He will be out in 10 months and the child is brain damaged for life.
Is this fair?

"The son of a millionaire couple who ploughed his powerful car into a
Jeep leaving a baby brain damaged has been jailed for 21 months.

Antonio Singh Boparan, 21, was driving at around 70mph along a 30mph
road and lost control while overtaking.
Now aged two, Cerys needs constant care and is unable to breathe
without a ventilator

He smashed into a car carrying 11-month-old Cerys Edwards in Sutton
Coldfield, West Midlands, in November 2006.

Now aged two, Cerys needs constant care and is unable to breathe
without a ventilator. She will never be able to walk or talk again.

Sentencing, Judge Frank Chapman told Boparan: "I am taking away a
small part of your life but it is a fraction of what you have done to
Cerys and her family.

"This was an aggressive piece of driving and showed an arrogant
disregard for the safety of other people."

Doug wrote:

Have you got a point to make or are you merely trying to use someone else's
tragedy to score petty points, again?

Doug riseup.net> wrote:

No, it's no more fair than on any of the other occassions that you asked
about similar incidents. And your comment is not accurate. He has been
jailed for 21 months as stated in the material you quoted and that was
close to the 24 months maximum sentence for what he did. And once again
you fail to distinguish between criminally reckless behaviour and
violence with intent to wound or kill.

I notice that you fail to identify the salient parts of the post, but
I'll do your research for you (again).

The car driven by Singh was a Range Rover.
The case was a first in the UK because the Range Rover has a 'black box'
which records the final seconds of an incident. This produced evidence
that Singh was driving at 72mph and had taken little or no braking or
avoiding action before the crash. His speed was reduced by 42mph in one
fifth of a second. That's a huge impulse.
Singh is heir to a 170 million fortune and judging by his photo in your
favourite newspaper doesn't look very sorry about his actions.

In message
<15f0c570-a5c7-43e8-89a5-b694b90ccca6@y21g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>,
Doug riseup.net> writes

Yet another thread about cars from the liar who claims he never posts
about cars.

On 24 Apr, 17:09, Doug riseup.net> wrote:

Antonio Singh Boparan sounds like a right Sir Anthony. This is a
tragic case. What point were you struggling to make?

On Apr 24, 6:45 pm, %%ste...@malloc.co.uk (Steve Firth) wrote:

At the risk of agreeing with Doug , this stupid rich kid is quite
obviously a total w@nker who couldn't give a toss about what he's
done. He should have been banged up for a lot longer than 21 months
and been banned from driving for life IMO. 70mph in a 30 zone is just
total lunacy.

B2003

Boltar yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

As is 95mph on the Aston Expressway. He appears to be a spoiled kid with
over indulgent parents. Even now the parents appear to feel as little
remorse as he has shown. So yes, I agree he should have had a sentence
that gave him a long sharp shock. However he got the maximum permitted
in law less twelve weeks for his early guilty plea and because the judge
decided that he could only give the extra time if the case had involved
racing or intimdation. I can see the judge's point, but I consider the
maximum penalty available to be too lenient.

On Apr 25, 12:37 pm, %%ste...@malloc.co.uk (Steve Firth) wrote:

Indeed, especially as is the way with our daft prison system he'll
probably be out in less than a year anyway and serve the remainder as
probation. I wonder if him or his parents might voluntarily consider
giving some of their rather hefty fortune to the parents of the kid
who's now permanently disabled... hmm , I'm pretty sure I can guess
the answer to that but we'll see.

At the risk of sounding like a crazed vigilante , if someone did that
to my kid and got some derisory prison sentence , I'd be waiting
outside the gates for them when they got out, possibly with a few
hefty mates in tow.

B2003

Boltar yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

Oh that can be answered easily, they're not paying a penny and to date
have not paid a penny. In a sickening display, their insurers are
refusing to pay *anything* because they state that Cerys might die soon
so they don't want to pay too much in case she dies sooner than they
think.

<http://www.birminghampost.net/news/2008/04/25/cerys-edwards-family-stil
l-waiting-for-compensation-65233-20816754/>

Boltar wrote: