Another cyclist on trial for manslaughter

[Jdsk]

A person died and the culprit who fled the scene gets 2 years for manslaughter.

Which case is this please?

Thanks

Jonathan

[climo]

This one.
If you hit someone on the road and flee as seemed to happen here then 2 years is way too little. It doesn't matter what you're charged with, dead is dead.

[Jdsk]

Loka was acquitted of manslaughter. He was convicted of causing bodily harm through wanton and furious driving.

Jonathan

[thirdcrank]

Re the sentence in this case, I think the defendant had been in custody awaiting trial for some twelve months. I suspect that this will have affected the sentence in that the judge will have requested information on what sentence would lead to immediate release, in this case so that deportation proceedings could begin immediately.

For anybody who's missed it, the discussion here touches on the fact of there being no offence of causing death by careless/ dangerous cycling.

[climo]

Loka was acquitted of manslaughter. He was convicted of causing bodily harm through wanton and furious driving.

Jonathan

I don't care what he was charged with, the fact is that he killed someone! That's it, they're dead and for his family it's a life sentence. Two years is no punishment for that.

[fastpedaller]

Loka was acquitted of manslaughter. He was convicted of causing bodily harm through wanton and furious driving.

Jonathan

I don't care what he was charged with, the fact is that he killed someone! That's it, they're dead and for his family it's a life sentence. Two years is no punishment for that.

Whilst I don't disagree, I still (for one) don't understand what 'Wanton & Furious' is defined as....... If he had been driving a car at the same speed I'd suggest it wouldn't have been seen as furious, and the sentence would have been less.

[Jdsk]

... I still (for one) don't understand what 'Wanton & Furious' is defined as.......

The offence... definition, background, sentence...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causing_b ... us_driving

CPS Guidance:
https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/r ... c-charging

I can't find any Sentencing Guidelines.

Jonathan

[hemo]

Unlike motor vehicles bicycles don't have speedometers, to get over this in serious cases where harm or death has occurred a charge of ' Wanton and Furious' riding is the resulting offence to describe someone cycling fast or without care.

[thirdcrank]

...
I can't find any Sentencing Guidelines. ....

There are no specific definitive guidelines for this offence but it is appropriate in any sentencing exercise to look at the harm you have done, and your culpability in causing that harm, as well as any relevant authorities i.e. any cases before the senior courts which have thrown light on the approach to be taken.

https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/upl ... liston.pdf

That's from the judge's sentencing remarks in the Alliston case (Your link originally)
========================================
Careless cycling is a specific offence.

[fastpedaller]

Unlike motor vehicles bicycles don't have speedometers, to get over this in serious cases where harm or death has occurred a charge of ' Wanton and Furious' riding is the resulting offence to describe someone cycling fast or without care.

So if a car weighing 1.5 Tonne causes death, but is going at 10MPH, that appears to be 'ok' and 'just an accident' if the pedestrian is injured?
That would appear to be the situation.

[hemo]

A car is a motorised vehicle there are laws/charges deciding what happens in such a case, the case in hand is about bicycles and charges relating to them.

[fastpedaller]

I didn't explain myself very well. The point I was making is that a cyclist going at 15MPH is charged with 'wanton & dangerous' , but on what grounds /evidence is this decided? Is it because of the tragic outcome? Many motorists kill cyclists or pedestrians, but because they are not exceeding the speed limit at the time, their charges are reduced to driving without due care etc, very rarely is a dangerous driving charge pressed. A car travelling at even 15 MPH had a lot more 'killing power' than a bike travelling at 15MPH. I suggest this is a result of our 'car-centric' society, where it is 'normal' for someone to drive a car, but someone who rides a bike is viewed as 'excentric' and treated differently.
Contrast this tragic case (2 years sentance) with the case of a friend of ours who was assisting his employee on the hard shoulder who's car had broken down. A motorist had been driving his Range Rover along the hard shoulder for many miles, and killed our friend. he then left the scene. After being traced he told a pack of lies, saying he had to leave the scene because his father was dying in hospital. He also suggested the deceased had committed suicide. The Police even put this hypothesis to his Widow on the day. The next day about 10 incensed lorry drivers who had witnessed the driving of the Land Rover turned up at the Police station. Who knows what would have happened if they hadn't (there are some good people around). Driver was charged with manlaughter, later reduced to a lesser charge and he got 9 months. His Family were very vocal that they considered it unfair that he wouldn't be with them at Christmas. The Widow of our friend will new be the same, or her (at the time) 5 year old daughter. His work employee was so traumatised he couldn't speak for a number of weeks.

[Jdsk]

I didn't explain myself very well. The point I was making is that a cyclist going at 15MPH is charged with 'wanton & dangerous' , but on what grounds /evidence is this decided? Is it because of the tragic outcome?

There isn't any more definition available beyond what's posted up thread. And similarly there is very little case law.

There does have to be "bodily harm". It doesn't have to include death.

Jonathan