http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-england-berkshire-41842050/police-release-cctv-footage-of-infant-mown-down-by-cyclist Seems about right to me . About the same as a motorist would get for killing a cyclist 😥

I hate things like this because they’re proper ‘shit happens’ type scenarios. The cyclist shouldn’t of been there or cycling that fast but equally a 4 year old shouldn’t be allowed to run full tilt across the road, pedestrianised or not… (IMO)

I think that’s fair.

Really suprised by the length of the sentence, not saying it’s unfair.

a 4 year old shouldn’t be allowed to run full tilt across the road, pedestrianised or not… (IMO)

It was not a road as such as it was a pedestrianised area. But I am sure the parents s feel guilty for letting him run away from them never the less.

Cyclist is wrong.

He got what he deserved.

He’d even been warned not to cycle in that area!

Idiot 😯

Feel sorry for the child and the parents.

a 4 year old shouldn’t be allowed to run full tilt across the road, pedestrianised or not…

If it’s a pedestrianised area then it’s not really a “road” is it? Also the rider had been warned previously but decided to carry on. If you are going to ride where you shouldn’t, then ride defensively and very cautiously. Fully deserved.

Seems a bit harsh for a accident tbh, he is cycling far too fast though and ignoring the warning was probably the biggest decider in length of sentance and that it’s a child involved.

It’s also a bit mental to ban cycles from the pedestrian area completely, shouldn’t really be any issue with cycling on them at a slow pace, get off if it’s too crowd, a blanket ban is nuts.

I can’t see any mention of a sentence? 😕

It’s also a bit mental to ban cycles from the pedestrian area completely, shouldn’t really be any issue with cycling on them at a slow pace, get off if it’s too crowd, a blanket ban is nuts.

Except you’ll always get idiots who don’t slow down when they clearly should. The same lot who speed past schools at kicking out time, etc.

Rockape63 – Member
I can’t see any mention of a sentence?

27 weeks it says on the video.

Even given that he shouldn’t have been there, I don’t understand how he hasn’t seen and avoided the child.

Rockape – 27 weeks at Her Majesty’s…

mogrim – Member
Except you’ll always get idiots who don’t slow down when they clearly should. The same lot who speed past schools at kicking out time, etc.

Make a reasonable law and enforce it, a blanket ban is silly.

If it’s a pedestrianised area then it’s not really a “road” is it?

Can’t quite read the sign on my phone but is it always pedestrianised? Looks like it’s a road sometimes.

EDIT:^^ except permit holders and loading 6-11 am 4-8 pm

We have this in town where its both a pedestrian zone and not a pedestrian zone – which is the worst of both options IMHO The vehicles to move at an absolute crawl though but i never went their during these times when my kids were so wee that this sort of thing might have occured.

THIS especially as previously warned.

Sentence may be a little harsh but it is criminal to ride at that speed in a shared use space never mind what is basically a footpath

No comment on the sentence handed out, that’s what judges are for and I don’t know the guidelines used to come to the decision.

As for the scenario: It’s a pedestrianised area so you should really ride at walking pace or get off and walk. Most pedestrianised areas round here do actually ban bikes being ridden, doesn’t stop it happening (I’ll ride down Queen St during delivery access times for example) but it does move the responsibility for being safe to the cyclist which has a bearing on the crime committed.

Not a nasty situation to be put in though, even more when a child is involved.

Can’t quite read the sign on my phone but is always pedestrianised? Looks like it’s a road sometimes.

According to the signage, it is always a pedestrianised area, but loading is permitted between certain hours. It does look like a street though, probably town planners could do a better job in making it look more pedestrianised. But still the cyclists fault.

https://www.windsorexpress.co.uk/news/windsor/122821/cyclist-jailed-for-crashing-into-four-year-old-boy-and-dragging-him-along-peascod-street.html

No working front brake dragged the boy for 10 meters. once i’m back from court i’m going to look up the offence its one i have never heard of!

Looks like his general demeanor in the court may have contributed to his sentence.

causing bodily harm by wilful misconduct when driving

Whosoever, having the charge of any carriage or vehicle, shall by wanton or furious driving or racing, or other wilful misconduct, or by wilful neglect, do or cause to be done any bodily harm to any person whatsoever, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and being convicted thereof shall be liable, at the discretion of the court, to be imprisoned for any term not exceeding two years .

probably town planners could do a better job in making it look more pedestrianised

In this case, he was warned the day before that it was a pedestrian zone and bicycles weren’t permitted.

causing bodily harm by wilful misconduct when driving

Sounds like something a lot of drivers could/should get done for

Seems fair to me. He was previously warned about cycling there, had faulty brakes, broke a kids arm and tried to do a runner afterwards instead of facing up to his actions.

Just because other punishments don’t seem to fit the crime doesn’t mean this one should be lenient as well.

Can’t quite read the sign on my phone but is it always pedestrianised? Looks like it’s a road sometimes

As above, it’s “pedestrianised” (with big speech marks) but you can drive a truck down it for 9 hours a day. And those 9 hours are probably the busiest 9 hours of the day, it’s not even for overnight deliveries.

27 weeks in jail for injuring a kid, but walk free when you drive your van on a truly pedestrianised area and crush a four year old to death.

the charge of causing bodily harm by wilful misconduct when driving is the same as the “wanton or furious cycling” one I think with a max term of 2 years.

wow, goes to show you – riding on a “pavement”, no brake and this time it was a child’s face. Lucky to escape a hanging, though I suppose the daily mail may yet try to force an appeal vs the lenient sentence

What are some of the responses here getting at? Motorists sometimes get off lightly so cyclists should too?

What are some of the responses here getting at? Motorists sometimes get off lightly so cyclists should too?

No, I think it’s just the perverseness of the sentences for motorists.

Cyclists can do no wrong here, and even when they do they do less wrong than those evil motorists.

Motorists getting let off lightly by other motorists (in juries etc) is a problem and should rightly be highlighted and fought against. Cyclists can’t see that they are guilty of doing the same thing with other cyclists though.

not true.

I hate things like this because they’re proper ‘shit happens’ type scenarios. The cyclist shouldn’t of been there or cycling that fast but equally a 4 year old shouldn’t be allowed to run full tilt across the road, pedestrianised or not… (IMO)

Nah, not equally, not even close – the Kid didn’t do anything wrong other then be a kid.

Drivers seem to get away with murder (literally almost) but if one took to the pavement because they couldn’t be bothered to find a legal route and hit someone, I’d expect the book to be thrown too.

Quote on TV last night from the governor of Barlinnie Prison…

“Prison should be for the people we are afraid of, not the ones we are annoyed with”

Certainly this guy should be punished but not sure that jail time is the answer.
He should be made to spend 27 weeks giving cycling proficiency lessons to primary school kids instead.

He should have just claimed he was dazzled by the sun or that the child ’fell into his way’.

really?
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/3158989/delivery-driver-cleared-death-four-year-old-he-knocked-down-wirral/

In this case, he was warned the day before that it was a pedestrian zone and bicycles weren’t permitted.

I am not trying to make excuses for the cyclist I think it is a fair sentence. And I know I am going off at a bit of a tangent, but it is surprising how town/urban planning can encourage good behaviour and discourage bad.

Last year I was talking to a town planner from New Zealand, he was saying how he copied the in street parking zone from English market towns because it naturally slowed traffic to below the speed limit without need for enforcement. It is becoming common now in Dutch and German residential areas to remove the distinction between road and pavement instead having one mixed use area, again it just naturally slows down drivers.

In this case they have a pedestrianized zone that looks like a street, and I can imagine cycling down it myself. The fact that they were already having an enforcement drive shows that quite a few people would. But enforcement shouldn’t be seen as the only way to modify poor behaviour.

P-Jay – Member

Nah, not equally, not even close – the Kid didn’t do anything wrong other then be a kid.

Of course the kid didn’t do anything wrong – he’s 4 years old.

It’s the parents who perhaps should of kept a closer grasp on their child.

Just because it’s pedestrianised doesn’t mean there won’t be hazards around, as we’ve seen in the video. You can’t hide behind/use pedestrianisation as a reason to not have your own responsibilities. It’s still an open, public space presumably near traffic in a town centre. Not really the same as a Centre Parks play pen is it.

As I said, many factors could of prevented this. In the eyes of the law, the cyclist was in the wrong, and shit has happened.

But enforcement shouldn’t be seen as the only way to modify poor behaviour.

Yeah, it’s properly interesting how proper design and planning can create behaviours, and how the wrong planning encourages the wrong behaviour.

Shoulda got life. Could be a child’s fac.. oh

Anyone who thinks that looks like a road that you would normally drive down should probably take a trip to their local opticians, which may or may not be Specsavers.

Sentence seems a little harsh, but then I’ve probably just got used to people almost literally getting away with murder.

One other point:

tried to do a runner afterwards instead of facing up to his actions

This probably prevented further crimes being committed.