http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=120457877
I was surprised they didn't mention anything about the current situation in Philly.
The jury found him guilty of six felonies, including assault with a deadly weapon: his car. Thompson now faces 10 years in prison.
Horrible situation, but I would be satisfied with the 10 year sentence if I had lost my teeth and nose.
Thompson is supposed to be sentenced today. Maximum he could get is 10 years.
I think he'll get a lot less.
We'll see.
Mick
The secondary punishment is just as good imo. He is no longer a doctor, kinda blew away the "do no harm" part of the Hippocratic oath. life in ruins, etc.
Seems that Karma ran over his dogma.
netviln: I totally agree, and a few folks were saying "his life is ruined anyway" about the Asheville firefighter as well. Unfortunately, people don't often think about the secondary punishment when they hear about a case, which is simultaneously why a cyclist might get mad and a non-cyclist might get the wrong message.
So I guess this gets to the question: is it right to "use" someone (e.g. by loading on the jail time despite their life already being ruined) to send a message to others? Is the doctor a means to an end or an end in himself? Will doing this make the world a better place overall? It's Kant vs Mill, baby!
Deterence is part of a judge's sentencing consideration.
I think the good doctor has already served as an example. There are plenty of people that have heard that he "faces maximum of 10 years." Some folks believe that is what he is getting.
My guess? Same as in Asheville. He'll get a sentence short enough so it will be jail and not prison. I have no problem with that.
I work with doctors. A lot of them are convinced they would be making just as much money if they were in other fields. "My neighbor is an MBA and he makes 300K."
I bet Thompson thinks that too. He'll find out differently. 
Now as far as stricter sentences?
As far as biker safety, this case and the Asheville case make little difference. What would make a change in our safety is drivers getting tickets (and points!) for the bullshit that we see every day.
Mick
secondary punishment? why should that factor into anything? if he didn't have such a high paying job to lose to begin with, he'd have to get more jail time for justice to be served?
I wasn't saying there shouldn't be punishment. From a public point of view the punishment is necessary because the general public doesnt even consider the secondary factors. So I agree that the punishment is necessary and should be high enough to deter future incidents. I was just making the comment that the secondary effects are just as punishing to him in particular as the sentence if not more so.
