Another crazy decision?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2264400/Taxi-driver-Ichhpal-Bhamra-killed-cyclist-Tom-Ridgway-fined-just-35.html

Is this what the courts really value cyclists as?

Disgraceful!

This is why drivers are willing to take a chance where a bike is concerned… if they kill you it’ll only cost them £35 and 3 points!

What a joke, can’t imagine what the parents of this guy must be thinking. He’s been fined about an hours wage for ending someone’s life.

evil closet monkey can i have your job please?

%^&(“%£ disgrace.

Wow. Even the Daily Mail comment trollmaggots are up in arms about it. Not one single “He was on a bike, he was asking for it” in the promoted comments. Amazing.

Although I suspect that if the cyclist had had a beard and a turban and the driver was a nice young white chap things would be rather different.

OP, there’s a post on the front page inspired by this case.

I suspect we’re only getting half the story here. What else was happening for a guy carrying someone on their bonnet for 90m to not get a charge of dangerous driving?

I used to post on the forum outdoorsmagic. One of the other posters got killed by a truck driver. 20 minutes after the “accident” the truck driver pulled over, pulled the bike from under the truck and threw it over a fence.

After the court case, where the driver walked free, the victims brother used his brothers logon and told the story, it was the most disturbing story I have ever read, it brought tears to my eyes (which doesn’t happen very often to an emotionless hulk like me). It was the antipathy to Bullhearts magnificent victory against cancer.

I believe in every case being judged on its merit, but there is a clear pattern emerging from cases involving cyclists deaths, and I am scared.

I suspect we’re only getting half the story here. What else was happening for a guy carrying someone on their bonnet for 90m to not get a charge of dangerous driving?

The Cycling Lawyer has an interesting take on it from a professional point of view. Apparently the CPS bollocksed it up (technical legal term). A relative of the victim goes as far as to say that they suspected a backroom deal was done to get the case out of court as quickly as possible. The blogger points out that this is by no means the first time this sort of thing has happened in cases concerning cyclist deaths. God knows how the CPS sleep at night.

It’s also worth noting that the driver has given up his taxi license, it says nothing about his driving license. This guy is quite probably still on the roads.

MSP – I believe in every case being judged on its merit, but there is a clear pattern emerging from cases involving cyclists deaths, and I am scared.

I commute 35 miles a day, 5 days a week… It never used to bother me, but I DO have a definite subconscious fear these days – the number of days a few seconds entering or leaving a roundabout could mean the difference between life & death…

Rscott I was guessing taxi fares on what I pay to get home, about a 7 minute journey cost just under £10

A range rover driver who hit a mature cyclist in flint north wales was jailed after pleading guilty to hitting the cyclist he got 14 months, and lost his licence.

and its took 11 months to get some sort of justice, , check out the bbc linky.

http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/cycling-paramedic-killed-in-road-collision-flint-north-wales

so sad and so unnecessary, i have cycled that road numerous times and its not a dangerous road comapred to some.

Another light sentence … 2 year ban and 300 hours community service for killing a motorcyclist while banned and uninsured http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-highlands-islands-21064837

I think we need to press for the law to be changed. In any collision between a cyclist and a motor vehicle, the onus should be on the motorist to prove no fault, as is the case in most of Europe.

and the vehicle is seized and if the driver is found guilty the vehicle scraped or sold for spares.

just to give some context for how screwed up the law is

not pleasant etc. but no one was killed by the perpetrator….

as for the CPS, a shower of shite

BiL lost a leg to a drunk driver, no ban nothing, because the cps and the police screwed everything up. The driver had a drink drive conviction previously and has had one since….

If I understand this case correctly- they couldn’t establish the cause of the original collision. Meaning that there’s no reason to assume that it was the driver’s fault. Also, they couldn’t determine whether the cyclist was killed by the initial crash or the “aftermath”

Agreed it’s horrible but it doesn’t seem as clearcut as it did at first glance.

Northwind’s got it, that’s my understanding too.

Dreadfully sad case all the same, tho they all are.

What disturbed me with the other 2 recent cases (the RAF officer an the 2 brothers) is in both cases the verdict was not guilty. While I wasnt in court so don’t know the facts I am wondering if there is reluctance of juries to convict because they think it just as easily could have been them in the dock. “But for the grace of good, there go I”.

[The Cycling Lawyer’s blog makes sense to me.

What the whole thing is making me ask is: why is there no transparency or public accountability for the prosecution service? I can see that they act for the Queen (pm perhaps not the people, as in the states) and it might ad the biggest can of worms ever opened.

If I understand this case correctly- they couldn’t establish the cause of the original collision. Meaning that there’s no reason to assume that it was the driver’s fault. Also, they couldn’t determine whether the cyclist was killed by the initial crash or the “aftermath”

Agreed it’s horrible but it doesn’t seem as clearcut as it did at first glance.

If you read the discussion on the Cycling Lawyer that I linked to, you can see that the cause of the original collision wasn’t even discussed in court. The prosecution lawyer knew nothing about the case before he turned up that day, and the events were glossed over apparently to get the case out of the room as fast as possible. The case itself may or may not have been clearcut, but we’ll never know because the CPS didn’t even bother asking the right questions:

Making every allowance for the fact that the details of the original collision did not come out in court and were not therefore reported upon, with the consequence that very little is in the public domain, the CPS charging decision does seem lame. In the absence of any striking explanation, a passing car should not collide with a cyclist. This is on the face of it indicative of a lack of due care. Had the original collision been due to Bhamra’s lack of due care, then it could hardly be disputed that that collision caused Mr Ridgway’s death. Even if a conviction of causing death by careless driving was not a certainty it seems to me unfortunate that the facts were not brought before a Court to determine. (The Cycling Lawyer.)

Quite apart from that fact that in my opinion the sentencing is risible even if the initial collision wasn’t the driver’s fault, this whole handling of a case that resulted in the death of a young person is deeply disturbing and is only the latest example of the pathetic attitude that our legal system has towards enforcing the already minimal responsibilities of drivers. The CPS needs a proper kicking for its handling of this one.

These cases come up on a weekly basis. They are well documented over on road cc be prepared for some despair if you read through them, all very sad.

Next month I am a witness in a case were a driver swerved across an open road into a cyclist striking him then sped away. It’s taken 12 months to go to court and charge is driving without due care and attention, if found guilty they will get a £35 fine. That’s for purposly driving a car into someone.

There is an issue with safety of cyclist on UK roads, sentencing is just one of the reasons. It requires action by our politicions firstly and they seem unwilling or incapable.

Whilst it’s easier to think of them as incapable it’s more likely they are unwilling not least for economic reasons. There is a saying ” you can’t put a price on a life” but of course you can or at least an economist can, and providing easy access to cars and licence to drive seems to be worth a couple of thousand deaths per year of which a 100 or so will be cyclist.

Yup, the odd cyclist here or there is collateral damage.

I dont think this is just restricted motoring incidents involving cyclists. Driver punishments for all sorts of infractions are often digusting. We as a society need to take poor driving much more seriously, enforce the rules properly and punish people appropriately. We’ve got to make people much more responsible for how they drive, most accidents are avoidable with more care, slower speeds, better spacing etc. We’ll always have genuine accidents caused by unexpected blowouts, unpredictable mechanical failures but the vast majority could have been avoided by better driving standards.

It’s all been said before though and won’t change, there’s no political will as most individuals don’t see themselves as being at fault, but then why would they, how many people ever have heir driving assessed after they take their test?

Disgusting I certainly wouldn’t leave it there

If we continue to see driving as a right and not a privilege this will continue.
Removal of licence should me far more commonplace and the penalties for driving when disqualified/uninsured/untaxed/no MOT should be far more severe.

mintimperial – Member

In the absence of any striking explanation, a passing car should not collide with a cyclist. This is on the face of it indicative of a lack of due care.

On someone’s part, yes. But the assumption everyone seems to be making is that it was the driver’s.

+1 for Stumpyjon,

“I dont think this is just restricted motoring incidents involving cyclists. Driver punishments for all sorts of infractions are often digusting. We as a society need to take poor driving much more seriously, enforce the rules properly and punish people appropriately. [list]We’ve got to make people much more responsible for how they drive, most accidents are avoidable with more care, slower speeds, better spacing etc.[/list] We’ll always have genuine accidents caused by unexpected blowouts, unpredictable mechanical failures but [list]the vast majority could have been avoided by better driving standards[/list].”

APF

the assumption everyone seems to be making is that it was the driver’s.

In a way it’s irrelevant who was actually to blame. Perhaps the dead guy deliberately threw himself under the poor innocent taxi driver’s wheels, who knows? We certainly don’t, as you rightly point out. But that’s not the real problem. If a motor vehicle collision results in a death then the full facts should be discussed openly in court. The case shouldn’t be summarily shunted through after a backroom deal with the CPS, which is apparently what happened here.

the law is a huge arse 😡 why should drivers give a damn if they can just get a £35 fine for killing a cyclist (who don’t seem to be worth (bleep) in the eyes of the law (and eyes of certain motorists 😡

mintimperial – Member
If a motor vehicle collision results in a death then the full facts should be discussed openly in court

Would it not be discussed in a Coroner’s Inquest?