ZeroG

News article taken from: https://www.bikeradar.com/commuting/n...on-death-17458

"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). "

deathhare

too bad for her
sounds like they were walking out in the road without paying attention.

bricktopmarv

tragic, as is this case closer to my home:

https://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/sto...5-2862,00.html

A CORONER has criticised "high risk" behaviour of Hell Ride cyclists after the death of an elderly man struck on a pedestrian crossing.

State Coroner Graeme Johnstone said the weekly Hell Ride, with hundreds of cyclists travelling at speed along Beach Rd, was not a suitable event for suburban streets or main roads.

The Hell Ride is an informal Saturday morning ride from Black Rock to Mt Eliza and back.
Mr Johnstone found a failure by cyclists to heed police safety messages and appoint responsible leaders had contributed to the death of James Gould.

He said Mr Gould's death after he was hit by cyclist William Raisin-Shaw as he crossed Beach Rd on a green pedestrian signal at Mentone on August 26 last year was "unnecessary and preventable".
Mr Gould, 77, died in the Alfred hospital the next day from head injuries.

Mr Raisin-Shaw, of East St Kilda, has been charged with failing to stop at traffic lights.
In his inquest finding delivered yesterday, Mr Johnstone highlighted a police submission which said the Hell Ride had "degenerated into a disorganised race".

He recommended speed and "bunching" be better managed so cycling groups would stop at red lights.

"With the running of red lights it is only a matter of time before we see a catastrophe when a car proceeding through an intersection with a green light strikes a group of cyclists," Mr Johnstone said.

"It is troubling that the safety measures, delivered over a number of years by Victoria Police . . . do not appear to have been heeded.

"The behaviour of this large group, as was evidenced by the incident where Mr Gould died, is indicative of a high risk event . . . that is not suitable for either suburban streets or main roads where the public frequent."

Mr Johnstone said 220 cyclists had died on Australian roads since 2000, compared with two pedestrians hit and killed by cyclists.
The coroner found a group of cyclists, riding about 50km/h, appeared to ignore a red light and continued through.

Mr Raisin-Shaw also ran a red light, under pressure from cyclists behind him calling out "rolling, rolling".
He said Mr Raisin-Shaw did not see Mr Gould as he stepped on to the road.
Mr Raisin-Shaw did not comment outside the Coroner's Court.

CycleSport Victoria president Klaus Mueller said outside court that cyclists should face tougher penalties for breaking road laws. He said most Hell Riders were not members of his organisation.

"Every rider out there has to recognise they have to follow the rules," Mr Mueller said.
"In statistical terms it is an extremely rare event for a cyclist to kill or hurt another road user; cyclists are by far and away the most vulnerable when they break the road rules."

Mr Raisin-Shaw will appear in court next month.

donheff

If he really yelled at her to get out of the way because he wasn't stopping it sounds like manslaughter. My guess is the magistrate didn't believe that part of it and got him for not avoiding someone who stepped into his legitimate path.

J A Holman

He saw, he made a threat, then carried out the threat.

The family should pay to have him silenced, never hear a threat from him again.

oatmealdeal

Even if she was drunk the cyclist should have stopped, imo.

fiataccompli

sounds like two egos collided and one had more mass & inertia (that is, citing the PO's clip, and assuming his communication was received)

Back 20 years ago when I used to ride with a group of urban ATBers, there were a few guys who would purposely run into street preachers (who, granted, were rather obnoxious giving loud, often with a PA, Pentacostal-esque 'sermons' that went on for hours at a time & generally said "you will go to Hell") with their bikes. FWIW, I never thought on rude action warranted a second. No heads were cracked, though...it was lower speed stuff.

J A Holman

The convicted saw the deceased and chose not to stop though he acknowledged with his threat that he was able to avoid her. He chose to strike her, purposefully, by choosing not to apply the brake or take an evasive action.

His warning easily translates to "Get out of my way or I may kill you."

The Brits are crazy not to lock him up. It wasn't an accident, he made a decision that he would strike a person.

uke

That's insane. He should face prison time in addition to those fines. What would we be saying if someone in a car yelled at cyclists to move or risk being hit, and proceeded to run down and kill a cyclist?

iansmash

Ugh I hate to hear situations like this because there are always more factors in play that we will never know about.


Therefore, I refuse to pass judgement.

Jabba Degrassi

yaeh d00d hired killerz solve everythings

Thetank

What some of you seem to forget is that in Europe the cars have the right of way, not the pedestrians. If he's on the road and someone steps out in front of his path even after yelling at them to move, who is really at fault? The one who has the right of way for not stopping or the Inebriated person getting in the way of traffic? Its sad to see a life lost because someone chose not to budge when it could have all been avoided. Not passing judgement either just pointing something out is all.

zoltani

Are you sure about that?

"Pedestrian crossings

The use of pedestrian crossings is required in all these countries except the UK and the Netherlands."

Wasn't this story in the UK?

J A Holman

What you overlook is that right of way is not a right, justification and is only erringly a mitigating circumstance. Especially in this instance.

The cyclist is completely at fault for making the conscious decision to proceed in spite of the clear danger he presented. He even phrased his warning as a threat warning, not a preventative one. It ceased to be an accident when he consciously, by his action and inaction, allowed it to happen. It is a crime, unsuitably punished.

You've got to be a coward not to judge this fellow. There is no justification for his behaviour, no excuse and no right or right of way.

What's with capitalizing inebriated? That's stupid. It would matter in an accident, this was no accident. I'm sure he didn't intend to kill, but he did intend to strike the girl.

Myqul

We keep coming up with random laws

Thetank

So because I choose not to judge this guy it makes me a coward? C'mon I'm being sensible here, the guy could have avoided the situation, so could have the pedestrian. I didn't place blame on any one person but I do think the guy was wrong for not stopping that's for sure. If you read I posted that I was merely making a point. Some of you guys just like to argue for the sake of arguing.


Spell Check did that, does running Spell Check make me a coward too?

J A Holman

This is true, if only more people would avail themselves

J A Holman

That's udder nonsense, bad milk. He told everyone he was willing to hurt someone and then did it, killing his victim.

No justification even had she been in the road taunting him with a red cape.

J A Holman

You did not use spell check.

You want to be "reasonable" because why? Because he was riding a bicycle? Why else? You don't like 17 yr old girls? Sorry pal, the guy is a killer now and was a bad person before to take the path he did. Flawed to the point he cost an innocent young person their lifetime.

Kea

dude there a edit fonction so you don triple post


That guy diserve more the a fine imo...

Jabba Degrassi

My name is Don Triple Post De La Mancha.

oatmealdeal

I have no sympathy for dead 17yr old drunk b!tchz. sXe foR lyFe, son!!

deathhare

I guess the law is the law..."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."

fiataccompli

there are some weird legal deviations in rules of the road going from country to country. Good point. Sounds like a legal question + a whole bunch of speculation on the part of folks who don't have all the facts (including, most likely, a court/judge).

hvac59

Hold it right there,
WHAT WAS INTENDED BY THE " MOVE BECAUSE I'M NOT STOPPING " statement................................. I think not one of you conviction minded know! Was it a plead because his attempts to stop were failing?, the article did state that he tryed to pass between them..............did it not? If that is so, how could it be MANSLAUGHTER(murder). We should not be so quick to judge, cause we all will eventually.
hvac59