Samuel Etherington has had his appeal against a nine-year sentence dismissed by the Court of Appeal

Samuel Etherington was jailed for nine years after admitting causing the deaths of two teenage girls

Samuel Etherington was jailed for nine years after admitting causing the deaths of two teenage girls

First published in News
Last updated
Daily Echo: Photograph of the Author by , Health Reporter

A YOUNG driver who was jailed for killing two teenagers with his car has seen his appeal against a nine-year prison sentence dismissed by the Court of Appeal today with judges saying he "deserved every day" in prison.

Samuel Etherington admitted causing the deaths of Jasmine Allsop, 14 and her 16-year-old friend Olivia Lewry by dangerous driving last November in Gosport.

Etherington, who had a 'poor driving record', had taken ketamine and mephedrone before crashing into the girls in his modified Honda Civic.

Daily Echo: Olivia Lewry (right) and Jasmine Allsop (left).

Jasmine Allsop (left) and Olivia Lewry were killed last November

He was locked up for nine years and banned from driving for seven at Winchester Crown Court in February, after Crown lawyers accepted his guilty pleas to two counts of causing death by dangerous driving.

He had denied two counts of manslaughter.

The 21-year-old, of Stoners Close, Gosport, today challenged his sentence at London's Criminal Appeal Court, with his lawyers arguing it was 'too long'.

They said the starting point of 12 years adopted by the sentencing judge was too close to the maximum 14-year term for the offence.

But his appeal was dismissed by three of the country's most senior judges, who said the term was 'fully merited' in light of his 'deliberately bad and dangerous' driving and the devastating consequences for the families of his victims.

Sir Richard Henriques, sitting with Lord Justice Treacy and Mr Justice Openshaw, told the court the crash happened shortly after 4am on November 3 last year.

He said Etherington, an unemployed sports coach, was driving a modified Honda Civic, which had lowered suspension and an exhaust system designed to make the car noisier, in Ann's Hill Road.

The girls were outside and shouted at him as he drove past them, revving his engine, and bystanders commented that he was 'going to kill someone', the court heard.

He then turned the car around and drove directly at the girls, who were standing in the road with their arms around each others' shoulders.

Sir Richard said the evidence suggested that, had Etherington chosen to brake as he crossed a nearby bridge - from where the girls would have been clearly visible in the road - he would have avoided them.

But the 'black box', fitted to his car for insurance purposes, showed he had in fact accelerated from 61 to 71mph and he had reached 65mph when he ploughed into the girls.

Instead of stopping to help his victims, Etherington sped away and his engine could be heard in the background of a 999 call made from the scene.

The judge told the court that Jasmine was killed outright by the impact, while Olivia died six hours later in hospital 'holding her mother's hand'.

Etherington was arrested after he rang police from a nearby petrol station and tests showed he had taken ketamine and mephedrone in the 24 hours before the crash.

Initially, he tried to blame the girls, saying they had 'jumped out' into the road, but his lies were uncovered by the black box recording.

Sir Richard said that, while Etherington was young, had shown evidence of remorse and told a probation officer he wished he had died, the crown court judge had to balance that against the 'devastating effect' on the girls' families.

He added: "Two young people died. Family impact statements are invariably moving, but in this case the effect on both families has been devastating.

"The judge chose his words well when he spoke of the agony and heartbreak caused single-handedly by this appellant.

"None of these families will ever be the same."

The court heard Etherington had previous convictions for bad driving, including one incident where he swerved around a police officer who tried to stop him.

Dismissing his appeal, the Appeal Court judge said: "This was a prolonged course of deliberately bad and dangerous driving. He knew the girls were in the road and deliberately increased his speed.

"He failed to brake, when it must have been obvious that tragedy was imminent; he failed to stop after the accident, he lied to police and sought to blame the girls.

"The sentence cannot be faulted - indeed, it was, in our judgment, fully merited. This appeal is dismissed."

 

Comments (26)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

12:19pm Fri 1 Aug 14

bigfella says...

good to see common sense prevails.
good to see common sense prevails. bigfella
  • Score: 19

12:57pm Fri 1 Aug 14

camerajuan says...

**** right it got thrown out! His lawyers should have said it was a pathetic idea in the first place and he's lucky he only got 9 years!
**** right it got thrown out! His lawyers should have said it was a pathetic idea in the first place and he's lucky he only got 9 years! camerajuan
  • Score: 18

1:01pm Fri 1 Aug 14

THEKILLER says...

Should have been increased by a third for a frivolous appeal.
Should have been increased by a third for a frivolous appeal. THEKILLER
  • Score: 17

1:14pm Fri 1 Aug 14

Charlie Bucket says...

THEKILLER wrote:
Should have been increased by a third for a frivolous appeal.
That would lead to perverting the course of justice. If people are allowed to appeal, but are further penalised for losing their appeal, then the avenue of appeal is effectively removed.
[quote][p][bold]THEKILLER[/bold] wrote: Should have been increased by a third for a frivolous appeal.[/p][/quote]That would lead to perverting the course of justice. If people are allowed to appeal, but are further penalised for losing their appeal, then the avenue of appeal is effectively removed. Charlie Bucket
  • Score: 0

1:30pm Fri 1 Aug 14

Graveling1971 says...

Charlie Bucket wrote:
THEKILLER wrote:
Should have been increased by a third for a frivolous appeal.
That would lead to perverting the course of justice. If people are allowed to appeal, but are further penalised for losing their appeal, then the avenue of appeal is effectively removed.
Actually, all appellants ARE at risk at getting of their sentence increased when granted leave to appeal and they are advised of that. In fact, the Court Of Appeal often increase sentences which the appellant has sought to reduce.
[quote][p][bold]Charlie Bucket[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]THEKILLER[/bold] wrote: Should have been increased by a third for a frivolous appeal.[/p][/quote]That would lead to perverting the course of justice. If people are allowed to appeal, but are further penalised for losing their appeal, then the avenue of appeal is effectively removed.[/p][/quote]Actually, all appellants ARE at risk at getting of their sentence increased when granted leave to appeal and they are advised of that. In fact, the Court Of Appeal often increase sentences which the appellant has sought to reduce. Graveling1971
  • Score: 16

1:33pm Fri 1 Aug 14

THEKILLER says...

Charlie Bucket wrote:
THEKILLER wrote:
Should have been increased by a third for a frivolous appeal.
That would lead to perverting the course of justice. If people are allowed to appeal, but are further penalised for losing their appeal, then the avenue of appeal is effectively removed.
Agree to a certain extent but when people can appeal just because they think the sentence is excessive (even if it comes under the guidelines as this sentence did) and there is little chance of a reduction then perhaps he should at least pay the cost of the appeal
[quote][p][bold]Charlie Bucket[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]THEKILLER[/bold] wrote: Should have been increased by a third for a frivolous appeal.[/p][/quote]That would lead to perverting the course of justice. If people are allowed to appeal, but are further penalised for losing their appeal, then the avenue of appeal is effectively removed.[/p][/quote]Agree to a certain extent but when people can appeal just because they think the sentence is excessive (even if it comes under the guidelines as this sentence did) and there is little chance of a reduction then perhaps he should at least pay the cost of the appeal THEKILLER
  • Score: 4

1:35pm Fri 1 Aug 14

sotontotty says...

Was he still under the influence of the drugs? did he really think he would get his sentence reduced? now go rot in jail!
Was he still under the influence of the drugs? did he really think he would get his sentence reduced? now go rot in jail! sotontotty
  • Score: 8

1:42pm Fri 1 Aug 14

THEKILLER says...

sotontotty wrote:
Was he still under the influence of the drugs? did he really think he would get his sentence reduced? now go rot in jail!
He had already had his sentence reduced by a third for pleading guilty, so he could have received 12 years but the way the legal system is because he plead guilty (could he have said he was not guilty!!!) he was given a lesser sentence
[quote][p][bold]sotontotty[/bold] wrote: Was he still under the influence of the drugs? did he really think he would get his sentence reduced? now go rot in jail![/p][/quote]He had already had his sentence reduced by a third for pleading guilty, so he could have received 12 years but the way the legal system is because he plead guilty (could he have said he was not guilty!!!) he was given a lesser sentence THEKILLER
  • Score: 9

2:21pm Fri 1 Aug 14

redsnapper says...

2 young lives snuffed out by this dirt bag. He deserves at least 9 years in hell.
2 young lives snuffed out by this dirt bag. He deserves at least 9 years in hell. redsnapper
  • Score: 11

2:42pm Fri 1 Aug 14

garagegarage says...

bring back hanging....
bring back hanging.... garagegarage
  • Score: 8

3:16pm Fri 1 Aug 14

KayleighJade says...

He deserves so many more years. He deliberately ploughed into 2 girls standing in the road and killed them, AND DROVE OFF! Who the hell does that?!
He deserves so many more years. He deliberately ploughed into 2 girls standing in the road and killed them, AND DROVE OFF! Who the hell does that?! KayleighJade
  • Score: 11

3:18pm Fri 1 Aug 14

jen1 says...

bigfella wrote:
good to see common sense prevails.
If common sense had prevailed, this worthless piece of rubbish would be locked up for life. I agree with him though, I wish he had died but just before he killed those two lovely girls.
[quote][p][bold]bigfella[/bold] wrote: good to see common sense prevails.[/p][/quote]If common sense had prevailed, this worthless piece of rubbish would be locked up for life. I agree with him though, I wish he had died but just before he killed those two lovely girls. jen1
  • Score: 8

3:19pm Fri 1 Aug 14

Mary80 says...

If he SPED UP with the intent to run them over why the hell is this not a mandatory life sentence? It wasn't an accident he knowingly murdered them
If he SPED UP with the intent to run them over why the hell is this not a mandatory life sentence? It wasn't an accident he knowingly murdered them Mary80
  • Score: 11

3:37pm Fri 1 Aug 14

TwistedWitch says...

Have the Echo got his address right. Did he really reside at Stoners Close? How prophetic!

What was the point of a seven year driving ban and a nine year sentence??? Shouldn't he have received a seven year driving ban to take effect from the day he leaves prison. This way round the ban will be up before he gets out, assuming he serves all of his sentence, which of course he won't.
Have the Echo got his address right. Did he really reside at Stoners Close? How prophetic! What was the point of a seven year driving ban and a nine year sentence??? Shouldn't he have received a seven year driving ban to take effect from the day he leaves prison. This way round the ban will be up before he gets out, assuming he serves all of his sentence, which of course he won't. TwistedWitch
  • Score: 4

3:59pm Fri 1 Aug 14

THEKILLER says...

TwistedWitch wrote:
Have the Echo got his address right. Did he really reside at Stoners Close? How prophetic!

What was the point of a seven year driving ban and a nine year sentence??? Shouldn't he have received a seven year driving ban to take effect from the day he leaves prison. This way round the ban will be up before he gets out, assuming he serves all of his sentence, which of course he won't.
He will only serve 4 1/2 years !
[quote][p][bold]TwistedWitch[/bold] wrote: Have the Echo got his address right. Did he really reside at Stoners Close? How prophetic! What was the point of a seven year driving ban and a nine year sentence??? Shouldn't he have received a seven year driving ban to take effect from the day he leaves prison. This way round the ban will be up before he gets out, assuming he serves all of his sentence, which of course he won't.[/p][/quote]He will only serve 4 1/2 years ! THEKILLER
  • Score: 2

4:02pm Fri 1 Aug 14

Nearly an OAP says...

While it is a foregone conclusion that he will be released one day I hope that no insurance company will give him insurance to get behind a wheel again or would he state that would be a breach of his human rights?
While it is a foregone conclusion that he will be released one day I hope that no insurance company will give him insurance to get behind a wheel again or would he state that would be a breach of his human rights? Nearly an OAP
  • Score: 4

5:17pm Fri 1 Aug 14

sparkster says...

I agree when the scum is released he should never be allowed behind the wheel of a car again
I agree when the scum is released he should never be allowed behind the wheel of a car again sparkster
  • Score: 7

6:10pm Fri 1 Aug 14

VOR666 says...

I totally agree that he should never be allowed behind the wheel of a car again, and no insurance company should touch him with a barge pole. However, shockingly, people like him simply won't bother to get insurance. He will blatantly ignore the law and drive a car uninsured. We can only hope that he doesn't kill again, although I am not optimistic.
I totally agree that he should never be allowed behind the wheel of a car again, and no insurance company should touch him with a barge pole. However, shockingly, people like him simply won't bother to get insurance. He will blatantly ignore the law and drive a car uninsured. We can only hope that he doesn't kill again, although I am not optimistic. VOR666
  • Score: 5

6:35pm Fri 1 Aug 14

mike coll says...

Can we please have some votes, the tories say we will vote on europe, BUT its time for a vote to bring back hanging.
If we can hang derick bentley (who was innocent) then surely we can hang this murdering thug.
Can we please have some votes, the tories say we will vote on europe, BUT its time for a vote to bring back hanging. If we can hang derick bentley (who was innocent) then surely we can hang this murdering thug. mike coll
  • Score: -4

6:56pm Fri 1 Aug 14

Mary80 says...

9 years and a 7 year driving ban for murder just staggers my mind. He had intent to run them over and the worst part is he just got a slap on the wrist and he'll still drive even without a **** insurance. People like him dont care about laws and how to be civil humans
9 years and a 7 year driving ban for murder just staggers my mind. He had intent to run them over and the worst part is he just got a slap on the wrist and he'll still drive even without a **** insurance. People like him dont care about laws and how to be civil humans Mary80
  • Score: 1

11:47pm Fri 1 Aug 14

Stubs says...

Hope he is given the worst jobs in prison.
Hope he is given the worst jobs in prison. Stubs
  • Score: 1

7:36am Sat 2 Aug 14

eye_of_horus says...

how the hell does this guy only get a 7 year driving ban for killing 2 girls?! and if that ban is already in effect it won't matter to him while he is in jail?
how the hell does this guy only get a 7 year driving ban for killing 2 girls?! and if that ban is already in effect it won't matter to him while he is in jail? eye_of_horus
  • Score: 1

8:42am Sat 2 Aug 14

Woolston ollie says...

I will gladly inject him so he goes to sleep and never wakes up, piece of shiit should not be beathing.
I will gladly inject him so he goes to sleep and never wakes up, piece of shiit should not be beathing. Woolston ollie
  • Score: 0

4:05pm Sat 2 Aug 14

STRIPEY51 says...

The only thing is, if he keeps his nose clean he will be out in less than four years, those lovely girls he killed, there parents have a life sentence, I know all about this as my son was killed by a dangerous driver and all he got was a ban and fine, we have done sixteen years of our life sentence.
The only thing is, if he keeps his nose clean he will be out in less than four years, those lovely girls he killed, there parents have a life sentence, I know all about this as my son was killed by a dangerous driver and all he got was a ban and fine, we have done sixteen years of our life sentence. STRIPEY51
  • Score: 0

4:59am Sun 3 Aug 14

Dr Martin says...

mike coll wrote:
Can we please have some votes, the tories say we will vote on europe, BUT its time for a vote to bring back hanging.
If we can hang derick bentley (who was innocent) then surely we can hang this murdering thug.
Bentley, Ellis, Kelly and Mattan and probably others

No i am glad we no longer execute people
[quote][p][bold]mike coll[/bold] wrote: Can we please have some votes, the tories say we will vote on europe, BUT its time for a vote to bring back hanging. If we can hang derick bentley (who was innocent) then surely we can hang this murdering thug.[/p][/quote]Bentley, Ellis, Kelly and Mattan and probably others No i am glad we no longer execute people Dr Martin
  • Score: 0

9:25am Mon 4 Aug 14

camerajuan says...

Stubs wrote:
Hope he is given the worst jobs in prison.
He will. Any six foot trucker killer will ensure that.

Tossing the salad is a real thing.
[quote][p][bold]Stubs[/bold] wrote: Hope he is given the worst jobs in prison.[/p][/quote]He will. Any six foot trucker killer will ensure that. Tossing the salad is a real thing. camerajuan
  • Score: -2

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree