Cyclist fined for causing death of motorcyclist.

[Cycleops]

Rather unusual and tragic case of a cyclist entering a junction without looking and colliding with a speeding motorcycle.
He was charged with ' riding a cycle on a road without reasonable consideration for others'.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-dorset-63746267

 

[midlife]

That’s sad all round. Did I miss the bit about the motorcyclist speeding ?

 

[Cycleops]

I read in another report that he was doing 40 in a 30.

 

[cougie uk]

That’s sad all round. Did I miss the bit about the motorcyclist speeding ?

https://www.bournemouthecho.co.uk/n...nd-guilty-riding-bike-carelessly-fatal-crash/

40 in a 30.

But the cyclist didn't even look. Who doesn't look at a junction. What a muppet.

 

[Cycleops]

Seems like the court took into account the motorcyclists excess speed which was maybe why he didn’t face a more serious charge and get jail time.

 

[Slick]

There is a real sad case going on up here that involved a van load of tourists that killed 3 people, including the Italian driver's very young son. Truth be told, if it was any of my family he had caused the death of, I'd want him hung, but the truth is, nothing can ever repair what a few seconds of inattention can do on our roads, and some times you just have to say, that is truly tragic.

 

[icowden]

Seems like the court took into account the motorcyclists excess speed which was maybe why he didn’t face a more serious charge and get jail time.

The court does not decide the charge that is brought. That is the job of the CPS. The CPS will have decided that there was insufficient evidence to prosecute on a more serious charge. Also the speed of the motorcyclist is not a factor in whether the cyclist was cycling dangerously or just carelessly.

 

[Cycleops]

Also the speed of the motorcyclist is not a factor in whether the cyclist was cycling dangerously or just carelessly.

But it could have been a mitigating factor the judge would have to take into consideration in sentencing. If he'd have been in a car and the charge was dangerous driving he'd have served time. Maybe there isn't a law that covers causing a death while cycling, hence the 'without reason consideration ' charge?

 

[mjr]

Maybe there isn't a law that covers causing a death while cycling,

There are at least two: both manslaughter and the old one about "wanton and furious". So I doubt that's the reason. There's probably more to it than reported so far. Wait for the full court report?

 

[mjr]

[...] nothing can ever repair what a few seconds of inattention can do on our roads, and some times you just have to say, that is truly tragic.

Should we just say that? Shouldn't we also prosecute the inattention and also look to design roads so that a mistake probably isn't a death sentence for someone?

 

[Slick]

Should we just say that? Shouldn't we also prosecute the inattention and also look to design roads so that a mistake probably isn't a death sentence for someone?

I think we do, my point is, hanging some people out to dry isn't the answer, as is recognised in the case in the OP.

 

[Cycleops]

There are at least two: both manslaughter and the old one about "wanton and furious". So I doubt that's the reason. There's probably more to it than reported so far. Wait for the full court report?

Manslaughter is obviously not applicable to road traffic offences. He wasn't going furiously,
so that cannot be used, he was inattentive.
I think there is no road traffic law that properly fits the offence which is why he was charged with riding without consideration for others. The judge was then constrained in the sentence he can give under that law.

 

[Jameshow]

His speed was probably a primary factor in his fatal injuries I would think.

The cyclist wasn't guilty of manslaughter as the m/c speed was excessive. His own lack of observation was to fault. Chances are he would have been dead 9/10 times.

And he has to live with the death of a young man.

 

[mjr]

Manslaughter is obviously not applicable to road traffic offences. He wasn't going furiously,
so that cannot be used, he was inattentive.

Section 35 of the Offences against the Person Act 1861 does not require both wanton and furious. Either will do, or the accused can have been racing, or "other wilful misconduct" as long as bodily harm was done. I'm 90% sure it could have been charged if there weren't some special circumstances not yet posted.

 

[classic33]

Maybe this, from the piece linked to
the cyclist involved had been left with "significant life-changing injuries".