From the archive: Just so you know, this article is more than 3 years old.
Today (4 July) the independent body responsible for developing sentencing guidelines for the courts has announced a consultation on its proposals for how offenders convicted of manslaughter should be sentenced in England and Wales.
The draft guideline covers four types of manslaughter.
The first -- gross negligence -- occurs when the offender breaches their duty of care towards the victim, resulting in death and amounting to a criminal act or omission. In the workplace this covers employers whose long-standing and serious contempt for the safety of workers was motivated by cost-cutting. It could also arise in domestic and medical settings.
The guidance also applies to unlawful act manslaughter, which includes deaths that result from assaults where there was no intention to kill or cause serious harm; manslaughter by reason of loss of control, which arises if the action of an offender, who would otherwise be guilty of murder, resulted from a loss of self-control; and manslaughter by reason of diminished responsibility, when the offender would have been suffering from a mental condition.
Under the draft guideline for sentencing gross negligence manslaughter, the court would have to decide the offence category by determining the level of culpability and the harm caused. Currently, these cases carry a minimum one-year prison sentence. However, the Sentencing Council is proposing that, if the offender's culpability is deemed to be the result of a lapse in otherwise satisfactory standards of care, the jail term should be in the range of one to four years (see table below).
Evidence that the negligent conduct persisted for a long period of time should result in a jail sentence between six and 12 years under the proposals, while an employer that had a long standing, utter disregard for the safety of employees and was motivated by financial gain (or avoidance of cost) should expect a prison sentence between ten and 18 years.
Step two: starting point and category range for a single offence of manslaughter resulting in a single fatality-
12 years' custody
8 years' custody
4 years' custody
2 years' custody
10-18 years' custody
6-12 years' custody
3-7 years' custody
1-4 years' custody
The council said sentences for gross negligence manslaughter were lower than other types of manslaughter. It added: "The introduction of guidelines will be particularly useful in promoting consistency in sentencing and transparency in terms of how sentencing decisions are reached."
The consultation document highlights that 16 offenders were sentenced for manslaughter by gross negligence in 2014. All were handed custodial sentences that ranged from nine months to 12 years; four were suspended. The median sentence length was four years.
By comparison, 104 of the 107 offenders sentenced to unlawful act manslaughter in the same year received custodial terms ranging from two to 24 years (the median was eight years, six months). Two were sentenced to life imprisonment and one was made subject to a hospital order.
All nine offenders sentenced for manslaughter by reason of loss of control in 2014 were handed determinate custodial sentences in the range of four years and six months to 18 years, with a median sentence length of ten years. And six of the 23 offenders sentenced for manslaughter by reason of diminished responsibility received determinate sentences (one suspended), from 18 months to 25 years. Three were sentenced to life imprisonment.
Sentencing Council member Mr Justice Holroyde said: "Manslaughter always involves the loss of a human life and no sentence can make up for that loss. In developing these guidelines, we have been keenly aware of the impact caused by these offences and so the guidelines aim to ensure sentencing that properly reflects both the culpability of the offender and the seriousness of the harm which has been caused."
The consultation is open to everyone until 10 October. Once the consultation exercise is over and the results considered, a final guideline will be published and used by the crown court. It will apply to all offenders aged 18 and over.
This corresponds to a rate of 0.43 deaths per 100,000 workers and is broadly level with the average five-year (2012-13 to 2016-17) rate of 0.46 per 100,000 workers, or 142 deaths.The figures indicate that the long-term downward trend of workplace deaths, which have halved over the last 20 years, is levelling off and has been since the beginning of the decade.
In most other areas of endeavour we learn from triumphs, but in safety the focus is often on disaster. We are knowledgeable enough to realise that we cannot simply blame the end user, but we still try to unpick long, causal chains of errors – of end users, of senior management, of designers – seeing human error as something to be designed, managed or reinforced out of an organisation.
News footage that followed the Grenfell Tower fire in west London in June featured London Fire Brigade remotely operating a small rotor-borne aircraft to survey the building’s damage and to search the upper floors for survivors.
As the Gig Guide feature (IOSH Magazine August 2017 issue) shows, in disrupting the markets in which they operate, companies such as Uber and Deliveroo are asking questions of the safety and health profession.Their workers are choosing flexibility and short-term contracts and this creates a fluidity in workforces that tests traditional methods of risk management.