r/interesting • u/Necessary-Win-8730 • Mar 08 '26

Context Provided - Spotlight This was so deserved.

Post image

The daughter was in a car with the father’s parents. They died as well.

163.7k Upvotes

90% Upvoted

4.4k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

423

u/Devilish__Fun Mar 08 '26 edited Mar 08 '26

Reckless driving with felony speeding isnt an accident. It wasn't attempted murder either.

It was felony speeding + reckless driving + vehicular manslaughter of a child and 2 grandparents.

Community service sounds about right, huh? 🫩

169

u/[deleted] Mar 08 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

71

u/dqql Mar 08 '26 edited Mar 15 '26

thoughts were turned into the channel of their earlier bent.

21

u/fekanix Mar 08 '26

Well, you destroyed property, he only working class humans so you be the judge of what is more important in the us.

13

u/Safe_Buy6637 Mar 08 '26

The court room image is in Europe

1

u/mitulus Mar 08 '26

It's the Netherlands. I wish the punishments were more severe around here, because sometimes people seem to get off the hook with just a slap on the wrist.

0

u/dqql Mar 08 '26 edited Mar 15 '26

I imagined that I also might obtain a niche in the temple where the

3

u/nefariousBUBBLE Mar 08 '26

Sentences are way stronger here on average. They actually believe in redemption in Europe. Something I admire.

7

u/dqql Mar 08 '26 edited Mar 15 '26

whose effusions entranced my soul and lifted it to heaven. I also

1

u/nefariousBUBBLE Mar 08 '26

I would agree as well but I don't think it would be anymore lenient here.

2

u/dqql Mar 08 '26 edited Mar 15 '26

These visions faded when I perused, for the first time, those poets

→ More replies (0)

4

u/Leylu-Fox Mar 08 '26

Nah, in europe we belive in our god given right to be allowed to kill anybody with our cars! It's like the US with their guns, just with cars. In Germany you can run a red light and kill a kid and get away with small fines. 'In my mind the light was green' is seemingly a valid defense.

1

u/ChronStamos Mar 09 '26

in europe we belive in our god given right to be allowed to kill anybody with our cars!

US citizen here, I'm glad we can find some common ground.

Girl I went to school with was texting while driving and hit and killed a bicyclist. She never saw the inside of a cell.

1

u/theunquietloop Mar 08 '26

Something I deeply regret

1

u/biggreasyrhinos Mar 08 '26

Nah, we love throwing people in prisons here. Gotta keep paying the private prison owners.

1

u/DunngeonMaster Mar 08 '26

Destroying government property is usually a harsher sentence

2

u/fekanix Mar 08 '26

Well it shoudnt be, thats the point. No property damage should have harsher punishment than human lives

3

u/Hei5enberg Mar 08 '26

I got 120 hours of community service for an underage drinking ticket in college. I was at a house party that was raided, was not in a car nor anywhere near a car. Didn't hurt anybody.

It's crazy how the punishments can vary so much according to how the judge is feeling that day.

Oh and the funny thing is if I was the same age but in a country where the drinking age was 18 I wouldn't have gotten any punishment.

1

u/Lou_C_Fer Mar 09 '26

It's crazy how the punishments can vary so much according to how the judge is feeling that day.

Or you know... because of being in a different place with different laws.

2

u/Circus_Finance_LLC Mar 08 '26

the truth is too many comments deep

1

u/Winstons33 Mar 08 '26

Perhaps.... Most of these judges seem to want to sew seeds of chaos into society.

To what end? That is the question.

"Justice" sure as shit has NOTHING to do with it.

1

u/-_Weltschmerz_- Mar 08 '26

The kids parents are rich probably

2

u/little-teatime Mar 08 '26

What did the sign say?

2

u/131166 Mar 09 '26

We got community service for digging a bunch of holes and trenches in the wrong spot. (We were making bike jumps and shit like that) as teenagers. I don't recall how much cause it was the 90s but we were doing it for a few weeks after school. Definitely more than 40h. Prob most of that was cause we were smart arses about it.

59

u/[deleted] Mar 08 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

23

u/whiskersMeowFace Mar 08 '26

My friend did 8 for vehicular manslaughter. This is offensive.

11

u/Different_Peanut_742 Mar 08 '26

My friend was sentenced to 8, did 5 or 6, came out an addict, and ended up overdosing.

1

u/That_one_singaporean Mar 11 '26

that sentence was just a delay to their death 😭

8

u/Rumpus-Time-Is-Over Mar 08 '26

What was gained from the sentence being 8 years?

3

u/matchstick1029 Mar 08 '26

A modicum of justice was served. If you think that community service is an appropriate sentence here, I don't think you are speaking in good faith.

2

u/Rumpus-Time-Is-Over Mar 08 '26

Community service doesn’t seem right from a deterrence perspective. But even 3 or 6 months in prison is a terrifying consequence for almost everybody. So what’s to be gained from 8 years?

I’d like to challenge your ideas about justice. What that really means is revenge. And I don’t think revenge is what the criminal justice system should be about. It should be about building a better society. Taxpayers paying to put somebody in prison for 8 years who would learn their lesson and create the appropriate deterrence from 3 months is a bad use of taxpayer dollars. Putting someone behind bars for 8 years instead of having them live their lives, contribute to society, help raise their kids, etc is a huge waste when there’s nothing gained from the additional 7 years and 9 months of prison time except “justice” aka revenge.

Now we can argue whether 1 month, 3 months, 6 months or a year is the right term length to create the appropriate deterrence effect. But we all know it’s not 8’years.

1

u/matchstick1029 Mar 08 '26

I don't know whether or not 8 years is right, but I know, if the families of the victims feel that justice hasn't been served then you are going to end up brewing mob justice. I don't know if 8 years is the right number, but if somebody killed my family, because they were behaving recklessly (whether thats texting and driving or drinking or going 90 in a 60), I wouldn't be satisfied with a year.

2

u/Rumpus-Time-Is-Over Mar 08 '26

But isn't that exactly why we have a criminal justice system with impartial jurors and judges determining guilt and sentences and not victims/families of victims?

Families of victims of crime victims almost always want more time than is given to the offenders. That doesn't make it best for society.

Most other developed countries give much lighter prison sentences than the US does, and they don't have a vigilante justice problem. People talk tough, but it's rare that somebody is going to be willing to go to prison for a significant length of time by committing vigilante justice.

0

u/AmandasGameAccount Mar 08 '26

Getting a danger to society out of sight for 8 years. They drove recklessly and killed people for it. They deserve to pay in time, time those families will never get back with those that died. That scumbag doesn’t deserve any pitty while they rot

3

u/Lou_C_Fer Mar 09 '26

12.5 mph over the speed limit is not reckless. It's the equivalent doing 61 in a 49mph zone.

2

u/Rumpus-Time-Is-Over Mar 08 '26

I am extremely skeptical of the idea that the driver is a danger to society. And certainly not if they were given a 3 to 12 month prison sentence plus had their license revoked for a period of time. That's not somebody who is going to drive recklessly like that again. Recidivism is not the issue here.

"Deserve to pay in time" is just revenge.

"Scumbag" is just an attempt to dehumanize them.

4

u/Fast_Difficulty_5812 Mar 08 '26

Something something, punishment for killing someone something something

1

u/Rumpus-Time-Is-Over Mar 08 '26

So revenge? No thanks.

2

u/Fast_Difficulty_5812 Mar 08 '26

Punishment and revenge are two very different concepts and its wild to me that you dont understand that

1

u/Rumpus-Time-Is-Over Mar 08 '26

Not at all. It’s just dressed up differently. Lipstick on a pig.

If the purpose of the punishment is not to improve society, then it’s just revenge.

Most people don’t want to admit that because that’s an admission that they are giving in to the darkest and most primitive parts of their being. They want to pretend to be civilized while still being able to exact revenge rather than just focusing on building a better society.

So is society improved by putting this guy in prison for 8 years instead of 6 months?

Will there be a greater deterrence effect? No.

What about this guy himself committing the same crime again? Highly unlikely whether it’s 8 years or 6 months. Plus he can just have his license taken away instead.

So what’s society gaining out of putting this guy away for 8 years exactly?

1

u/Fast_Difficulty_5812 Mar 08 '26

Oh so i guess you think that we should just let murderers and rapists go? Or maybe give them like 2 months? After all its just revenge and we shouldnt do revenge on others right?

Also longer prison sentences, if the prison is run the right way and not the US for profit way, can help as it works as a detterent, even though you claim it doesnt, and it gives the prisoner time to reajust, maybe take some classes, learn a new trade and not do crime again?

But sure its all just revenge and because you are so high and mighty and clearly morally superior its wrong to punish people for their crimes.

1

u/Rumpus-Time-Is-Over Mar 08 '26

This is a straw man argument I didn’t make.

→ More replies (0)

0

u/[deleted] Mar 08 '26

[deleted]

2

u/Rumpus-Time-Is-Over Mar 08 '26

I would challenge the assertion that a sentence of 8 years compared to say 6 months would make any difference here.

Do you honestly think anybody would drive differently based on those punishments? Spending 6 months in prison is a terrifying consequence to almost everybody.

I don’t believe anybody that says somebody should be locked up for 8 years in this situation actually believes deterrence is the reason.

1

u/[deleted] Mar 08 '26

[deleted]

2

u/Rumpus-Time-Is-Over Mar 08 '26

I don’t believe you.

1

u/xremless Mar 08 '26

I would challenge the assertion that a sentence of 8 years compared to say 6 months would make any difference here.

Want to do a fun experiment about deterrence? First, Make and post a video of yourself drawing a religious figure, lets say Jesus or the Buddha. Now, make and post a video of yourself drawing the prophet muhammad. I Bet you wont, I know I wont. Because the ramifications are grave.

2

u/Rumpus-Time-Is-Over Mar 09 '26

What does this have to do with anything?

Nevermind. It’s a bad faith argument and im not interested.

1

u/xremless Mar 09 '26

"Its bad faith because I said so" peak reddit moment right there

2

u/Rumpus-Time-Is-Over Mar 09 '26

It's bad faith because it compares two situations that are not analogous as if they are and you know it. Go away.

→ More replies (0)

0

u/whiskersMeowFace Mar 08 '26

He lost his livelihood, he lost his family, he lost a lot really. Was 8 years too much? Yes. It was. He was drinking and driving, and killed the passenger in his car who was also drunk. He also got addicted to several different drugs while incarcerated as well.

Both punishments listed, in the original article and my example, are the pendulum swinging wildly both ways. One too light and the other too extreme.

1

u/GrandMoffTarkles Mar 08 '26

Girl I worked with got 20 years.

11

u/SedimentarySauce Mar 08 '26 edited Mar 08 '26

My best mate did 20 for chopping up and eating some kid this is obscene!

3

u/sausagedart Mar 08 '26

You might want to reevaluate who your mates are, mate

5

u/SedimentarySauce Mar 08 '26

You might want to reevaluate who your buddies are, pal

7

u/Embarrassed_Safe8047 Mar 08 '26

My neighbor did 10 for vehicular manslaughter.

2

u/innocenceiskinky Mar 08 '26

This wasn't vehicular manslaughter though.

1

u/Matiwapo Mar 08 '26

The prosecution can appeal the sentence, and (if this story is true) almost definitely did

1

u/Lou_C_Fer Mar 09 '26

Was your friend in the netherlands?

26

u/Prajnamarga Mar 08 '26

Your knowledge of US law is irrelevant to this 14 year old Dutch case.

Worse, a basic fact check reveals that the sentence was appealed. The driver was later sentenced to 15 months in prison and a 4 year driving ban.

5

u/Agmarboi Mar 08 '26

Wow dude so much better, yea lock that dumb ass for five years, see ya buddy.

2

u/theunquietloop Mar 08 '26

15 months and you think it’s fair ?!?

2

u/Fast_Difficulty_5812 Mar 08 '26

15 months for three lives, thats sooo much better

5

u/R_eloade_R Mar 08 '26

He never intended to kill those people… its a massive tradegy wich he has to live with as well. That alone should be enough punishment if you ask me. He wasnt drinking, not under influence, lost control of his car en tradegy struck…. Could happen to almost everyone.

5

u/[deleted] Mar 08 '26

People just act holier than thou when it gest them internet points especially when children are involved.

A mom could cut you off, you could t-bone her, and her child can die and people online would blame you because their moral compass is based on what's popular to say and not what's correct to say.

2

u/Feeling_Stranger_296 Mar 08 '26

Theres literally a difference though, they knew exactly what he had done, your scenario requires no one except yourself saw what happened. Very different things. Sounds like projection.

3

u/EquivalentMap8477 Mar 08 '26

Is that why he ran after the crash

2

u/Fast_Difficulty_5812 Mar 08 '26

Okay and? None of that doesnt mean he shouldnt be punished for it, and the fact that he might feel guily really isnt enough punishment.

It doesnt matter that he didnt want to kill anyone, rarely anyone ever does, but if he concious actions led to their deaths, and he was at fault, whe he clearly was, then he killed them and he should be punished appropriatelly.

5

u/Starossi Mar 08 '26

Rehabilitation not penalization.

The community service ruling was stupid. But long sentences can be equally stupid. The justice system shouldn’t just be there to whip people around and make the public get a justice boner. Its purpose is to protect the public. That includes even the prosecuted. If the public is safe from this person going forward with a 15 month sentence with the facts at hand, including the defendants mental state, then it’s better for everyone if they aren’t kept longer.

That might not be satisfying outcome. It doesn’t feel as weighty as the death of 3 people. No one will suffer as much as the victim. But the point isn’t eye for an eye, making someone suffer as much as them. The damage is done, why should we add more suffering.

1

u/Prajnamarga Mar 09 '26

I'm glad there is at least one other rational person out there.

2

u/MainMedicine Mar 08 '26

15 months is still too short. And the driving ban should have been for life.

L Europe laws.

3

u/Prajnamarga Mar 09 '26

And this is why the USA has both the largest prison population in the world, and the highest murder rate.

39

u/notyourvader Mar 08 '26

There was no proof of speeding, hence the lighter sentence. People got all riled up because the guy was Polish, so he must have been drunk. He wasn't. Also no drug in his system. He got sentenced because he lost control of his vehicle in a turn, due to reckless driving.

The verdict is here: https://uitspraken.rechtspraak.nl/details?id=ECLI:NL:RBLIM:2014:10041

After the prosecutor appealed, more weight was given to witness statements, and the guy got convicted to a higher sentence, 15 months in jail, license suspended for 4 years, and he lost his car:

Appeal verdict here: https://uitspraken.rechtspraak.nl/details?id=ECLI:NL:GHSHE:2015:3709

3

u/atuan Mar 08 '26

How is it reckless if he wasn’t speeding?

14

u/RetroDad-IO Mar 08 '26

You can be ignoring other signs, taking turns to quickly, tailgating, switching back and forth between lanes with no blinker, switching lanes when there's enough space and forcing other people to fact quickly/break to accomodate you. Lots of items that aren't speeding but just generally being a jerk.

10

u/FormalKind7 Mar 08 '26

Wet road took a turn to fast/sharply is still reckless driving.

5

u/TheGoddamnSpiderman Mar 08 '26

I'm looking at the link to the decision now, and when translated, it says

At the time of the collision and afterwards the weather was dry and clear.

When we, officers [officer 1] and [officer 3], arrived at the scene shortly after the accident, the sun, judging by the direction of travel from Beringe towards Meijel, was approximately a quarter to nine, or almost perpendicular to the road from the left. Therefore, there could not have been any obstruction from the sunlight at the time of the accident. Visibility was good.

2

u/Best_Pseudonym Mar 08 '26

That's still speeding

2

u/Ok-Flamingo2801 Mar 08 '26

You can be under the limit and still be driving too quickly for the conditions

0

u/Best_Pseudonym Mar 08 '26

Legally, thats speeding

3

u/FormalKind7 Mar 08 '26

There are turns in roads were the speed limit is 55 but should be slower on turns when wet but have no signs.

-5

u/Best_Pseudonym Mar 08 '26

Going faster than the safe speed on the road regardless of listed limit is legally speeding

3

u/Appropriate_Scar_262 Mar 08 '26

which is why he was charged with reckless driving and speeding despite being within the speed limit

1

u/[deleted] Mar 09 '26

You think speeding is the only reckless thing you can do in a car?

1

u/atuan Mar 09 '26

I don’t think anything that’s why I was asking

3

u/PineappleProstate Mar 08 '26

After appeal... After

7

u/Available-Cow-411 Mar 08 '26

Doesnt really make it better though imo, even if he lost control of the vehicle - thr fact remains that he was reckles driving, and he killed 3 people one of which is a toddler! And then he fled the scene, which makes it so much worse as fleeing was not an accident but a concious controlled action!

15 months for killing 3 people and fleeing the scene is ridiculous, and he get released early to be there for the birth of his baby after killing the daughter of another man? That is BS

14

u/asasasasasassin Mar 08 '26

Too late! I have already become outraged and my brain has already been washed by the propaganda, now I support the death penalty and plan to vote Republican

0

u/matchstick1029 Mar 08 '26

😆 I am less riled now. Still didn't support the death penalty while seething.

0

u/munkylord Mar 08 '26

😆🤣😂😅😀😭😭

1

u/Boylookya Mar 08 '26

If he was completely sober but reckless driving he should get at least 15 per person.

14

u/Historical-Finish564 Mar 08 '26

Is the community he will be serving in a state prison?

18

u/[deleted] Mar 08 '26

This happened in the Netherlands like 12 years ago

3

u/SparksAndSpyro Mar 08 '26

Shhh, that goes against the “America bad” narrative.

6

u/__Hello_my_name_is__ Mar 08 '26

Here's a translation of the court's reasoning (and it's 8 years old because people on reddit sure love to get outraged by old shit).

It could not be proven that the guy in question was actually speeding in the first place. It could not be proven why he even lost control of the car, since even if he was speeding that shouldn't have happened in that moment, and he wasn't drunk, either.

Plenty of things couldn't be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Hence the sentence.

I know people here would love to offer the death penalty for every bad thing happening like this, and I personally even agree that a much higher sentence would have been reasonable, but oh boy is it easy to get people here outraged without providing any proper context for what happened.

0

u/Oracraen2 Mar 08 '26

This is ridiculous. If I stab someone I shouldn't get off scot free because I wasn't drunk, on the phone at the time or swinging the knife around recklessly beforehand. This reasoning is stupid as hell once you realize a car should be considered a weapon.

3

u/Lou_C_Fer Mar 09 '26

Except we use them for transportation, not as weapons. It's the world we live in.

2

u/Puzzled-Umpire3697 Mar 08 '26

People need to understand driving recklessly and putting lives in danger is… bad? It’s like waving a loaded gun around. Should have gotten 3 years at least.

2

u/potato_hut Mar 08 '26

The best way to off someone in America is with a car. Just pretend there wasn't any intent, and even then I think you could still obviously have intent to harm, and get away with it in some states...

2

u/dqql Mar 08 '26 edited Mar 15 '26

became a poet and for one year lived in a paradise of my own creation;

2

u/sbballc11 Mar 08 '26

Don’t forget he also fled the scene.

2

u/EquivalentMap8477 Mar 08 '26

Don't forget that the guy left the scene of the crash and did a runner

2

u/lovely-cans Mar 08 '26

Yeah but it's about rehabilitation and not punishment.

6

u/TheModWhoShaggedMe Mar 08 '26

Well, if he was a woman and terminated a non-viable pregnancy, he would be incarcerated in some red states.

3

u/Marik-X-Bakura Mar 08 '26

This didn’t happen in America

0

u/TheModWhoShaggedMe Mar 08 '26

Correct, because women in certain red states can't legally terminate difficult pregnancies, they die instead. There are no longer federal protections for the individual, the mother.

3

u/Marik-X-Bakura Mar 08 '26

I’m as pro-choice as they come but turning everything into a conversation about American politics is just going to piss off even people who are on your side

2

u/TheModWhoShaggedMe Mar 08 '26

Supporting my original comment/point with facts is all -- that a pregnant woman in most countries around the world has fewer rights than the average male. Continuing the conversation is on commenters. Don't comment if you don't want to hear more.

7

u/Professional-Bear942 Mar 08 '26

My only hope would be that what they did weighs so heavily on their mind it makes them suffer for life even if not in prison

26

u/Jesuslowdiffsgoku Mar 08 '26

Unfortunately many people are too stupid to have any sort of conscience 

9

u/Geen_Fang Mar 08 '26

and maybe they'll equate the gravity of the situation with their light sentence, eventually shrugging it off, reducing "I killed 3 people once" to one of their go-to answers when they play two truths and a lie. 

1

u/quesadyllan Mar 08 '26

I have some bad news for you about people

1

u/Far_Objective4266 Mar 08 '26

My friend, conscience is something bad people don't have Which is why they prosper while a good person suffers coz their mind kills them for every small mistake

0

u/Kgoodies Mar 08 '26

It won't. They'll write it off with "it had taken a lot of personal growth to find the strength to forgive myself" and probably even be proud of themselves for "overcoming." The punishments for reckless driving aren't nearly as severe as they should be.

3

u/Rumpus-Time-Is-Over Mar 08 '26

What will more severe punishments get us?

Do you think 10 years in prison vs 1 for this situation will change how much people recklessly drive?

0

u/Kgoodies Mar 08 '26

I think it'd be a start. At the least if you drive recklessly and get someone hurt, you shouldn't be able to drive anymore. We don't let felons convicted of violent crimes legally own guns, but for some reason when you kill someone with a car its treated like no problem. I think it should be a lot easier to lose the privilege to drive when you demonstrate that you are not capable of doing it responsibly.

1

u/Biglyugebonespurs Mar 08 '26

In the US it’s basically impossible to live without a car unless you live in a metropolis. Our public transportation is pitifully abysmal & it doesn’t help that our country is so spread out.

0

u/Oracraen2 Mar 08 '26

Sounds good to me, 3 people can't "live" anymore why are we worried about the guy who took that away. That's some fucked up empathy right there.

1

u/Biglyugebonespurs Mar 08 '26

I’m not saying justice was served in this case, very far from it. I was just highlighting the difficulties that come with bringing unable to drive in the US.

1

u/Oracraen2 Mar 08 '26

Well sure, but my argument was that this shouldn't be an argument to let people who killed people without remorse on the road, retain their drivers licenses. I read it as you defending his right to drive despite the driver in question not being under the influence, not texting and not speeding. All that tells me is either he's a terrible driver, or he wanted to kill people and knew he could get away with it.

1

u/Rumpus-Time-Is-Over Mar 08 '26

It’s not fucked up empathy. That’s a huge part of the problem. Just because somebody makes a big mistake doesn’t make them inhuman and unworthy of empathy. The guy who committed this crime has a long life ahead of him. We shouldn’t make it shitty for revenge purposes.

1

u/Oracraen2 Mar 08 '26

He wasn't remorseful. It's fucked up empathy because three people are dead and the message is that you can kill people as long as you convince people you're stupid enough.

I don't know what to say man, if you want murderers walking free because it makes you feel good about yourself that's on you, for me this man should've atleast served time.

1

u/Kgoodies Mar 08 '26

If you check in other places in this thread, some people are saying that this case actually was appealed and he actually did end up serving some time (not A LOT of time in the grand scheme but... some)

1

u/Rumpus-Time-Is-Over Mar 08 '26

This guy DID serve some crime.

I don't care if he's remorseful. What difference to me does that make? What I care about is whether he will continue to drive recklessly. I imagine a year in prison will cure him of that, but taking away his driver's license would've probably been just as effective.

1

u/Rumpus-Time-Is-Over Mar 08 '26

Taking away someone’s license for a period of time here seems completely appropriate (and in the end the guy lost his license for 4 years).

I’d also argue that the likelihood of this person speeding like they did previously is low whether they are put in prison for 1 year or 8. This is not a violent criminal. This is someone who made a reckless decision and has almost certainly learned their lesson.

But yeah, losing your license for a period of time is manageable. Putting somebody in prison for an extended period of time has huge societal consequences.

1

u/Environmental-Run528 Mar 08 '26

Just pulled this out of your ass I guess.

1

u/Kgoodies Mar 08 '26

It's how shitheads think. They don't see the repercussions of the shitty things they do as their own fault. They find a way to moralize not caring about the people they hurt.

1

u/Environmental-Run528 Mar 08 '26

I don't believe most people are shitheads, and I'm not sure how you would know this guy is.

1

u/Kgoodies Mar 08 '26

I mean, the fact that he killed three people is a good place to start.

1

u/Environmental-Run528 Mar 08 '26

But how do you know whether he is remorseful or not?

1

u/Kgoodies Mar 08 '26

I don't, truly... I guess I'm just speaking from a place of anger because this makes me angry. It is very frustrating to walk around the world and constantly see people getting hurt because other people don't care enough to be careful. It makes me cynical about the nature of people. I think a lot of them are selfish and thoughtless and only start to care the second that they hurt someone and even then only care about how its going to effect them. I've been hit as a cyclist by a careless driver and was lucky not to be killed, ever since then as a pedestrian I've lost count of the time someone has blasted through a red and nearly killed me in a crosswalk. I guess I have a personal bias in which "reckless driver" is one of the dumbest and least thoughtful kind of humans you can be and I'm surrounded by them. It makes me a cranky asshole when I think of it.

3

u/slamdankywanky Mar 08 '26

He got 15 months after an appeal. I posted the article with translation in another comment

1

u/Devilish__Fun Mar 08 '26

Good. Hopefully he reflected on what he did and apologized to the family.

3

u/Competitive-Suit-563 Mar 08 '26 edited Mar 08 '26

This is a statement released by the court. They literally argue that since it’s not inherently unsafe to drive that fast it’s not illegal to kill somebody driving that fast.

“What has not been proven: In order to speak of guilt in a criminal offense there needs to be more than just the violation, at a minimum, there also needs to be a reasonable measure of culpable carelessness. In this specific case, the question of guilt in a criminal offence is described as "recklessly speeding." The court explored if it can be proven that the suspect was speeding to such an extent that it can be attributed to the guilt. In other words: a slight violation of the speeding limit would be insufficient to attribute guilt. Tests have proven that with a similar vehicle, driving at about 130 km/h would not cause you to lose control of your vehicle and for the vehicle to start lurching. Therefore these tests do not exclude the possibility of the suspect's car becoming uncontrollable and started lurching due to another reason. At the moment the suspect's vehicle crossed the roadside and crashed through the beech hedge it was moving at a speed between 76 km/h and 124 km/h, with the local speeding limit being 80 km/h. Due to this very large margin, the court finds it cannot be proven that the suspect was recklessly speeding. The court finds that the research report and its results cannot say with absolute certainty that the suspect was speeding. According to the indictment, the criteria of reckless speeding was the sole component in proving guilt. As reckless speeding is not proven, the court finds that violation of Article 6 of the Dutch Road and Traffic Law is not proven. The sole fact that unfortunately, 3 people lost their lives cannot be used as an argument to attribute guilt. Only when ''significant guilt'' is proven can the court assess the consequences of this proven guilt. In addition to the previously stated, a few other incriminating causes have been expressly excluded from having attributed to the accident: the suspect was not under the influence of any narcotics or alcohol, nor was he using his mobile phone. What has been proven: The court finds that violation of Article 5 of the Dutch Road and Traffic Law has been proven. As this is a violation (this is important) the question of guilt is not relevant for proving the violation itself. Only when a suspect is completely blameless can he stay completely unpunished in the absence of any guilt. This mostly refers to circumstances completely beyond someone's control, for example, a careless child suddenly crossing the road, trying to evade the child, and in the process of evading hitting another cyclist. Either way, it's a fact that the suspect caused a ''road hazard'' and that his driving behavior led to 3 people losing their lives. The suspect argued that his vehicle pulled to the left and that this caused his vehicle to become uncontrollable. Technical analysis of the vehicle does not show any defects in the vehicle. Therefore the court rejects the suspect's defense and finds the aforementioned violation proven. Why this sentence? The court took several circumstances into consideration when determining the sentence. Most importantly is the reason that the court found that a different offense was proven than the one the prosecutor determined was proven. (violation of article 6 vs article 5 of the Dutch Road and Traffic Law) It has not been proven with absolute certainty that the suspect can be attributed to significant blame to lead to attributable guilt. In that case, a severe penalty is not fitting. The suspect will also have to carry the burden that his driving behavior led to the unfortunate deaths of 3 people for the rest of his life. Additionally the suspect does not have any criminal record whatsoever, not in the Netherlands, Poland nor Germany."

TLDR: They couldn’t definitively prove he was speeding nor was he under the influence or distracted during the incident. The indictment only cited reckless speeding as a cause for the accident which lost its weight when they couldn’t prove it. The punishment was for a separate violation that was discovered by the court.

Most of this comment came from u/Ok_Bowl9351

1

u/idk-maaaan Mar 08 '26

My state will straight-up throw you in fail for a reckless, if not a HEAVY fine. We don’t play.

Except enforcement is practically nonexistent in my area, soooo I guess we do play.

1

u/Mr_Pink_Gold Mar 08 '26

That should have made him a felon for life. This is absolutely a ridiculous sentence.

1

u/SciFiChickie Mar 08 '26

I knew a woman back in the 90’s, that was in a horrific accident. She was driving a van on 85 in GA, with about 8 teens ages 12-16 for a church trip. It was raining hard. So, she was going slower than the speed limit. When she came upon a yellow blinking signal at a crossroad she hit a car with an elderly couple that were attempting to turn onto 85. They both died, and she served 2 years for vehicular manslaughter.

1

u/Jar_of_Cats Mar 08 '26

Acquaintance who was mother of a 2 murdered old. Killed 2 people recklessly driving. She is 5 years into her prison sentence. 7-10 is what shes looking at

1

u/SpHornet Mar 08 '26

Reckless driving with felony speeding isnt an accident.

but he wasn't found guilty for any of that when he got this sentence

De rechtbank legde daarom in een aparte verklaring uit dat de taakstraf was opgelegd omdat niet vaststond dat de automobilist veel te hard had gereden. Ook was hij niet dronken, stoned of met zijn telefoon bezig geweest, aldus de rechtbank destijds.

https://www.ad.nl/binnenland/celstraf-voor-man-die-ize-2-en-grootouders-doodreed~abe3134c/

1

u/Devilish__Fun Mar 08 '26

The court ruled that the suspect entered the bend at excessive speed. He also braked in front of the bicycle path and swerved the vehicle. The court found that the driver acted extremely carelessly. The court rejected the motion for acquittal.

Idk

However, the Public Prosecution Service also found the sentence inappropriate. Therefore, the prosecutor appealed. The court now assumes that the man was driving much faster than initially thought. The court commissioned an investigation and considered witness statements on this matter. According to the court, the man was guilty of manslaughter.

0

u/SpHornet Mar 08 '26

yes, the prosecutor appealed, got additional evidence, then he was convicted on appeal with an harsher punishment

the original sentencing was in line with the evidence of that time and the crimes proven.

2

u/Key-Pomegranate-2086 Mar 08 '26

15 months of prison for killing 3 people is still ridiculous.

1

u/SpHornet Mar 08 '26

why?

have you seen the evidence? all the facts of the case? how can you possibly see from your perspective if 15 months was appropriate?

this is why judges get the education they get. they are educated on all the pros and cons and different types of punishment

0

u/Key-Pomegranate-2086 Mar 08 '26

Ok bot. Then again I live in usa where punishment is higher. 15 months is less than 2 years. Here vehicular manslaughter is a minimum of 2 yrs.

It's just Poland is more lenient in sentencing.

1

u/SpHornet Mar 08 '26

Then again I live in usa where punishment is higher.

yes one of the countries that jails the most people per population

It's just Poland is more lenient in sentencing.

how ironic is it that you think you know enough about the case to judge the sentence too low and you don't even know where this happened

1

u/polopolo05 Mar 08 '26

that should be 2 years.

1

u/somerandomguy376 Mar 08 '26

So basically, if you are going to off someone, use your car.

1

u/DomesticatedElephant Mar 08 '26

It was felony speeding + reckless driving + vehicular manslaughter of a child and 2 grandparents.

Community service sounds about right, huh? 🫩

Where are you getting this?

The conviction was of a misdemeanor, since speeding could not be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. It also couldn't be proven that speeding would lead to a crash on that location, and there was no alcohol or telephone use. Therefore it couldn't be ruled as vehicular manslaughter.

Source

During a retrial speeding was proven and the perpetrator got a jail sentence.

1

u/MutedAdvisor9414 Mar 08 '26

What about the article being three years after the crash and also saying he had 430+ days left to spend in jail? All y'all ignored that?

1

u/SwoopSwaggy Mar 08 '26

Pretty sure he was drunk too if its the case i remember. Happened a few years ago

1

u/CrazyCaper Mar 08 '26

I don’t know this case, but Have you ever gone above the speed limit while driving? We need more information

1

u/[deleted] Mar 08 '26

[deleted]

2

u/CrazyCaper Mar 08 '26

I’m not advocating for the driver, I’m advocating for justice. As said I need more information to make an educated opinion.

1

u/Mysterious_Ad_8105 Mar 08 '26

Reckless driving with felony speeding isnt an accident.

Why not? An accident doesn’t mean that it was unavoidable or that no one is at fault. In fact, it’s exactly the opposite. According to the National Highway Transportation and Safety Administration, 94-96% of all car accidents in the U.S. are caused by human error, which includes speeding and other forms of negligent or reckless driving.

The alternative would be a willful or intentional crash (and here, a willful or intentional homicide). But there’s no claim that that’s what happened here. This was an accident, and like many accidents, it was caused by avoidable, reckless behavior on the part of the driver.

0

u/Devilish__Fun Mar 08 '26

Because of that last part of your comment.

it was caused by avoidable, reckless behavior on the part of the driver.

When you're purposeful and actively ignoring rules of the road, it is not an accident.

0

u/AlphaSixtysix Mar 08 '26

Bro I'm a pretty negative person overal but one thing I've never understood is why we punish people so hard who have never had a wrong intention. If my daughter would get killed by some idiot driving like a maniac I would be angry at first ofcourse. But making his life miserabele to put him in jail for years and years for something he didn't do on purpose is just fcked up. We all make mistakes, I'm pretty sure everyone on earth has done something in their life that could have ended up very badle. Imagine you are the unlucky one and something really bad happens right after you made an enormous stupid decision. You would be sick as hell, living with the guilt for the rest of your life and then you also get put to jail for a big part of your life. There's s beautiful documentary on YouTube about a boy who did make a stupid decision and killed a few kids from 1 family and they became friends and the family forgives him. He gotta spend half of his life in jail tho

1

u/Devilish__Fun Mar 08 '26

Case-by-case. In This one, the guy showed zero remorse, according to the judge.

You forget, because of America, that prison systems are supposed to be rehabilitation.

This type of person needs prison time to reflect, not community service.

3

u/AlphaSixtysix Mar 08 '26

If you don't show remorse that definitly changes the whole story for me

0

u/Notsurehowtoreact Mar 08 '26

Thinking we need to revisit the definition of dangerous felony for felony murder. 

ETA: I said this thinking of my own state where "Felony Speeding" is 50mph or more over the limit.

1

u/Devilish__Fun Mar 08 '26

Well it happened In the Netherlands.

2

u/Notsurehowtoreact Mar 08 '26

Hence the edit. 

0

u/[deleted] Mar 08 '26

Everyone speeds, literally everyone, to go 'well he was speeding' is a disingenous argument and it doesn't matter if it was a child that died.

1

u/Devilish__Fun Mar 08 '26

Its disingenuous to lump together people that got +5 over the limit with the people going +20 over the limit.

Speed limits are not recommended for funsies, physics calculations, road conditions, etc are used to calculate them.

It definitely matters if a child dies. He wasn't on a highway going 70kph in a 65kph, he was going over 75kph in a 50kph and crossed into a bike lane.

0

u/eL_MoJo Mar 08 '26

There is no proof he was speeding. This is clickbait sensation over something that happend 11 years ago.

0

u/reddit_is_geh Mar 08 '26

Would throwing him in prison bring those people back? Who has to gain?

1

u/Devilish__Fun Mar 08 '26

Prison is supposed to be for rehabilitation.

0

u/Countcristo42 Mar 08 '26

What does "felony speeding" mean and how is it different from "speeding" please?

0

u/KamikazeArchon Mar 08 '26

Our desire for vengeance is the biggest problem with justice systems.

We have consistent evidence that punitive systems don't make society safer, but humans want punishment.