Cyclist fined after collision death
(BikeRadar)
A Buckingham cyclist was fined £2,200 on Tuesday after being convicted of dangerous cycling in the town, an incident leading to the death of 17 year old Rhiannon Bennett, say BBC reports.
Jason Howard, 36, was cycling down Verney Close, at around 17mph according to police evidence, when he was in collision with Rhiannon, causing her to fall and hit her head on the pavement. She died six days later.
Aylesbury magistrates were told Howard had shouted at Rhiannon to "move because I'm not stopping" before crashing into her and were also presented with evidence that he could have swerved to avoid Rhiannon, but decided to stay on a straight course towards Rhiannon and her friends in order to try and pass between members of the group.
A witness told the court that Rhiannon and eight of her friends were walking to a chip shop after drinking beer in a park. The court heard that Rhiannon had drunk “two or three” cans of lager but was “absolutely fine”.
There was conflicting evidence as to whether Rhiannon was actually in the road or had stepped back onto the pavement and whether Howard actually mounted the pavement.
The conviction was criticized by Rhiannon’s father Mick Bennett, who said he believed Howard should have faced manslaughter charges and been jailed for several years over his daughter's death in April 2007.
The Crown Prosecution Service said the charge was the most appropriate one.
The charge of dangerous cycling is the most serious cycling-specific offence and carries a maximum fine of £2500 but no prison term can be imposed.
The definition is riding so that ‘it would be obvious to a competent and careful cyclist that riding in that way would be dangerous’.
There are also the lesser offences of riding a bike without due care and attention, also known as careless cycling (max fine £1,000) and cycling on the pavement (max fine £500).
User Comments
There are 16 comments on this post
Showing 1 - 5 of 16 comments
-
crimsondynamo
Posted Sat 9 Aug, 8:54 pm BST Flag as inappropriate
I've been in the situation of cycling past/through drunk and aggressive delinquents, if you stop or slow down you get twatted.
It's basic "dog psychology", if you show any fear or even courtesy then they have the upper hand, you make yourself a victim.
I don't know the circumstances of this situation, but I can imagine similar happens across the country a hundred times a day, it's just tragically unfortunate that someone has lost their life in a wholly avoidable incident.
-
andymiller
Posted Tue 29 Jul, 4:03 pm BST Flag as inappropriate
If this had been a cardriver and the victim a cyclist people would have been calling for him to be sent down. What he did was deliberate and inexcusable.
It's a pity that the 'dangerous cycling offence doesn't allow inprisonment - he should be serving time for what he did.
-
Toshmund
Posted Sun 20 Jul, 9:11 am BST Flag as inappropriate
In any of the media reports I have seen, the scenario was not explained to this full extent. I thought he must have been on a cycle path and they were walking along 9 abreast in the opposite direction. Which seems to be the norm around where I live, often with hoods up and potentially a ipod (no, it is not the Bronx...yet!?) Seems to be a bit late in the day, for the father to be playing the strong parenting card. 17 years old and drinking beer in a public park...but, she was a doting daughter according to the national press. That makes everything alright then!
I cannot imagine how this even got to prosecution stage, although a very sad incident - she was certainly not without somekind of blame for how it happened.
Just another incidence of self-accountability being non-existent in this strange society.
-
salsarider79
Posted Wed 16 Jul, 1:14 pm BST Flag as inappropriate
p.p.s. The Law is clear: If you want to kill someone, use a car. It's cheaper with such tiny fines, easier cos you can do it on the way to work, and almost no chance of going to prison.
Rant over, I'm off for a bike ride.
-
salsarider79
Posted Wed 16 Jul, 1:11 pm BST Flag as inappropriate
I find it sad and pathetic that again we have this two sided law. As a (ex) motorist I understand how hard it can be driving, and how hard it can be to spot people and cyclists sometimes. However, that does not explain this ruling.
The motorist that was speeding on an icy road, driving while disquilified and using an unroadworthy car, crashes into and kills 4 cyclists, says that the council should have gritted the roads and gets off with a £180 fine. What about the drivers responsability to drive at a safe speed, maintain his car perhaps...?
I was hit by a car a few months ago, suffering a few nasty cuts to leg and arms, buckled wheel and a smashed helmet (a £110 s-works 2-d), and where was the car driver? Off down the road and gone. I didn't get chance to see a number plate. At least this "arrogant and vile little man" was caring enough to warn of his passing and care for the victim after the accident.
p.s. I also noticed in the coverage of the case that "A 16-year-old boy, who was also walking with Rhiannon...told the court that he did not see the collision himself but when he turned around moments later, he described the defendant's bike as being on the pavement.
He told the court that in his opinion the defendant had mounted the pavement."
No possible chance that the bike had landed on the pavement after the collision then?
Bookmark with: