Thursday, 14 May 2009

Beggars belief

What right minded person would conclude that the fact a cyclist involved in a collision was not wearing a helmet should be a mitigating factor in sentencing an unlicenced driver who killed the cyclist. Surely the law is there to protect vulnerable road users no matter what they are wearing. There was no evidence presented to promote the argument that the cyclist might have survived had he worn a helmet.

Drivers have a responsibility to maintain a clear distance from cyclists and horse riders and this clearly wasn't the case for this poor cyclist. The driver got a 24 month suspended sentence. The car owner was fined £93, ordered to pay costs of £43 and a victim surcharge of £15. Next, we'll be seeing judgements about the colour of cyclists' clothes or the type of footwear they use.

Is that justice? It certainly won't encourage potential riders to take up cycling. Perhaps the judge needs to visit Copenhagen where he'd be lucky to find a cycle helmet. I can't see a Danish court reaching the same conclusion.

1 comment:

Dr.Rutledge said...


That is very sad to hear. Here in the USA state of California (as far as I know) the driver always holds responsibility for accidents involving pedestrians and cyclists. Thanks for sharing this article.

I'm a physician and former faculty member at Harvard and Stanford Medical Schools. I discovered your blog while looking for the best health writers on the web. I reviewed your posts, and think your writing would be a great addition to the Biking Community on Wellsphere, a top 5 health website that has nearly 5 million visitors monthly. If you would like to learn more about how you can join our Health Blogger Network, republish your blog posts and be featured on the Wellsphere platform, just drop me an email at