Cyclist on trial for manslaughter- sentenced

[Farrina]

It is alleged that a cyclist riding a fixed wheel bicycle, without a front brake fitted, and riding at speed hit a pedestrian causing her untimely death.

Just in case the manslaughter charge does not stick, the fall back charge is the old offence of "causing bodily harm by wanton or furious driving" (I believe this is from section 35 of the Offences against the Person Act 1861)

BBC http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-london-40927791

Cyclist 'blamed victim' after fatal London crash

Kim Briggs, 44, suffered brain injuries and died in hospital days after the collision, the court heard.

(Original post edited 15/8/2017 to better clarify circumstances and added further information about ancillary charge)

[tatanab]

with a fixed wheel

That is not relevant on its own, just in case somebody says fixed is dangerous. The relevant part is that he did not have a front brake. I'd hang him high as an example to other front brakeless "fixie" riders. The newspaper report says that if he had been riding with brakes he would have been able to avoid the collision - that is entirely conjecture.

[661-Pete]

Yes, I spotted the article too. Very tragic outcome to a very unpleasant incident. I cannot possibly sympathise with the cyclist, on the evidence presented so far. Who can? If the reports are true, he deserves all he gets.

The story states that he posted online 'on a forum', after the collision. Anyone know which one? Surely not this one! I haven't searched LFGSS, the most likely candidate, seeing as I've never used that forum.

[531colin]

I hit a pedestrian who was taken to hospital.
I had 2 brakes on my fixed wheel bike, and i still couldn't miss her.....she stepped out so close to me, all I had time to do was move my head so that my shoulder hit her.
I should think a cyclist doing 20 mph (how do they know?) stands more chance of avoiding a pedestrian than a car doing 30 mph.
All the same, he should have a front brake.

[horizon]

If it's true that having a front brake would have avoided this accident and if there is only around one death per year caused by cycles then it implies that if all bicycles have properly fitted brakes there will be no fatal accidents caused by cyclists. Which of course isn't quite true but very nearly so.

I'm wondering why motorists aren't charged with manslaughter but cyclists are.

And finally, this from the Mail (if you can figure it out, that is):

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... rians.html

[Bez]

The story states that he posted online 'on a forum', after the collision. Anyone know which one? Surely not this one! I haven't searched LFGSS, the most likely candidate, seeing as I've never used that forum.

It was LFGSS but his posts (and I think his account) were deleted.

I'm wondering why motorists aren't charged with manslaughter but cyclists are.

For most cases there are more specific charges, eg causing death by careless/dangerous driving, which were introduced with the supposed intent to address jurors' reluctance to convict drivers for manslaughter. There is no similar homicide offence for non-mechanically propelled vehicles. There are still very (very) occasional uses of manslaughter in motor vehicle cases.

Collection of references here:

https://pinboard.in/u:beyondthekerb/t:4554

[horizon]

I'm wondering why motorists aren't charged with manslaughter but cyclists are.

For most cases there are more specific charges, eg causing death by careless/dangerous driving, which were introduced with the supposed intent to address jurors' reluctance to convict drivers for manslaughter. There is no similar homicide offence for non-mechanically propelled vehicles. There are still very (very) occasional uses of manslaughter in motor vehicle cases.

I was aware that certain charges are available in the case of motoring deaths (but you've elucidated it much better than I could have done). But it still begs the question. I cannot see how it can be applied to cyclists if not routinely to drivers. AIUI, manslaughter is more serious a charge than CDbyDD but if the same situation occurred with a car (pedestrian steps into road), it's likely there would be no charge at all. AIUI the cylist wasn't speeding.

[awavey]

If it's true that having a front brake would have avoided this accident and if there is only around one death per year caused by cycles then it implies that if all bicycles have properly fitted brakes there will be no fatal accidents caused by cyclists. Which of course isn't quite true but very nearly so.

I'm wondering why motorists aren't charged with manslaughter but cyclists are.

And finally, this from the Mail (if you can figure it out, that is):

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... rians.html

the picture with the guy holding his head, but with a helmet placed next to him, and they actually pay people to put library photos like this together ??

[horizon]

It gets worse: the article talks about several people being killed by cyclists but I cannot find any evidence of this - only two in the past few years (one I know about in Hereford, one other and then this one).

[Bez]

AIUI, manslaughter is more serious a charge than CDbyDD but if the same situation occurred with a car (pedestrian steps into road), it's likely there would be no charge at all. AIUI the cylist wasn't speeding.

Well, it's not possible to commit a speeding offence on a pedal cycle outside of the Royal Parks.

The debate about manslaughter vs CDbDD/CDbCD is a complex one, but manslaughter/CDbDD are broadly comparable in theory.

[mjr]

I hit a pedestrian who was taken to hospital.
I had 2 brakes on my fixed wheel bike, and i still couldn't miss her.....she stepped out so close to me, all I had time to do was move my head so that my shoulder hit her.

I'm surprised because I thought you'd be the sort to slow down when close-passing walkers.

I should think a cyclist doing 20 mph (how do they know?) stands more chance of avoiding a pedestrian than a car doing 30 mph.
All the same, he should have a front brake.

Aye, to both. I guess we'll find out if they know and how - he may well have skidded trying to stop, which might give something to measure to estimate speed, or being Old Street, there may have been CCTV.

[Bez]

It gets worse: the article talks about several people being killed by cyclists but I cannot find any evidence of this - only two in the past few years (one I know about in Hereford, one other and then this one).

I find 31 recorded incidents 2005-2015 involving a pedestrian fatality and a pedal cycle, ie a little under 3 per year on average. I've not inspected each of these in detail.

[Bez]

being Old Street, there may have been CCTV.

According to reports the collision was recorded on CCTV.

[mjr]

PK99 on Cyclechat pointed out that the bike is described on http://www.planetx.co.uk/c/q/bikes/trac ... track-bike as "a speed weapon" I wonder how long until they edit that!

[531colin]

I hit a pedestrian who was taken to hospital.
I had 2 brakes on my fixed wheel bike, and i still couldn't miss her.....she stepped out so close to me, all I had time to do was move my head so that my shoulder hit her.

I'm surprised because I thought you'd be the sort to slow down when close-passing walkers. ......

In London, in the rush hour, there are always pedestrians. The general advice is that pedestrians should make sure its clear before stepping into the road .....if i had been using any sort of motor vehicle I could have been doing 30mph and it could have ended badly.