Sally Kyd

Sally Kyd

@profkyd.bsky.social

Professor of Criminal Law; dog lover; road harm reduction enthusiast; steel pan player.

503 followers275 following429 posts

Another petition has secured a debate in parliament: commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-bri... The max penalty (of imprisonment) for causing death by driving should not be increased. But how we regulate drivers and whether we let those who repeatedly risk harm to continue driving deserves debate.

commonslibrary.parliament.ukSentencing for causing death by dangerous or careless drivingThere will be a Westminster Hall debate on Sentencing for causing death by dangerous or careless driving on 28 October 2026. The debate will be opened by Alex Barros-Curtis MP (Labour, Cardiff West).
Sally Kyd@profkyd.bsky.social

www.bbc.co.uk/news/article... I think many will be disheartened. I know some MPs are in favour of lifetime bans in certain cases. How can we persuade those in power to reverse their motonormative thinking here?

Worth reading the whole thread in context.

Joanna Hardy-Susskind@joannahs.bsky.social

I’ll give you an example. This is the Death by Careless Driving sentencing guideline. That’ll always get a jury trial, you think! Wrong. Look at the starting points for this either way offence:

Sally Kyd reposted

Hey. Labour MPs. And other MPs, too. Are you on your way to the Commons for the Courts and Tribunals Bill? Grab a coffee. Come over here. And pay attention. 👇🏼

BTW - nowadays you can film such driving and submit the footage to the police through Op Snap. Of course, in an ideal world the police would have the resource to enforce the law with greater effect. But due to motonormativity, it's not seen as a priority for limited resource.

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...

"The irony is that automating routine work can leave people with fewer opportunities to practise the skills they need when something goes wrong. Applied to robotaxis, this paradox is striking: the better the autonomous system becomes at driving, the less its human supervisor needs to drive." 1/3

This has always been my main worry for AVs, and not just robotaxis. IF the tech is able to remove the risk of human error, that is a positive. But it's a big IF and, in the meantime, we still rely on humans who may become less skilful in the interim. 2/3

And yes, safety drivers are only being used because there is a level of impatience to get these things on the roads asap, whether or not they are 'safe-enough' yet. And they will act as the 'fall-guys' if things go wrong. We can still have faith in a safer future until the human is removed. 3/3

“That was quite human-like – really cool,” he said. “We’ve done a lot work to make sure the car can park in appropriate spots that are socially acceptable.” The anthropomorphising of machines irks me. Surely the point is these machines avoid human error. The bare minimum is to park in a safe place.

Sally Kyd reposted

How is this seen to be acceptable in 2026? I have long thought that there are a number of commonalities between sex offending and motoring offending, victim blaming being one of them. But to express that view in those terms... Surely that undermines any credibility in the case he's trying to make?

This post is unavailable.

It's been clear for a long time that the law on unfitness to plead needs reform, as identified by the Law Commission: lawcom.gov.uk/project/unfi... This specific case involves a very unusual set of circumstances, but illustrates how the current law leads to injustice. www.bbc.co.uk/news/article...

bbc.co.ukSophie Brimble's family welcomes review of law after driver deemed unfit to stand trialThe UK government says it is considering changing the law around defendants who are considered unfit to stand trial.