iiinova — where your digital self keeps evolving

Sally Kyd @profkyd.bsky.social · 04/09/2026

I quite like the self-awareness of this advert. But I don't want to watch a bunch of knobs glorifying risk-taking on the roads. Is that old age or my research speaking? I used to 'get' how fun this kind of thing was...

A promotional advert from Amazon Prime for The Grand Tour, new series starting 4th September. The image shows a hand gripping what looks like a gear stick, with a head of a man grimacing replacing the gear 'knob'.

020

Sally Kyd @profkyd.bsky.social · 16/08/2026

I don't think the report can be correct. Endorsement with at least 3 points is obligatory for careless driving. Screenshot of the Sentencing Council's guidelines:

Screenshot of Sentencing Council webpage for careless driving guidelines.

Culpability level A - consider disqualification OR 7-9 points
Culpability level B - 5-6 points OR consider disqualification of up to 56 days
Culpability level C 3-4 points

110

Sally Kyd @profkyd.bsky.social · 08/07/2026

Am I a mug? I paid £15:29 for the hardback. I could've saved ££, plus room in my hand luggage! But I am old school and prefer an actual book to bring on holiday. So far, so engrossing. I'm glad I didn't become a prosecutor who can't stop their star witness shoving a grenade down his trousers.

120

Sally Kyd @profkyd.bsky.social · 21/05/2026

Felt like I'd gone back a few decades at the station this morning. That's a road atlas in the back!

040

Sally Kyd @profkyd.bsky.social · 04/04/2026

It's worth noting what "exception hardship" means, according to the Sentencing Council's guidelines. For the guidelines in full on totting up bans, see part 3: Driving disqualification share.google/gcgFv5gflZCJ...

Almost every disqualification entails hardship for the person disqualified and their immediate family. This is part of the deterrent objective of the provisions combined with the preventative effect of the order not to drive. The court must be satisfied that it is not merely inconvenience, or hardship, but exceptional hardship, for which the court must have evidence. If a motorist continues to offend after becoming aware of the risk to their licence of further penalty points, the court can take this circumstance into account. Courts should be cautious before accepting assertions of exceptional hardship without evidence that alternatives (including alternative means of transport) for avoiding exceptional hardship are truly not viable.
Loss of employment will be an inevitable consequence of a driving ban for many people. Evidence that loss of employment would follow from disqualification is not in itself sufficient to demonstrate exceptional hardship. Whether or not it does will depend on the circumstances of the offender and the consequences of that loss of employment on the offender and/or others. Useful information can be found in the Equal Treatment Bench Book (see in particular Chapter 11).

182

Sally Kyd @profkyd.bsky.social · 03/10/2025

It gets worse. The below was in the defence closing speech. So he might have admitted a causing death by driving charge, if he faced one. Looks like the jury sympathised with the defendant after hearing he'd been punched 4 times by the deceased. He isn't here to face charges for that.

Mr Csoka said: “When someone is stressed they drive worse.

“When someone is distracted they drive worse,

“When someone is in fear they drive worse,

“If they have just been repeatedly punched to the head, they drive worse.

“You are not here to consider driving offences. You are only here in this trial to consider the charges on the indictment.

010

Sally Kyd @profkyd.bsky.social · 25/09/2025

I'm perplexed. The statute says serious harm is the same as GBH. GBH is serious harm (so it's circular). I would think any jury would agree a fractured neck is serious harm. The CPS guidance on ABH vs GBH is here: www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidan...

110

Sally Kyd @profkyd.bsky.social · 28/07/2025

A tragic case, but interesting use of the law. Driver pleaded guilty to death by careless whilst under the influence; mother guilty of manslaughter for breach of duty of care to her baby. But, unhelpful choice of words by the reporter & the judge in this case. www.essexlive.news/news/essex-n...

Ms Steel was driving the vehicle to Kiely’s mum’s home address to drop her tot off. He was in a child seat at the back of the car, behind his mother. The journey was just over a mile long.

The driver lost concentration on Cherry Tree Avenue, hit a parked vehicle, and the car, which was not speeding, rolled onto its roof. Harry was thrown out of the rear car window and "probably died instantly" from his head injuries, the court heard.

Mr Justice Jay said: "It could of course be said that you, Stevie and Harry were desperately unlucky. This was not an accident that was likely to happen. Maybe 99 times out of 100, the car would not have rolled over at this sort of speed, and Harry would have survived.

"It is a sad and tragic fact that accidents like this do happen in unusual circumstances and as a result of what some would call bad luck. However, the reason why precautions need to be taken is precisely because one cannot assume that luck will always turn out to be good."

Jurors heard that Kiely, now 22, and Harry had been picked up by Steel at around 3pm on July 13. An Isofix Maxi-Cosi car seat and base that the mum ordinarily used was installed in her grandmother's car. The car seat was taken without the base to carry Harry in Steel's car.

Harry had not been secured into the child seat at all. The internal harness was not attached and the child seat was not properly strapped into the car using the rear seat belt. The court heard Ms Kiely "simply draped the seat belt around the back of the child seat and plugged it in".

030

Sally Kyd @profkyd.bsky.social · 07/06/2025

He has not been charged with causing serious injury by dangerous driving by the looks of it. Obviously I don't know the details, but it looks like the police/CPS are confident they have sufficient evidence to prove intent to cause GBH.

110

Sally Kyd @profkyd.bsky.social · 19/05/2025

Google has, unprompted, given me this AI overview of mid -career academic struggles. This was with an alert for a THE article. I live in Melton Mowbray, a small market town in Leicestershire, England. I'm not sure how many other academics live here. Not enough to be noteworthy though! #academicsky

AI overview:
Mid-career academics in Melton Mowbray, like those elsewhere, often face a unique set of challenges that can impact their well-being and career satisfaction. These include managing administrative tasks that can detract from research, developing leadership skills without formal training, and navigating the often unclear paths for promotion and advancement. Additionally, balancing career and personal life, especially after periods of parental or elder care leave, can be particularly difficult.
Here's a more detailed look at the struggles:
Challenges:
Diminished enthusiasm for research:
Routine tasks and administrative duties can overshadow the passion for research that many academics initially had.

010

Sally Kyd @profkyd.bsky.social · 14/05/2025

New South Wales Law Commission has issued its Report on Serious Road Crime. I agree with its recommendation not to introduce a new offence of vehicular homicide, for the reasons given, although I'm not sure about some of their other recommendations. lawreform.nsw.gov.au/documents/Co...

The image is a screenshot of three paragraphs of the report:
We do not support a new homicide/manslaughter offence
2.17 We acknowledge that serious road crimes causing death are grave offences with severe consequences for victims, families and communities, and that introducing a new vehicular homicide/manslaughter offence may emphasise this seriousness.
2.18 We recognise that, where a road crime causes death, the loss and devastation suffered by victims and their families is profound, irrespective of the circumstances of the crash. The impact of every fatal vehicular collision cannot be underestimated.
2.19 While not minimising the significance of this impact, the criminal law also must take into account other circumstances, including the seriousness of the offender’s conduct and their moral culpability. For the reasons below, we conclude that a new offence should not be introduced.

The current offences cover the field appropriately
2.20 We do not think a new offence is necessary, as the current serious road crime offence hierarchy adequately deals with the different conduct and levels of criminality involved in serious road crimes causing death. As the Court of Criminal Appeal commented, the current hierarchy is “rational, logical and cohesive”.
2.21 Manslaughter, the most serious offence in the current serious road crime offence hierarchy, can already be charged in appropriate cases, and can capture a wide range of driving-related conduct.21
2.22 Both categories of involuntary manslaughter (manslaughter by criminal negligence and manslaughter by unlawful and dangerous act) have been successfully prosecuted in cases involving vehicular deaths. We explained the elements of these categories in the consultation paper. We also provided examples of recent
manslaughter cases involving vehicular deaths, which showed the breadth of circumstances captured by this offence.
2.23 As a result, introducing a new offence would not address any gaps in the law. The ACT Law Reform and Sentencing Advisory Council recently reached a similar conclusion for its jurisdiction. It determined that a vehicular manslaughter offence would be unnecessary, for reasons including that the existing manslaughter offence appropriately captured a broad range of conduct.

A new offence may not impact sentencing and prosecutions
2.26 There is a risk that introducing a new offence could result in only symbolic criminalisation without any change to sentencing and prosecutions, which could fail to address the more serious concerns outlined above.
2.27 Creating a specific offence of vehicular homicide/manslaughter might not lead to more serious charges in driving cases. If a new offence kept the existing elements f manslaughter in addition to new elements, prosecutors would still need to meet the existing legal threshold for manslaughter. As a result, the introduction of a new
offence may not significantly change the way manslaughter is prosecuted for vehicular deaths.
2.28 In addition, a new offence may not result in more manslaughter prosecutions as police and prosecutors would continue to have discretion in selecting charges and negotiating pleas. If a new offence required the prosecution to prove multiple elements, or more elements than existing offences, it may be more difficult to prosecute and be charged less frequently. It may also create confusion about which
offence should be charged, and result in charging inconsistencies.
2.29 It is also possible that a new offence would not result in significantly higher sentencing outcomes, even if it had the same maximum penalty as manslaughter (25 years’ imprisonment). A maximum penalty is a guidepost, but only one factor, amongst many other factors that a sentencing court considers.

001

Sally Kyd @profkyd.bsky.social · 15/04/2025

Familiar themes in the failure to take road death seriously in this fascinating piece from California. I look forward to the updates. Having started to examine how the courts in this country decide when to disqualify from driving, this investigative journalism raises so many questions about for me!

The state suspends a driver's license for accumulating four points in a year, six points in two years, or eight points in three years. What does it take to get that many points? Using a cellphone while driving is zero points. A speeding ticket is a point. Vehicular manslaughter is two points.

110

Sally Kyd @profkyd.bsky.social · 07/04/2025

My productivity might suffer over the next few weeks. Introducing new fur baby, Theo (aka Teddy) a Great Swiss Mountain Dog. Little brother (but not little for long, given he's 10kg at 8 weeks) to Fae the Bracco.

000

Sally Kyd @profkyd.bsky.social · 29/01/2025

🩸Donation number 62 of O- done! ✅ Give blood if you can 🙏

030

Sally Kyd @profkyd.bsky.social · 07/01/2025

Apparently it's time to stop work!

050

Sally Kyd @profkyd.bsky.social · 17/12/2024

Interested to see the take-up of this tech. In an ideal world we would want more officers on the roads. For those interested, Briggs et al (not on bsky 😌)have researched how the few existing officers choose whether to give a "bloody good telling off":

022

Sally Kyd @profkyd.bsky.social · 17/11/2024

This is Fae. I get asked at least once a day what breed she is. Kudos to anyone who can say without using Google lens! We adopted her in May and are so lucky to have found her. ☺️

130

Sally Kyd @profkyd.bsky.social · 17/11/2024

It feels like working in HE is harder now than ever. But Facebook has just reminded me that not having a research day during term time is not new a new thing; , it's something I experienced 14 yrs ago (I appreciate I'm in the privileged position of posting this whilst on study leave!). #AcademicSky

Screenshot of a Facebook memory from 17 November 2010 from Sally Kyd stating "yet again doesn't get a research day next semester".

151

Sally Kyd @profkyd.bsky.social · 15/11/2024

I'm conscious my bio here mentions I'm a dog lover. So, for my new followers, here's a photo of my Bracco, to who we adopted in May, making herself comfortable at her new doggy daycare yesterday. I'm on study leave currently, so I get to spend more time with her than previously. 🧡

110

Sally Kyd @profkyd.bsky.social · 14/11/2024

Nice messaging 👍 Have you considered changing the word "accident" to "collision". The subconscious messaging in the wording is important. And let's hope we are not seeing a sustained reversal in stats in more recent years (noting your graph stops in 2010). See www.gov.uk/government/s...

A graph showing an increase in fatalities in reported drink-drive collisions 21012-2022.
Overall, an estimated 6,800 people were killed or injured when at least one driver was over the drink-drive limit. This represents an increase of 1% from 6,740 in 2021 and is the third lowest figure recorded since 1979.

While there are different patterns in the numbers of drink-drive fatalities and total casualties in recent years, the percentage of road casualties, whether fatalities, serious or slight injuries, that were drink-drive related has increased over the last 10 years (as shown in charts 2, 4 and 6 below). The COVID-19 pandemic may have contributed to this trend.

110

Sally Kyd @profkyd.bsky.social · 30/09/2024

The provisions of the Californian Penal Code on vehicular manslaughter can be found here: leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_...

000

Sally Kyd @profkyd.bsky.social · 26/09/2024

We had some success in reducing the size of Clarkson & Keating! No idea how this now compares to Smith & Hogan in breeze block terms though...

010

Sally Kyd @profkyd.bsky.social · 24/09/2024

Pleased (and relieved) that the new edition of Clarkson and Keating: Criminal Law Text and Materials is now available on Westlaw and to purchase online. Just in time for the new academic year!

010