Man A drove along the road and a sofa fell off the back of his vehicle. He stopped, and a passing motorcyclist, attempting to warn others of the danger, crashed into man A's vehicle and died.

Man A's principal punishment is two years in jail.

Man B reversed his vehicle along a pavement and knocked over a woman, who died.

His punishment is a fine of £1,800, court costs of £1,200, and a driving ban for a year.

Astonishingly, man B used as his defence the fact that he reversed along the pavement about 20 times a week without incident.

Shouldn't he be fined for each time he did this?

His punishment seems extraordinarily lenient, while that of man A inappropriate.

Prison benefits no-one in cases like these of wilful negligence, and is at huge cost to the taxpayer.

Surely it would be better to allow each man to keep working to pay off an appropriate fine. £100,000 seems to be a suitable amount.

Mark Davies
Christchurch Close,
Stamford