Girl injured by speeding driver awarded £5m

The family supply chicken and poultry meat to KFC and other take aways, they also supply to Tesco, Waitrose and Sainsburys. Still want to boycott the company? Personally I think they should make him work for what he did. Why let him have the privilage of sitting around playing playstation in prison?

It can't possibly cost that much to keep the girl and pay for her parents so they can care for her rather than work if they choose to! I agree they need some form of support to help the girl who was injured, but that's just excessive.

I think we're seeing the actualisation that prison doesn't actually change anyone's behaviour (In general) and so they decided to punish the driver the way that hurt him most which was to take his money. It's a shame as his parents probably earned all the money he had not the 19 year old so they've effectively punished his parents for his actions.

Does no one else find it funny has we treat crimes based on the end result not the crime itself!? Doing 70 in a 30 zone si probably a years ban on driving and a £500 fine. Because he committed that exact crime, but the consequence was different he got £450,000 a year fine and 18 months or whatever in jail.

The guy doesn't have to pay a penny. He's covered by some sort of insurance, as noted in the article. You seem pretty retarded dismissing the relation between consequences and 'end result' as you put it. If he had of killed her (rather than leaving her as a cabbage) he would have been looking at a far harsher sentence. Tbh who the hell would wana live on a ventilator, having 5 million stuck in your parents account lol.

Meanwhile, there are millions of people in Africa starving to death.

The family is already a millionaire one, isn't 5m abit much?

Meanwhile, there are millions of people in Africa starving to death.

The family is already a millionaire one, isn't 5m abit much?

Sorry, I did skip reading and the article and got ahead of myself. My point still stands about punishment being different depending on the end result. Regardless of the intention it's only the affect it has that judges the punishment. You're punishing the 19 y/o for committing a crime that many people have committed, but received much softer punishments. If he had intentionally speed to crash into the car and cause harm to the girl it would be different. All he did was speed! granted he deserves the punishment if not more of a punishment!

whereas the guy who ran the girl over served only 6 months of his life in prison, and the family of millionaires lose £5 Million, but their son will still lead a comfortable life, they'll still have a lot more money.

Family didnt pay anything though :P

Yet these children probably do not have to use ventilators unlike this girl.

I might be going against the grain of some people, but I would argue that they could have given her £20m and it still would not account for a life that has been irrevocably damaged.

scary signature ! why do you keep it? some people find it scary you know.

That £5 Million was all his own money?
Good, even better

Was from insurance lol

Forgive me, I did not believe the members of this forum would be genuinely frightened of a sliding picture on the internet of a giant sexface.

well its because you see a blank white space, then boom! something yellow appears at first which is scary, then when you see the veins in the sexface, that's when it gets spine chilling.

All going to plan then.