Anne Sacoolas has been sentenced to eight months in prison, suspended for 12 months, for causing the death of teenage motorcyclist Harry Dunn by careless driving.
Sacoolas, 45, was driving her Volvo on the wrong side of the B4031 in Northamptonshire, a two-lane road with a 40mph limit, when she hit Harry, 19, who was riding in the opposite direction.
The former US spy was sentenced in an “unprecedented” case at the Old Bailey – but did not attend the hearing in person after American officials stepped in.
Sacoolas left the UK in August 2019, claiming diplomatic immunity following the collision outside US military base RAF Croughton.
It left the teenager’s grieving parents facing a “torturous” three-year journey to seek justice for their son.
She pleaded guilty to causing Harry’s death by careless driving, via a video link from Washington DC in October this year.
More on Anne Sacoolas
Related Topics:
Alongside handing Sacoolas a suspended prison sentence, the judge, Mrs Justice Cheema-Grubb, also ruled that she is disqualified from driving for 12 months.
She told the defendant, who appeared in court on Thursday via a video link from her lawyer’s office in the US capital, that while she remained in the US her sentence could not be enforced.
Advertisement
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:07
‘Why didn’t you go to UK to attend court?’
‘Little reason’ for Sacoolas not to attend court in person
Judge Mrs Justice Cheema-Grubb was critical of Sacoolas for not attending the sentencing hearing in person.
The court heard that she had been advised by US officials not to fly to the UK, as her return “could place significant US interests at risk”.
But Mrs Justice Cheema-Grubb said there was “little reason” for Sacoolas not to attend, as she had been granted bail.
She also praised Harry’s parents and family for their “dignified persistence”, which she said had led Sacoolas to “acknowledge her guilt”.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
0:58
‘Harry, we’ve done it!’ – Mum reacts
Delivering her sentence, she told Sacoolas: “You drove along the wrong side of the road for much more than a moment and you did not realise what you were doing when you came to a bend in the road.
“I bear in mind that this was a short period of driving and you were not familiar with English roads. The death of Harry Dunn is, of course, the highest degree of harm.
“Anyone who has caused death by driving would be expected to feel remorseful… and I accept that you feel genuine remorse.”
In a statement from Sacoolas, read out by her lawyer in court, she said that the mother-of-three lived with “regret every single day”.
She said: “There is not a day that goes by that Harry isn’t on my mind, and I am deeply sorry for the pain that I have caused.
“It’s for this reason that I have been so committed to a resolution to this case since 2019.”
Her barrister, Ben Cooper KC, also told the court that Sacoolas had been subject to harassment and multiple death threats and had moved home several times.
‘We’ve done it Harry’
Speaking outside the court, Harry’s mother, Charlotte Charles, gave an emotional speech in which she said that Sacoolas would have a “criminal record for the rest of her life”.
Ms Charles, who said she had promised her son in hospital that she would get justice, added: “Yep, Harry, we’ve done it.
“We would have been happy with anything – for us, it was just about doing the right thing.”
Family spokesman Radd Seiger added: “Our real enemy here isn’t Anne Sacoolas, our real enemy here is the US government.”
At the time of the collision, Sacoolas was driving two of her children home from a barbecue at the Croughton air base in Northamptonshire.
The court heard on Thursday that Harry was thrown over the car and lay in the road as he said “don’t let me die”, after the collision.
Sacoolas called her husband to the scene and was seen to be crying with her head in her hands, the Old Bailey heard.
She acknowledged she was driving on the wrong side of the road, with speed not a factor and a breath test for alcohol showing negative, the court was told.
‘I made a promise to Harry’
In a victim impact statement, Ms Charles, sobbed as she described how her “world turned upside down”.
“He was the light of my life before he was so senselessly and cruelly taken from us. Harry just disappeared out of my life that night, shattering my existence forever,” she told the court.
She said Harry’s twin, Niall, continues to be “hit very hard” by the tragedy, adding: “I didn’t just lose one son the night Harry died. I lost Niall too.”
Ms Charles added: “His passing haunts me every minute of every day and I’m not sure how I’m ever going to get over it.”
“I made a promise to Harry in hospital that we would get him justice and a mother never breaks a promise to her son.”
They described their fight for the truth as “totally torturous”, adding: “It’s not an exhaustion that you can go to bed and sleep off.”
Mr Dunn told Sky News: “I think if you ever really told our story to somebody who didn’t know (it) they wouldn’t believe some of the stuff we’ve had… from that awful night in the hospital.”
But he added: “It’s been worth all the heartache and the pain to prove that normal people from Northamptonshire can take on these people and get what should be done straightaway and get justice.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:57
Harry Dunn’s parents said they feel like they have fulfilled their promise to their son
‘I have nothing to say to her’
In October 2019, Harry’s family were invited to attend the White House and meet the-then president Donald Trump – who secretly arranged for Sacoolas to meet them in the Oval Office.
But the parents had no idea about the meeting and refused to take part in a photo-call Mr Trump was hoping for.
Now they say they have no desire to speak to her.
Ms Charles said: “You never say never, but I don’t think there’s a chance at all of that.
“It’s a bit too late. She’s had three years.”
Mr Dunn added: “I don’t feel there’s any need for me to meet her to be honest. I have nothing to say to her.”
Speaking following the conclusion of the sentencing, Foreign Secretary James Cleverly said “important lessons” had been learned from the case.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:17
‘Why didn’t you go to UK to attend court?’
He said: “Since Harry’s death in August 2019, we have been clear that Ms Sacoolas should return to the UK to face British justice.
“Since she chose not to, virtual hearings were arranged as the most viable way to bring the case to court and give justice to Harry’s family.
“I want to pay tribute to the incredible resolve of Harry’s family and I hope that the judgment provides some closure.
“We have learnt important lessons from this tragic incident, including improvements to the process around exemptions from diplomatic immunity and ensuring the US takes steps to improve road safety around RAF Croughton.”
The UK is on a “slippery slope towards death on demand”, according to the justice secretary ahead of a historic Commons vote on assisted dying.
In a letter to her constituents, Shabana Mahmood said she was “profoundly concerned” about the legislation.
“Sadly, recent scandals – such as Hillsborough, infected blood and the Post Office Horizon – have reminded us that the state and those acting on its behalf are not always benign,” she wrote.
“I have always held the view that, for this reason, the state should serve a clear role. It should protect and preserve life, not take it away.
“The state should never offer death as a service.”
On 29 November, MPs will be asked to consider whether to legalise assisted dying, through Kim Leadbeater’s Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill.
Details of the legislation were published last week, including confirmation the medicine that will end a patient’s life will need to be self-administered and people must be terminally ill and expected to die within six months.
Advertisement
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
14:46
Minister ‘leans’ to assisted dying bill
Ms Mahmood, however, said “predictions about life expectancy are often inaccurate”.
“Doctors can only predict a date of death, with any real certainty, in the final days of life,” she said. “The judgment as to who can and cannot be considered for assisted suicide will therefore be subjective and imprecise.”
Under the Labour MP’s proposals, two independent doctors must confirm a patient is eligible for assisted dying and a High Court judge must give their approval.
The bill will also include punishments of up to 14 years in prison for those who break the law, including coercing someone into ending their own life.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
However, Ms Mahmood said she was concerned the legislation could “pressure” some into ending their lives.
“It cannot be overstated what a profound shift in our culture assisted suicide will herald,” she wrote.
“In my view, the greatest risk of all is the pressure the elderly, vulnerable, sick or disabled may place upon themselves.”
Labour MP Kim Leadbeater, who put forward the bill, said some of the points Ms Mahmood raised have been answered “in the the thorough drafting and presentation of the bill”.
“The strict eligibility criteria make it very clear that we are only talking about people who are already dying,” she said.
“That is why the bill is called the ‘Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill’; its scope cannot be changed and clearly does not include any other group of people.
“The bill would give dying people the autonomy, dignity and choice to shorten their death if they wish.”
In response to concerns Ms Mahmood raised about patients being coerced into choosing assisted death, Ms Leadbeater said she has consulted widely with doctors and judges.
“Those I have spoken to tell me that they are well equipped to ask the right questions to detect coercion and to ascertain a person’s genuine wishes. It is an integral part of their work,” she said.
In an increasingly fractious debate around the topic, multiple Labour MPs have voiced their concerns.
In a letter to ministers on 3 October, the Cabinet Secretary Simon Case confirmed “the prime minister has decided to set aside collective responsibility on the merits of this bill” and that the government would “therefore remain neutral on the passage of the bill and on the matter of assisted dying”.
She talks about a “slippery slope towards death on demand”. Savage. The state should “never offer death as a service”, she says. Chilling.
So much for Sir Keir Starmer attempting to cool the temperature in the row by urging cabinet ministers, whatever their view, to stop inflaming or attempting to influence the debate.
Ms Mahmood talks, as other opponents have, about pressure on the elderly, sick or disabled who feel they have “become too much of a burden to their family”.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:41
Details of end of life bill released
She hits out at a “lack of legal safeguards” in the bill and pressure on someone into ending their life “by those acting with malign intent”.
Advertisement
Malign intent? Hey! That’s quite an assertion from a secretary of state for justice and lord chancellor who’s been urged by the PM to tone down her language.
It’s claimed that Sir Keir ticked off Wes Streeting, the health secretary, after he publicly opposed the bill and launched an analysis of the costs of implementing it.
Will the justice secretary now receive a reprimand from the boss? It’s a bit late for that. Critics will also claim Sir Keir’s dithering over the bill is to blame for cabinet ministers freelancing.
Shabana Mahmood is the first elected Muslim woman to hold a cabinet post. Elected to the Commons in 2010, she was also one of the first Muslim women MPs.
She told her constituents in her letter that it’s not only for religious reasons that she’s “profoundly concerned” about the legislation, but also because of what it would mean for the role of the state.
But of course, she’s not the only senior politician with religious convictions to speak out strongly against Kim Leadbeater’s bill this weekend.
Gordon Brown, son of the manse, who was strongly influenced by his father, a Church of Scotland minister, wrote about his opposition in a highly emotional article in The Guardian.
He spoke about the pain of losing his 10-day-old baby daughter Jennifer, born seven weeks prematurely and weighing just 2lb 4oz, in January 2002, after she suffered a brain haemorrhage on day four of her short life.
Mr Brown said that tragedy convinced him of the value and imperative of good end-of-life care, not the case for assisted dying. His powerful voice will strongly influence many Labour MPs.
And what of Kim Leadbeater? It’s looking increasingly as though she’s now being hung out to dry by the government, after initially being urged by the government to choose assisted dying after topping the private members bill ballot.
All of which will encourage Sir Keir’s critics to claim he looks weak. It is, or course, a private members bill and a free vote, which makes the outcome on Friday unpredictable.
But the dramatic interventions of the current lord chancellor and the former Labour prime minister are hugely significant, potentially decisive – and potentially embarrassing for a prime minister who appears to be losing control of the assisted dying debate.
Red Bull driver Max Verstappen has won the Formula One world title for a fourth straight year.
His victory was confirmed after finishing fifth at the Las Vegas Grand Prix. Mercedes’ George Russell won the race.
The 27-year-old Dutchman becomes just the sixth driver in Formula One history to win four titles or more, after outscoring Lando Norris who took the chequered flag in only sixth.
Verstappen is now guaranteed the world crown with two races still remaining, with his domination cementing his name among Formula One’s greats.
“Oh my God man,” said an emotional Verstappen after securing the world title. “What a season. Four times. It was a little bit more difficult than last year.”
Lewis Hamilton raced back from 10th to second place to complete an impressive one-two finish for Mercedes. Carlos Sainz finished third for Ferrari, one place ahead of his team-mate Charles Leclerc.
Russell’s third victory was the most dominant of his career so far, crossing the line 7.3 seconds clear of Hamilton.
More on Formula 1
Related Topics:
Michael Schumacher and Lewis Hamilton have each won a record seven, with 1950s Argentine legend Juan-Manuel Fangio on five ahead of Alain Prost, Sebastian Vettel and now Verstappen on four.
Having won every Drivers’ Championship since claiming his first in the controversial end to the 2021 season when he beat Hamilton in deeply contentious circumstances, Verstappen now joins Hamilton, Fangio and Vettel in winning four titles consecutively.
Advertisement
Only Schumacher has achieved a run of five.
The team were hit by controversy earlier this season, with Red Bull’s principal sponsor, Christian Horner, facing allegations of controlling behaviour by a female staff member. Horner, who denied the accusations, was cleared, and a subsequent appeal was thrown out.
Horner congratulated Verstappen on the radio, telling him: “Max Verstappen you are a four-time world champion. That is a phenomenal, phenomenal achievement. You can be incredibly proud of yourself.”
Red Bull is on course to finish third in the constructors’ championship this year. This century only Hamilton in 2008 with McLaren, and Verstappen in 2021, have won the drivers’ title when their team did not win the constructors’ championship.