks in their local pub.

But as they crossed Stockport Road they were hit by Clarke, then 19, from Begley Close, Romiley, who police estimated was driving his Peugeot 106 at around 44mph in a 30mph area.

Francis, who was a retired industrial relations officer, was killed and June, who has mild dementia, suffered what prosecutor Lisa O'Neil described as `life changing' head, leg and pelvic injuries which have left her in need of around-the-clock care.

Amputation

The retired nurse's injuries were so bad doctors initially thought about amputating her legs but decided against it.

The family said Francis was a careful person who would never take a risk on the roads.

He had previously suffered health problems and had three times been given his last rites after surgery for a heart problem. But he battled back to fitness so that he could care for June, 68.

Following the case, the Dugdales' children said they were bitterly disappointed at the sentence and would have liked to see the driver sent to jail. Laura Downey, 38, said: "For this man to be told it would help us to have an explanation and apology for what happened but for him to dig his heels in and refuse is terrible."

Clarke, 20, was ordered to sit a re-test before getting his licence back after he admitted driving without due care and attention.

Neville Warburton, defending, said that while Clarke may have seemed to be indifferent, he had expressed remorse for what happened and would like to pass his condolences to the family of the elderly couple. Clarke was a new driver who had a clean licence.

District Judge Paul Richardson said: "I am left with the conclusion that he simply didn't see them in the road, certainly not in time to avoid the collision."

He added that he was sentencing according to guidelines.

| Previous | Next

Showing comments 1 to 24 and replies | View All

Dazefly, UK (13/04/2007 at 11:33)

When you drive a vehicle, you are in charge of a lethal weapon. It takes seconds to wipe out life and the victims and their families then spend a lifetime grieving and picking up the pieces. 3,201 people were killed on the roads in 2005. 28,954 people were seriously injured. There were 271,017 casualties in total due to road accidents. Isn't it about time we started taking this carnage seriously?

J Sheldon (13/04/2007 at 11:48)

Nearly fifty percent over the speed limit and the circumstances. The question I would ask, why was the charge such a low one. Imprisonment was not an option, even the disqualification was discretionary. No doubt the low charge brought forward a guilty plea and saved Court time.

edwards (13/04/2007 at 12:53)

Time and time again we see little or no action taken against drivers causing death by careless driving.Given the pathetic consequences, is it any wonder standards of driving in the UK are so bad? If this chap had say assaulted the victim on a pavement then clearly we would have had a custodial sentence, can somebody please explain what the difference is? Why is causing death by careless driving different from a physical assault? And while we are here, when was it made legal to drive without seatbelts as I see so many motorists driving without them it cannot still be illegal can it?

Bejjy, Ex Salford (13/04/2007 at 13:14)

You are quite right J Sheldon; nowdays verdicts in many cases are not about justice but are about what sentencing option costs less in both court time and money.

Ace Riley, Online (13/04/2007 at 14:25)

As the family of the people he killed i would take private legal action against this driver for compensation (Criminal damages) these bad drivers seem to get away with murder now ? Still very dissapointed with so called british justice "Lack of it"

Colin W, Stockholm (13/04/2007 at 15:40)

This is Britain. Why is anyone surprised?

David,North Manchester (13/04/2007 at 17:19)

Judges have become enemies of the British people in Blairs Britain and have a lot to answer for in their contribution to the decline of this society.

jenny (13/04/2007 at 19:30)

yes the consequences of this mans driving caused a couple to loose thier lives but the article in question is biased and sensationalised for the enjoyment of its reader. Is it not possible that this accident was unintentional and that James Clarke is having to live with this incident for the rest of his life? and now the whole of manchester have misinturprited the article and think that he is a murderer? im not suggesting that the family of the elderly couple are not angry and seeking justice but cant anyone see this from his point of view?

Peter Sindle (13/04/2007 at 19:42)

This was a terrible thing to happen and I dont really know the true circumstances of this accident- and it would seem neither did the court after reading your report- but I do think that the street lighting could have played some part in the accident.
Previous to this accident the street lighting had been changed with more trendy lamp posts and very poor power bulbs making the the whole of the main road from Sandy Lane to The Duke of York very poorly lit and in some areas the lights were not lit at all and I personely made a request to R.b.of Scotland to fix floodlights over the ATM machine because it was so dark , - just like going dack to the old gas lights -however after the accident a floodlight was quickly fastened to a covenient pole to give extra light where the accident had happened because the lighting had been so bad. I saw no reference to the conditions at the time of the accident.

SB, Audenshaw (13/04/2007 at 23:51)

Hands up all those who've never made a mistake while driving.
The car is intrinsically dangerous and lethal.

annemarie, bury, lancahsire (16/04/2007 at 10:25)

MISTAKES !!!
We all know that any person that drives there own car are responsible for there own actions, first and foremost to watch the road. The district judge Paul Richardson said " he didn't see them in the road ".
As I understand The victim and his wife crossed the road directly under a street light and the lady was also wearing a full length white coat.
Finally in response to "Jennys" comments, I would like to say that Mr James Clarke has never once apologised for what he caused. He seems to be coping very well under the circumstances. Maybe it could be seen from his point of view if Mr Clarke had explained his actions and show some remorse rather that changing his plea to guilty just a few days before the court date. Finally if Mr Clarke is finding it hard to cope I would just like him to take a moment to realise just what pain he has caused to the victims family as they are the ones that have lost a dear loved one.
As for a 12 month ban I feel the need is really for Mr Clarke's attitude to change.

Gemma (16/04/2007 at 11:00)

Can I just say it's nice to see that some of you have took the time to make the concerned comments and join us in our anger. BUT I totally disagree with Jenny's comment James Clarke has shown no remourse at all he cant even tell the family what happened or even apologise to the family despite being asked on numerous occasions. His attitude and what I have seen tells me exacley what sort of person he is. He has ruined my familys life's my Grandad was a very much loved person and was very carefull on the roads, James Clarke took his life by speeding and not looking where he should be and theres no justice for what he has done. He hasnt only killed my grandad but he has all so left my nana as an empty shell, my grandad was her rock and she now cant even live at home she is under 24 hour care and cant even walk properly without support the accident has finished her off and now I just count myself lucky that every day she is still with us is a blessing. So dont give me mistakes, James Clarke should not have been speeding and should have been watching where he was going theres no excuse my grandparents crossed under a street light and it was a clear road there no excuses. As for his attitude that we have received and the fact he has shown no remourse makes me HATE him. I have nightmares most nights about this I miss my grandad so much and he would still be here if it wasnt for James Clarke.

annemarie, bury, lancahsire (16/04/2007 at 13:03)

TAKE A GOOD LUCK AT THIS PICTURE AND REMEMBER HIS FACE. HE WILL BE BACK ON THE ROAD IN JUST 12 MONTHS.
HOW CAN YOU ASK FOR PITY FOR THIS MAN WHEN ALL HE DESERVES IS LONG AND LONELY NIGHTS IN A JAIL CELL.
LETS JUST HOPE THAT THERE ISN'T A NEXT TIME BECAUSE HIS ATTITUDE MAKES ME THINK THAT THERE MIGHT JUST BE !!!!

Laura Downey (16/04/2007 at 15:17)

I have just read the article and all of the comments.The driving of a vehicle is a huge responsibility and with this goes an obligaation to take the consequences when things go wrong. Driving at excessive speed is not "a mistake"but a deliberate action which JAMES CLARKE undertook of his own volition. So, no I cannot give a thought to how he may be feeling. It seems that he is also incapable of giving any thought to how my family may be feeling ,although why he cannot one can only guess as he has consistently refused to help us . He has refused to tell the police or ourselves anything and had the opportunity to tell his side of events on many occasions. We are left with no explanation or apology and therefore it is no wonder we are left feeling angry and at a loss as to what sort of person he is. The article was not sensationalised in any way but merely gave the facts.The Judge was limited by the law in giving the sentence he did.As a family we will now put our energy into bringing in new laws regarding careless driving,which are already in existence but not yet being used. This would introduce a custodial sentence and may make irresponsible young drivers more careful. In addition we hope to tackle the experience we had of dealing with the Crown Prosecution Service in the hope that no other family will have to go through what we have been through over the past year or so. This is what my father would have wanted-that even the tiniest amount of good would come out of the situation and that his death be treated with the same sense of dignity that he lived his life with.

John Roberts, Salford (16/04/2007 at 15:34)

I'd like to give my sympathy to the victims' family.
I don't understand how someone can kill someone and nearly someone else and not go to jail.
It isn't an accident when you drive that fast. He's a disgrace and should be ashamed of himself.
There's something wrong with the law, that poor woman has to live with all that pain and he gets nothing. Despicable.

Catriona, Haslingden (16/04/2007 at 21:08)

i agree that he probably didn't do it intentionally, but he was driving dangerously, and that wasn't by accident, and if the street lighting really was so bad like someone said earlier, then all the more reason to drive more slowly than you usually would. the article says he has shown remorse but why hasn't any of this been said to the family, it's not hard, he could have just written a letter, or even get someone else to write a letter for him if he was too afraid to say it to their faces. there's no excuse, he needs to be jailed and taught a lesson for everybody's sake

alexander, manchester (16/04/2007 at 22:18)

what a joke you people are!!! i hope u read this. just cause he 19 does not mean he should go to jail and its his fault. he admitted to it because its a same offense as clipping and wing mirror even though thats your fault. the old man had alcohol in his system the women had mental problems and vision problems!!! where they where hit was yards away from a crossing which they failed to use. and the driver saw them but just just stepped out without looking catching him unaware. if that was another car just coming out it would be the cars fault. esp if driver had alcohol in him. and why does who they are make it a crime they didnt pay attention to the road where cars are. no matter your age you treat the roads as you would a railway. the only crime this guy committed is one you all do and thats drive over the 30mph limit so if someone steps out into the road stupidly i hope its you driving and end up in this situation. retarded sheep just saying stuff without facts!

Gemma, Denton, Manchester (17/04/2007 at 15:20)

Alexander - how dare you make them comments. It was my nana and Grandad and I will think you will find I know more facts than you do. My Grandad had no more than 2 glasses of wine he was very capable of crossing the road and looking where he was going. The road was clear they didnt need to use the crossing, they were in the middle of the road so James clarke had plenty of time to see them. I think you will find that you need to look where you are going when driving a car unless you are completley stupid and dont know that. Speed limits are set for a reason and if he wasnt speeding and watching the road then my grandad would still be here and my nana wouldnt be the empty shell that she is now. What sort of person are you hoping that the people who have made comments go through the same thing - are you sick. We have had no apology or explanation of what happened and his attitude stinks, even the police commented on his attitude and that he's showing no remourse, he had his chance to apologise, and explain but he didnt he turned it down everytime.Theres no excuse JAMES CLARKE is in the wrong and thats the fact.

Rose Frances, Online (17/04/2007 at 15:30)

Alex, what a pleasant person you sound! Referring to a man killed by a dangerous driver as the 'old man' do you even know the facts? His name was Francis not old man and the level of alcohol in his blood was well below the legal limit to drive as disclosed at the inquest. He was not drunk. Also, the evidence from the police suggests that they were well into the middle of the road hence the car being damaged on the right hand side. Anything to say now??

So the driver saw them did he?? Well that's interesting because to have been hit by a car at 45 mph when the driver saw them would suggest that he didn't brake wouldn't it? Or that he was driving well above that speed which is in itself a prisonable offense.As for breaking the speed limit, no, I do not. I'm not pious I just have regard for others safety.

Yes, of course accidents happen the problem is that James Clarke failed to contact the family at any point. Not to pass on condolensces or to ask how the woman he left in a critical condition was progressing. Could you knock someone down and not care how they were doing? I sure as hell could not.

Retarded sheep you say? That's a very kind way to talk to a grieving family. The problem here is a lack of respect, the same lack of respect shown all along by Clarke.

Oh and a point to Jenny, biased and sesationalised? How so? Maybe you just don't want to believe the facts of the matter. Have a word with yourself.

Laura Downey (17/04/2007 at 17:42)

To Alexander,you appear to have much more information than appears in the article. If you witnessed the incident perhaps you would like to contact the police and enlighten them a bit more. If not you obviously have no idea what you are talking about as the things you are talking about have certainly not been stated in court or in the article. Perhaps you would be good enough to make public this additional knowledge you appear to have so that the truth can be told -why haven't you done so already?If on the other hand you are merely speculating then this helps no-one and merely leads to rumours. Stick to the facts and do something constructive.

Rose Frances, Manchester (17/04/2007 at 22:06)

Alexander, your disgraceful comments show a complete lack of humanity for the suffering of a close knit family after the tragic loss of a dignified and well loved man, and the total destruction of his wife's life.
Perhaps you'd like to explain how an impact so strong that it knocked Frank 20 yards down the road is the same as 'clipping a wing mirror'.

rosie (18/04/2007 at 13:57)

In response to those who feel they have the right to be predjudice against james clarke for his innocent actions i have some enlightening news for you. Anyone could have caused this incident to happen, and his actions were without malice. He had no intention to harm, and yes he killed someone and caused pain to a family but this was a simple mistake. I have known james for years and he is a very careful and considerate driver, not to mention a kind and incredibly honest person. He stood up in court and admitted to his MISTAKE. In the article it highlights that james did not apologise but what apology could possibly make up for the death of a loved one. He has to wake up each morning with the guilt of a death. It amazes me that people can still believe everything they read, and feel like they have the right to exploit people. You should be ashamed of yourselves. I would also like to say that i completely agree with jennys earlier comments. People should realise that there is always two sides to every story.

Thom Lambert, Stockport (18/04/2007 at 14:39)

I am amazed by the fact that people who don't even know Mr. Clarke seem to know that he hasn't shown remorse.

Why would he want to speak to people who aren't even civil enough to not shout obscenities and slanderous comments during a trial? The same people who have made up their minds before they get into court to hear the facts.

Furthermore, I am no lawyer but I believe if he was a murderer then he would have been prosecuted for murder. Also, if the death had been caused by dangerous driving would Mr. Clarke not have been prosecuted for causing death through dangerous driving? Like I say, I am no lawyer but does this not mean that Mr. Clarke DIDN'T cause death through dangerous driving and ISN'T a murderer?

I thoroughly imagine that an apology would result in remarks such as 'that's not good enough'.

I am also happy to hear that no-one else ever exceeds the speed limit.....

Rose Frances (18/04/2007 at 14:42)

Rosie, I do realise that James did not intentionally drive into my parents. What I can't agree with is the definition of his character given by you. James only admitted to be guilty after 15 months!! He changed his plea from not guilty only 5 days before the court case. How do you think that made us feel? You are also wrong to believe that a simple word such as 'Sorry' wouldn't make us feel better. An apology would have made the world of difference to our suffering. Maybe he should clear his conscience. We are still waiting. As for two sides to every story...that is exactly the problem we have never heard anything from him or about how the accident happened. We don't know how my Dad's last seconds of life were. Only James knows that. Surely you can understand?

()

Report

News