bump                                                                                                                                                                             

signed                                                                                                                                                                             

Signed and passed on. 
12,701 up to date
                                                                                                                                                                             

Signed                                                                                                                                                                             

Signed                                                                                                                                                                             

                                                     12,849                                                                                                                                                                             

I've had a response from the government dept concerned:

"The e-petition 'Brian Hampton Appeal should be rejected and sentence increased' signed by you recently reached 12,901 signatures and a response has been made to it.
As this e-petition has received more than 10 000 signatures, the relevant Government department have provided the following response: We cannot comment on the individual circumstances of Jade Clark’s tragic death or the details of the sentence imposed on Brain Hampton. This is not through any lack of concern or interest but because Government Ministers cannot get involved in a matter which is a preserve of the judiciary. Sentences are decided by the courts and they do this independently of Government, having taken into account all the circumstances of the offence including the harm caused and the culpability of the offender as well as any sentencing guidelines. Parliament has made sure that significant penalties are available for those who cause death on the roads; of up to 14 years for the most serious offences of causing death by dangerous driving or causing death whilst under the influence of alcohol or drugs and 5 years for causing death by careless driving. As well as death by careless driving, Brian Hampton was convicted of perverting the course of justice, which carries a maximum penalty of life imprisonment, Dangerous driving can have devastating consequences and the Government is keen to ensure that we are doing everything we can to keep our roads safe. That is why last year the Justice Secretary wrote to the Sentencing Council to ask them to review the death by driving guideline and they have agreed to include this in their programme of work. That is also why we created a new offence of causing serious injury by dangerous driving in the Legal Aid, Sentencing, and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012. This ensures that dangerous drivers will be punished appropriately when their actions have serious consequences, short of death. The new offence specifically targets those cases where dangerous driving results in serious injury. Sentencing for road traffic offences is particularly difficult, because the harm caused may often outweigh the offender’s culpability. However the law seeks to punish those who cause death or injury on our roads in a way that is proportionate to the blameworthiness of the driver. It is open to anyone who feels that the sentence imposed on them is excessive or inappropriate, to appeal against it. It is an important principle of our criminal justice system that those convicted of an offence may seek leave to appeal to a higher court against their conviction or sentence. The Appeal Court judges will only substitute another sentence if the sentence is wrong in law; where sentence has been passed on the wrong factual basis; where some matter has been improperly taken into account or there is some fresh matter to be taken into account; or where the sentence was wrong in principle or is manifestly excessive. In this case, the appeal entered by Brian Hampton was dismissed This e-petition remains open to signatures and will be considered for debate by the Backbench Business Committee should it pass the 100 000 signature threshold.

View the response to the e-petition

Thanks,

HM Government e-petitions http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/  "

                                                                                                                                                                             

I've had the same response. 

Cop out. 

If you can't petition the Judiciary directly, who else but the Government can you petition on this topic? The best we can hope for is that it has been brought to the attention of the Court of Appeal.                                                                                                                                                                             

Im wondering if it did get to 100,000 threshold would the goal post be moved yet again?

Little or no faith left in petitions of any kind atm. I dont think I have signed anything recently that has actually achieved what it set out to do; goal posts move all too easily for one reason or another.

As said above, COP OUT!

Signed, lets hope public opinion actually counts for something...                                                                                                                                                                             

 As this e-petition has received more than 10 000 signatures, the relevant Government department have provided the following response: We cannot comment on the individual circumstances of Jade Clark’s tragic death or the details of the sentence imposed on Brain Hampton. This is not through any lack of concern or interest but because Government Ministers cannot get involved in a matter which is a preserve of the judiciary. Sentences are decided by the courts and they do this independently of Government, having taken into account all the circumstances of the offence including the harm caused and the culpability of the offender as well as any sentencing guidelines. Parliament has made sure that significant penalties are available for those who cause death on the roads; of up to 14 years for the most serious offences of causing death by dangerous driving or causing death whilst under the influence of alcohol or drugs and 5 years for causing death by careless driving. As well as death by careless driving, Brian Hampton was convicted of perverting the course of justice, which carries a maximum penalty of life imprisonment, Dangerous driving can have devastating consequences and the Government is keen to ensure that we are doing everything we can to keep our roads safe. That is why last year the Justice Secretary wrote to the Sentencing Council to ask them to review the death by driving guideline and they have agreed to include this in their programme of work. That is also why we created a new offence of causing serious injury by dangerous driving in the Legal Aid, Sentencing, and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012. This ensures that dangerous drivers will be punished appropriately when their actions have serious consequences, short of death. The new offence specifically targets those cases where dangerous driving results in serious injury. Sentencing for road traffic offences is particularly difficult, because the harm caused may often outweigh the offender’s culpability. However the law seeks to punish those who cause death or injury on our roads in a way that is proportionate to the blameworthiness of the driver. It is open to anyone who feels that the sentence imposed on them is excessive or inappropriate, to appeal against it. It is an important principle of our criminal justice system that those convicted of an offence may seek leave to appeal to a higher court against their conviction or sentence. The Appeal Court judges will only substitute another sentence if the sentence is wrong in law; where sentence has been passed on the wrong factual basis; where some matter has been improperly taken into account or there is some fresh matter to be taken into account; or where the sentence was wrong in principle or is manifestly excessive. In this case, the appeal entered by Brian Hampton was dismissed This e-petition remains open to signatures and will be considered for debate by the Backbench Business Committee should it pass the 100 000 signature threshold. http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/56314