Ghost drivers - Fatal crash on A66

[DarloRich]

I never said that there shouldn't be punishment, but the all stick approach has been shown not to work.

Agreed - I would never say all stick. I simply think we need to be a bit more sticky while we sort out some carrots. The stick is quicker to deploy and will get results in the short term - a zero tolerance campaign until you get control of the problem. You have to show decent people you wont allow criminality to go unchecked and that "cultural sensitivities" aren't a free pass to behaving how you want. We have rules in this country. They apply to ALL of us. You will follow them or face punishment and we are going to show decent people the results of this. That gets people on side and gets them helping the police in improving communities.

The required societal improvement is going to take generations but it starts by making communities safer.

In my previous interactions with you on this forum I have always found you to be able to engage in sensible discussion. I hope that is still the case, and that the straw-man argument above is just a symptom of having a lot of quotes to to respond to. I do wonder if it would be worth splitting out the topic of general justice reform from the more charged topic of this incident.

I think I had a decent replay and then didn't type it!

Surely it has to be a 2 track approach - increased funding for criminal justice at all levels AND education and social support services. Tough on crime and touch on the causes of crime God knows how we pay for it.

I have seen open theft from cars and even drug dealing where I live and this used to be a decent area. I report it, descriptions, reg numbers etc and nothing. Something is wrong. Perhaps the police are simply overwhelmed. Are we close to losing control of our streets? There are many who think we are. I don't but..................

Indeed, but just because it is hard, does not mean it is worthwhile. Similarly, all too often stays in prison don't focus on rehabilitation, but instead mean that minor criminals just end up with contacts in organised crime.

Agreed

 

[Merle Haggard]

/snip

I have seen open theft from cars and even drug dealing where I live and this used to be a decent area. I report it, descriptions, reg numbers etc and nothing. Something is wrong. Perhaps the police are simply overwhelmed. Are we close to losing control of our streets? There are many who think we are. I don't but..................

Agreed

I also report crime.

In a case of attempted burglary (could have turned to aggravated ... ) at a (hobby) workshop I was given a number when I reported it to the police. Turned out they just recorded that number with no details at all and it was an 'incident' number not a 'crime' number. Although I had descriptions, car registration, and it was a repeat police absolutely not interested - refused to engage when I 'phoned. Presumably being recorded as an incident not a crime meant it didn't appear in crime statistics. There were other examples I could quote, included evidence of drug-dealing - 'but we're looking for the ring-leaders, not dealers like this'. Car loaded with drugs left at car wash while owner went to burger bar.

Once people realise there is no action they give up reporting.

The result, 'minor crime is going down' which actually means 'the number of people who think it's worth the bother of reporting any crime is going down' - apart from the police not recording.

That first statement often follows the words 'although very serious crime is rising, ...' A cynic might say the police find it hard to ignore a blood soaked body in the High Street.

 

[Killingworth]

Indeed, in generations gone by, there would have been many industries happy to take on apprentices, and give those not-so-acedemically inclined another chance to make something of themselves, in a workplace that could work to smooth off some rough-edges. Unfortunately, across much of the country such schemes, and the companies that ran them, are very rare beasts indeed.

About 1970-3 I had a couple of short secondments to an office in Albert Road, Middlesbrough, a different world from where I lived in Richmond. ICI dominated Teesside and heavy industry was on the up. New reservoirs were being built to supply the water. Jobs for young males were not hard to find - the army was recruiting well. All was looking good.

I'd been brought up in Newcastle where jobs were already becoming hard to get. Shipbuilding, heavy engineering, coal, fishing, merchant marine, railways were all in decline as far as new jobs were concerned. But there was the Ministry of Pensions and National Insurance.

Since the 1960s much production has gone overseas and what remains is using less labour, much of that female. Shopkeepers, insurance reps, bank clerks have mostly gone. We're now into the 3rd generation of unemployed men and they're all but unemployable with low academic achievements and without role models to show them the way. It's no surprise that crime becomes attractive, especially with low chances of apprehension. With few GCSEs and rare A levels the established norm there's little incentive to go for what higher paid jobs there are.

However the youngest of the 5 men in this case, Cole Worthy, appears to have had a hard working father who's lost a son and had his house badly damaged. The lad seems to have been living elsewhere. His father's LinkedIn record shows continuous employment as a rigger working on offshore installations, most recently overseas.

Middlesbrough is where this took place but across the country there must be communities where similar situations could occur. Before we rush too far to judgements we may need to wait to review all of what's happened. Of course it's bad, extremely bad, but there may be brighter spots and it's those we need to encourage and build on.

 

[najaB]

Jobs for young males were not hard to find - the army was recruiting well. All was looking good.

And this is the source of many of the problems - changes in production methods and industry mean that there aren't a lot of jobs and the jobs that do exist require skills that we don't train people for. Several posters have mentioned that custodial sentences only deter people who feel they have something to lose, a job and in income being one of them.

 

[Starmill]

You lose your individuality, freedom and privacy. You become a number and do as you are told, not as you want. You eat what you're given, not what you fancy.

That sort of thing.

Technically prison doesn't take away people's individuality, as rebuilding that as something better is supposed to be part of the job of the sentence! That's why prisoners are encouraged to do work within the prison system for example. It doesn't impose a particular diet on you either, you get to continue a diet you were already following e.g. vegetarian, gluten free or whatever, it does however take away your freedom of choice of the actual menu.

 

[najaB]

You lose your individuality, freedom and privacy. You become a number and do as you are told, not as you want. You eat what you're given, not what you fancy.

I agree with the loss of personal liberty, but the problem with taking it too far is that you end up with people who cannot function in society at the end of long sentences. It's not unknown for some of them to deliberately commit crimes in order to get sent back inside.

 

[brad465]

I agree with the loss of personal liberty, but the problem with taking it too far is that you end up with people who cannot function in society at the end of long sentences. It's not unknown for some of them to deliberately commit crimes in order to get sent back inside.

This is something well covered in The Shawshank Redemption; Brooks is released after 50 years, but could not adjust to life 'outside' ("I saw an automobile once, now they're everywhere"), although in his case rather than commit a crime he hung himself.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I agree with the loss of personal liberty, but the problem with taking it too far is that you end up with people who cannot function in society at the end of long sentences. It's not unknown for some of them to deliberately commit crimes in order to get sent back inside.

I have long thought that we should go back to having the workhouses for that. No, not as pseudoprisons as they once were, but where people who find it hard to cope with unstructured "real world" life for whatever reason can choose to go and live and have their life managed a bit for them, being provided with 3 healthy meals a day, accommodation, socialisation options and the likes plus work to fund it all and give them pocket money. Sort of like grown up student accommodation with a job included. I'd expect the accommodation to be in the style of small studio flats rather than communal.

I've actually come across support for this in some homelessness charities. Some people just aren't up to dealing with the full-on outside world, and this could provide structure and purpose for them. Quite a lot of homeless people even if given a job and flat will end up homeless again because they struggle to manage the complexities of it all, and quite a lot of criminals end up back inside.

 

[martin butler]

Short term, the answer is the police have to take back control of the streets, it might mean curfews, and getting the army to assist in them, and use of riot units, along with targetted heavy handed arrests of known criminal elements,

Whats needed is for youngsters to be removed from home influences and put into a borstal type or military type living situation, where they get taught skills, learn that they are now powerless, that real hard men, are in control of their lives,to break them, then rebuild them back up get former Military policemen to organise and run it.

Teach these kids skills and education, and instill in them, hope that they can be better than their fathers, it has to be harsh to start with but will turn them round,

 

[spyinthesky]

Short term, the answer is the police have to take back control of the streets, it might mean curfews, and getting the army to assist in them, and use of riot units, along with targetted heavy handed arrests of known criminal elements,

Whats needed is for youngsters to be removed from home influences and put into a borstal type or military type living situation, where they get taught skills, learn that they are now powerless, that real hard men, are in control of their lives,to break them, then rebuild them back up get former Military policemen to organise and run it.

Teach these kids skills and education, and instill in them, hope that they can be better than their fathers, it has to be harsh to start with but will turn them round,

Military Aid to the Civil Powers (MACP) is a long way from a possibility in these cases and must meet the criteria which is much of a last resort. From memory I believe was last used after 9/11 and the positioning of troops and Air defence systems.
I hope you realise the lack of actual policing is carried out by the RMP’s.

2010 to 2015 government policy: armed forces support for activities in the UK

www.gov.uk

Edit- MACP last used for deployment to NI

 

[DarloRich]

and getting the army to assist in them,

We don't need and the army don't want to get involved in domestic policing. This isn't Belfast! Plus we only have 12 soldiers and they do drones.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: Wednesday at 11:09 ==

Whats needed is for youngsters to be removed from home influences and put into a borstal type or military type living situation, where they get taught skills, learn that they are now powerless, that real hard men, are in control of their lives,to break them, then rebuild them back up get former Military policemen to organise and run it.

this is an authoritarian wet dream! ( and i suspect not serious)

 

[martin butler]

We don't need and the army don't want to get involved in domestic policing. This isn't Belfast! Plus we only have 12 soldiers and they do drones.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: Wednesday at 11:09 ==


this is an authoritarian wet dream! ( and i suspect not serious)

I am serious, what else will work, As I see it we have youths that have been let down at every stage since birth, and how else can you change someone,?

and an Authoritarian wet dream would be to lock them up and forget they exist, what i am saying is educational help whilst giving them structure.

 

[DarloRich]

I am serious, what else will work, As I see it we have youths that have been let down at every stage since birth, and how else can you change someone,?

and an Authoritarian wet dream would be to lock them up and forget they exist, what i am saying is educational help whilst giving them structure.

I don't know - but I am fairly certain that locking kids up because they come from the wrong side of the tracks and beating the brown stuff out of the wont be the answer!

I would also start by funding the police, courts, prison and probation services to a sensible degree. The army are for protecting the country from external threats, the security services for internal subversives and the police for catching criminals!

 

[JamieL]

Is there an example in history where hitting people with a bigger stick has eradicated crime?

Eradicated - well, no - but reduced? Maybe. I had a holiday in Singapore this year and it is amazing how clean and safe the place feels. Part of this is inevitably due to the harsh punishments including long prison terms (in prisons that run a brutal highly regimented system), heavy fines and judicial caning.

 

[AlterEgo]

Eradicated - well, no - but reduced? Maybe. I had a holiday in Singapore this year and it is amazing how clean and safe the place feels. Part of this is inevitably due to the harsh punishments including long prison terms (in prisons that run a brutal highly regimented system), heavy fines and judicial caning.

It's also because Singapore catches a lot of criminals. Easier for it to do as a city state, but it is true that Singapore is conspicuously safe.

 

[Tetchytyke]

I had a holiday in Singapore this year and it is amazing how clean and safe the place feels.

It also has some of the harshest anti-drugs laws in the world yet drug abuse there is rising, and rapidly, albeit from a lower base.

Singapore, though, is an example of a place where- by and large- everyone who is a citizen there has something to gain by behaving and something to lose by going down the criminal route. It's not all stick, there's a lot of carrot in Singapore- it is a very wealthy city.

Also helps that it's a dictatorship.

Whats needed is for youngsters to be removed from home influences and put into a borstal type or military type living situation

I was wondering when this old chestnut would appear.

If the military gave people a solid grounding in life then the rates of drink and drug abuse, mental health problems, homelessness, and other serious problems wouldn't be significantly higher among the ex-forces population than in the wider civilian population. Somewhere between 5% and 10% of all homeless UK nationals are ex-forces, and this is improving only due to the hard work of the likes of SSAFA.

The Army Foundation College also has its own crime problem: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c3w07p7wqv1o

Warning: This article contains sexual language and details of sexual assault

Four young women have told the BBC they were sexually assaulted and harassed at an Army training college for teenagers - with one saying she was raped by several fellow junior soldiers in an attack that lasted hours.

The women all attended the Army Foundation College (AFC) at Harrogate, North Yorkshire, over the past five years and say the incidents happened when they were aged 17.

The college has a dangerous culture of misogyny and sexual violence, say the women, who are all speaking out for the first time.

These reports are "extremely distressing and serious", said an Army spokesperson in a statement.

The BBC can also reveal that North Yorkshire Police received 16 reports of sexual offences linked to the college in the year to June, according to a Freedom of Information request.

Those reported offences include allegations of exposure, voyeurism and sexual assault. No information was provided as to whether they had led to prosecutions.

A total of 176 complaints of inappropriate sexual behaviour at the college were made between January 2018 and June 2025, according to Ministry of Defence (MoD) data.

Thirty-two allegations were against permanent staff and 144 against junior soldiers.

 

[styles]

I don't disagree with having some form of community service offered over prison for young people who get caught up in such problems, but I would stop short of it being military service. Training people for more unwinnable wars in the desert will only breed resentment and potentially create new martyrs. People should join the military of their own free will.

There is also a balancing act however. Scotland adopted such an extreme position on prison avoidance that cases like this came about: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-66937137

Content warning for sexual assault:

Spoiler

A man who raped a 13-year-old schoolgirl in a park when he was 17 has avoided a prison sentence.

Sean Hogg, 21, attacked the girl in Dalkeith Country Park, Midlothian, on various occasions between March and June 2018.

Judge Lord Lake said that if the rape had been committed by an adult over 25, Hogg would have received a jail sentence of four or five years.

Instead he was ordered to do 270 hours of unpaid work.

Some people need locking up for the protection of the public. I would suggest that people who intentionally drive the wrong way down a trunk road while speeding and filming it for social media clicks are in that category.

 

[Bletchleyite]

There is also a balancing act however. Scotland adopted such an extreme position on prison avoidance that cases like this came about: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-66937137

I don't personally think there should be mitigation of any kind when it comes to a crime this serious. Rape is up there with murder, in some ways it's worse than murder in my eyes - it can ruin lives to the point they're barely worth living.

Similarly I don't think it should be mitigation to punishment for a driving ban if your job involves driving. If it does you need to be all the more careful, just as e.g. a teacher would be more impacted by conviction for a sexual offence than a warehouse worker.

 

[styles]

Similarly I don't think it should be mitigation to punishment for a driving ban if your job involves driving.

I've always felt uneasy about the 'exceptional hardship' claims for avoiding driving bans. If my job relied on driving I'd be more careful about my driving behaviour, not less. Never had any points on my driving licence and while I can accept someone getting a few points for speeding perhaps, if you manage to tot up to 12 points within 3 years then I have little sympathy.

I'm also often dismayed at people who get caught driving while disqualified who are given, as punishment, further disqualifications. If you can't stick to a driving ban then for public safety you need to be physically kept away from motor vehicles.

Examples like this do nothing to discourage people from breaking the law: https://jerseyeveningpost.com/news/...ed-jail-despite-repeat-drink-driving-offence/

Rosie Haigh (33) was pulled over for a road check in St Saviour on 27 June and found to be driving her 125cc KSR motorbike while over the legal alcohol limit.

A breathalyser test undertaken at the scene provided a reading of 57 micrograms per 100ml of breath, in excess of the 35µg100ml limit.

Centenier Seamus Friel, prosecuting, told the Magistrate’s Court that Haigh had previous convictions for speeding in November 2025, and driving a motor vehicle whilst over the limit in February 2021.

Assistant Magistrate Adam Clarke, presiding, said Haigh’s offending passed the custody threshold, but opted to hand her 120 hours of community service.

3 drink driving convictions within the space of 5 years and still let out? I mean, to be pulled for drink driving you usually need to demonstrate some poor driving or be dobbed in, so chances are this is something they're doing much more frequently than they'd been caught for. They're a danger to all other road users.

 

[Egg Centric]

I don't disagree with having some form of community service offered over prison for young people who get caught up in such problems, but I would stop short of it being military service. Training people for more unwinnable wars in the desert will only breed resentment and potentially create new martyrs. People should join the military of their own free will.

There is also a balancing act however. Scotland adopted such an extreme position on prison avoidance that cases like this came about: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-66937137

Content warning for sexual assault:

Spoiler

A man who raped a 13-year-old schoolgirl in a park when he was 17 has avoided a prison sentence.

Sean Hogg, 21, attacked the girl in Dalkeith Country Park, Midlothian, on various occasions between March and June 2018.

Judge Lord Lake said that if the rape had been committed by an adult over 25, Hogg would have received a jail sentence of four or five years.

Instead he was ordered to do 270 hours of unpaid work.

Some people need locking up for the protection of the public. I would suggest that people who intentionally drive the wrong way down a trunk road while speeding and filming it for social media clicks are in that category.

Not disagreeing with that but just as an FYI despite the tabloid driven hysteria about TikTok videos all indications are that this appears to have been part of a feud (one of the perps' houses was ram raided half an hour earlier) rather than driving dangerously "for the sake of it". Which doesn't make it better obviously.

 

[AlterEgo]

Not disagreeing with that but just as an FYI despite the tabloid driven hysteria about TikTok videos all indications are that this appears to have been part of a feud (one of the perps' houses was ram raided half an hour earlier) rather than driving dangerously "for the sake of it". Which doesn't make it better obviously.

And now an arson murder this morning which police "aren't ruling out as linked".

 

[Tetchytyke]

I'm also often dismayed at people who get caught driving while disqualified who are given, as punishment, further disqualifications. If you can't stick to a driving ban then for public safety you need to be physically kept away from motor vehicles.

That's what extending the disqualification period does; it isn't a punishment in and of itself. It then becomes an offence to drive whilst disqualified.

It's why they also apply periods of disqualification to people who don't actually have, or are even eligible for, a driving licence.

3 drink driving convictions within the space of 5 years and still let out? I mean, to be pulled for drink driving you usually need to demonstrate some poor driving or be dobbed in, so chances are this is something they're doing much more frequently than they'd been caught for.

The article is from an offence in Jersey. Things are different on small islands.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: Wednesday at 16:23 ==

all indications are that this appears to have been part of a feud (one of the perps' houses was ram raided half an hour earlier) rather than driving dangerously "for the sake of it". Which doesn't make it better obviously.

And now an arson murder this morning which police "aren't ruling out as linked".

The police have to call off a pursuit where the driving becomes so dangerous that it could seriously injure or kill other road users. This makes perfect sense in a lot of ways but it also, regrettably, gives people seeking to escape the police an incentive to drive as dangerously as this.

From what I've seen, the police had already called off the pursuit- the two officers who were killed were heading to the scene but weren't involved in the pursuit.

It does rather sound like two crime groups having a feud and bugger everyone else. I sincerely hope that the police get lots of data off the mobile phones of the perpetrators. It sounds like they have.

 

[martin butler]

Clearly, it's a lot deeper rooted than just the joyriding, criminal families going back generations, communities that harbour criminals, see its all linked, sink estates, people growing up where law and order was never present, where family feuds go back generations,

it may only be a few bad apples, but they cause a lot of trouble, Where I grew up, we had two families who were always at each other's throats, and it was inter-generational, sons followed fathers, daughters followed mothers, it was nothing to see 4 police cars dragging one family member away, they were very well known, locally, because crime was unheard of before they were placed on the estate, we knew each other, and looked out for one another,

 

[styles]

That's what extending the disqualification period does; it isn't a punishment in and of itself. It then becomes an offence to drive whilst disqualified.

It's why they also apply periods of disqualification to people who don't actually have, or are even eligible for, a driving licence.

Sure but if somebody persistently drives against a disqualification or under the influence then they are a danger to other road users, including pedestrians, children, cyclists, car drivers, etc.

Somebody who is caught drink driving in 2021, 2025, and 2026 clearly has no respect for the law, and a disqualification will likely do little to prevent their reoffending. They are a danger to the public.

The article is from an offence in Jersey. Things are different on small islands.

It is indeed, but the sentencing guidelines for Jersey do still include custodial sentences. To be done 3 times in 5 years for drink driving is what I would consider to be custodial sentence territory as said driver can clearly not be trusted.

The Jersey legislation suggests a minimum 3 year disqualification if a second drink driving offence occurs within 10 years, so the 2025 ban was either unduly lenient or the driver was driving while disqualified, while drunk, last week.

 

[Tetchytyke]

To be done 3 times in 5 years for drink driving is what I would consider to be custodial sentence territory

And it often would be, but there will be a reason why it has been mitigated downwards. Which will probably be linked to the reason why she was stopped in the first place.

 

[styles]

And it often would be, but there will be a reason why it has been mitigated downwards. Which will probably be linked to the reason why she was stopped in the first place.

But that's the point - it shouldn't be.

3 drink driving convictions in 5 years is unacceptable and it evidences a driver having no respect for the law or others' safety. These drivers will kill people.

It is not a standard which would be applied to unlawful act manslaughter. It reiterates the point that if you want to kill somebody, you should do it in a car.

 

[Tetchytyke]

But that's the point - it shouldn't be.

I know nothing about that specific case, and the article is paywalled. But if you have a lone parent with mental health problems who is self-medicating with alcohol and you send them to prison then you're also putting their children into care. Is that a good outcome for society? Or is a treatment programme together with community service better?

There's usually a reason why you see mitigation like that and it isn't always reported faithfully by the press. And in smaller communities that mitigation will often be the reason why they were stopped in the first place.

 

[styles]

I know nothing about that specific case, but if you have a lone parent with mental health problems who is self-medicating with alcohol and you send them to prison then you're also putting their children into care. Is that a good outcome for society? Or is a treatment programme together with community service better?

This is a strawman argument given that the offender was not given a treatment programme. Note that in Jersey, as like in England & Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland, such a programme can be prescribed by the courts.

 

[Tetchytyke]

This is a strawman argument

No it isn't. You don't know why any mitigation was granted. The article doesn't say (or not in the bit that's not paywalled). You're getting outraged but you only have a part of the story (PS it was drink driving in 2021 but only a speeding offence since then).

My experience of the criminal justice system is that where high levels of mitigation are applied there is a reason for that mitigation to be applied. The Magistrate is reported as having specifically referred to the custodial presumption before giving a non-custodial sentence. The report doesn't, as far as I can see (and I'm not fighting the paywall to find out), say why.

The newspapers seldom report on the reason for that mitigation- sometimes they genuinely don't know as it is buried in confidential probation reports, and sometimes they don't care as manufactured outrage about soft judges sells more clicks.

You also referred to another case in Scotland which you claimed was unduly lenient. On appeal the conviction was overturned and he was acquitted of all charges.

 

[styles]

No it isn't. You don't know why any mitigation was granted. The article doesn't say (or not in the bit that's not paywalled). You're getting outraged but you only have a part of the story (PS it was drink driving in 2021 but only a speeding offence since then).

My experience of the criminal justice system is that where high levels of mitigation are applied there is a reason for that mitigation to be applied. The Magistrate is reported as having specifically referred to the custodial presumption before giving a non-custodial sentence. The report doesn't, as far as I can see (and I'm not fighting the paywall to find out), say why.

It does. It clearly says that the lenient penalty was given because it was only a 57 reading (the limit in jersey being 35).

In Scotland, most European countries, and soon to be England and Wales that would be over 2.5x the drink drive limit.

Giving a lenient sentence because it's "only" 57 is unjust.

You also referred to another case in Scotland which you claimed was unduly lenient. On appeal the conviction was overturned and he was acquitted of all charges.

Indeed, but obviously this was not quashed at the time of the original conviction so the point remains that, on the assumption at the time that the defender was guilty, a convicted rapist was spared prison.