Ebike court case

[Blue Hills]

I will take your word for it. I have just been a cider tasting and can't be bothered checking anything out.

i salute you for your honesty
very refreshing (as I hope was the cider)
all the best.

 

[icowden]

They acquitted him on driving without a licence and insurance?

Yes. But that could be as simple as something like the ebike not qualifying for a license and insurance therefore he can't be convicted of an offence.

 

[Pale Rider]

The ebike is categorised as a light moped, or it would be if it went through the long and complex single vehicle type approval process.

It therefore requires a moped licence to ride it, so he was in line for that charge.

However, the full charge is 'causing a death while driving a vehicle without having a licence'.

For that charge to be proved, there must be an element of careless driving.

The jury acquitted him of driving carelessly in the death by careless charge, so it would have been perverse to find him guilty of the riding without a licence charge.

Although they could have returned mixed verdicts if they wanted to.

The same chain of reasoning applies to the insurance charge.

 

[icowden]

Some very poor reporting by the beeb now that I look closely.

The second article says:-

He was acquitted of causing death by careless driving and driving without a licence at the Old Bailey.

But the first article says the offences are:

But he denies further charges of causing death while uninsured and causing death while unlicensed.
The court heard he is contesting these because they require a fault in the driving which contributed to Ms Cihan's death.

So he was never charged with driving without a license, or driving an illegal e-bike. Instead CPS went for the more serious charges which they couldn't support in prosecution.

 

[Notafettler]

i salute you for your honesty
very refreshing (as I hope was the cider)
all the best.

Not me

 

[Notafettler]

Honest

 

[the snail]

Would it have made any difference in how its being viewed, if she'd been hit and killed by a car doing thirty in a twenty zone?

He was 10mph over the speed limit.

I don't think you can say he was breaking the speed limit. There is an assist limit of 15mph, but the speed limit on the road is 30mph, and there is no evidence that he was going faster than that, or for that matter any solid evidence of what speed he was doing.
It seems from the report that the jury accepted that he was riding in a similar manner to the traffic around him, and could not have reacted better and avoided the accident, so was not guilty of dangerous driving.
The thing that strikes me, looking at the pictures of the scene, is that really we shouldn't have traffic of any kind travelling at 20mph+ in close proximity to pedestrians, where people feel forced to run across the road. The whole urban environment is horrible for vulnerable road users and needs to be completely re-thought. Doubtless there have been countless similar incidents all over the country with little or no media attention.

 

[ebikeerwidnes]

I don't think you can say he was breaking the speed limit. There is an assist limit of 15mph, but the speed limit on the road is 30mph, and there is no evidence that he was going faster than that, or for that matter any solid evidence of what speed he was doing.
It seems from the report that the jury accepted that he was riding in a similar manner to the traffic around him, and could not have reacted better and avoided the accident, so was not guilty of dangerous driving.
The thing that strikes me, looking at the pictures of the scene, is that really we shouldn't have traffic of any kind travelling at 20mph+ in close proximity to pedestrians, where people feel forced to run across the road. The whole urban environment is horrible for vulnerable road users and needs to be completely re-thought. Doubtless there have been countless similar incidents all over the country with little or no media attention.

As far as I can see the speed limit was 20 mph - but I have not seen any information about how the speed of the bike was measured - it doesn;t seem to have been challenged by the defence (as far as I know) so it seems to have been accepted
Also - the crash seems to have been at a pedestrian crossing controlled by lights - which were green for the bike - so she had a safe alternative if she had pressed the button and waited for the lights to change.

 

[Notafettler]

Maybe of interest
https://cyclingindustry.news/french-government-lead-on-e-bike-tuning-with-threat-of-e30000-fine/

 

[mjr]

As far as I can see the speed limit was 20 mph - but I have not seen any information about how the speed of the bike was measured - it doesn;t seem to have been challenged by the defence (as far as I know) so it seems to have been accepted
Also - the crash seems to have been at a pedestrian crossing controlled by lights - which were green for the bike - so she had a safe alternative if she had pressed the button and waited for the lights to change.

Any challenge from the defence is unlikely to be reported in the short articles I've seen, plus speed limits don't normally apply to bicycles, horses or runners anyway.

 

[Drago]

But this bike had been unlawfully converted to a light motorcycle, to which speed limits do apply.

 

[Pale Rider]

There was on evidence for a conviction for speeding, because that needs a recorded number.

What the prosecution did was use the evidence of the other cyclist 'he rattled past me' to say the rider was doing an excessive speed for the conditions.

The court is then invited to infer that such a rider is guilty of riding carelessly - his standard of riding was below that of a careful and competent driver.

Looks like the jury rejected that because you might think they accepted the other limb of the death by careless charge - he caused the death.