Only in backward Britain

That is pretty pathetic. The guy should have gotten life. Especially since he not only drove off but also tried to cover it up... What was the judge thinking?

Very, very pathetic. Problem is, the law needs to be able to PROVE that a crime was committed. KNOWING, unfortunately is not enough.

Some years ago, there was a couple who lived on my mother's street. She was a youngish, middle aged woman. He looked like a feeble old man, who was in a wheelchair. The man died.

Subsequently I found out that the police knew that he had been murdered by his wife. The woman had been feeding him tiny bits of arsenic in his food over a long period of time. Arsenic remains in the cells, and the effects build up. That is why, every time I saw the man, he appeared sicker and more frail.

Everyone, including the police, KNEW that the woman had murdered her husband, slowly. Problem was, it could not be proved. So she went merrily along, scot-free!

Not enough evidence? How about trying to convict him anyway, and allowing a jury to decide if there's enough evidence. What a crock!

That sort of backward crap happens here as well.

Wilso- I don't know the exact mechanism, but in the US, I believe that there has to be sufficient evidence before an indictment is handed down. Also, a smart DA will not prosecute a case that he knows that he has no chance of winning.

Any legal experts around to comment on this?

I also don't know the exact mechanism, but I do know there are myriad differences between US and British (on which Oz law is based on) law.

I agree completely with Phoenix that if there is not enough evidence it is wrong to suppose someones guilt, but read again what was said:

Kadri admitted speeding when he overtook a car which had slowed as Callum crossed a road with his brother Sam, 12, and a friend on New Year's Day. Leaving the boy for dead, Kadri fled, dumping his Renault 5 and destroying documents linking him to the car.

Callum, known as CJ, died from his injuries.

Kathryn says Kadri should have been charged with causing death by dangerous driving. But prosecutors claim there was not enough evidence.

If this ******* toerag ADMITTED what he did how the **** can there be "NOT ENOUGH EVIDENCE"

I've just read on the BBC teletext that the toerag above is to have his sentenced REDUCED.