R v Ebanks

• Jurisdiction: Cayman Islands
• Judge: (Hull, J.)
• Judgment Date: 28 November 1985
• Court: Grand Court (Cayman Islands)
• Date: 28 November 1985

Grand Court

(Hull, J.)

R.

and

D.K. EBANKS

B.F. Sharman, Crown Counsel, for the Crown;

N. Levy for the accused.

Road Traffic-causing death by dangerous driving-sentence-deterrent sentence appropriate when fatal accident rate high-in absence of mitigating circumstances 6 to 6½ years” imprisonment correct tariff

Road Traffic-causing death by dangerous driving-sentence-mitigation-plea of guilty and offer to make amends to victim”s family mitigation but bad road conditions at time of accident not mitigation

The accused was charged under the Traffic Law, s.64 with causing death by dangerous driving.

The accused was intoxicated when he drove a powerful car through a built-up area at 8 a.m. on a Saturday morning. The road was wet and curved and the car skidded, knocking down two children one of whom was killed.

The accused was charged under the Traffic Law, s.64 with causing death by dangerous driving, pleaded guilty and was convicted. In mitigation he submitted, inter alia, that the bad road conditions had contributed to the accident and that he had offered to make some amends to the family of the dead child.

The court considered whether, in view of the rising number of fatal accidents on the roads it would be appropriate to impose a deterrent penalty upon the accused.

Held, sentencing the accused:

A deterrent sentence of imprisonment was justified for such a serious offence committed at a time when the rising number of fatal accidents on the roads was causing grave concern and indicating a prevalence of reckless or incompetent driving in the Islands. Deterrent sentences were particularly appropriate for driving offences, since all members of the community were drivers at risk and such sentences should be expected for future offences committed while the accident rate remained so high. In the absence of mitigating circumstances, a deterrent sentence of 6 to 6½ years” imprisonment would have been appropriate in the present case but allowance had to be made for the fact that the accused pleaded guilty, that he had offered some amends to the child”s family and that he was the first person to be charged with such a serious offence during the year. The bad road conditions were not a mitigating factor, since he should have driven more carefully to take account of them. The accused would therefore be sentenced to 4½ years” imprisonment and disqualified from driving for 10 years following his release from prison (page 434, line 19 – page 435, line 5; page 435, line 29 – page 436, line 8).

HULL, J.: Mr. Ebanks, I have quite a lot to say on this matter.
5	First of all, you have pleaded guilty to a charge of dangerous driv-
ing causing death. The immediate facts of the case were that
about 8 a.m. on a Saturday, June 29th, you lost control of a car in
Mary Street in George Town. The evidence is that you skidded to
the right hand side of the road, and in doing so you knocked
10	down two small boys. One of them was killed. He was 10 years of
age.
I note what your counsel has asserted about the amount of
alcohol you had and I proceed on the basis that the actual alcohol
level in the blood is, at best, a very rough and ready

...