- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Tubeless valves
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
Police tape (CC licensed by freefotouk on Flickr)Officer given written warning for decision not to prosecute driver who hit cyclist while on wrong side of road
A Merseyside police officer has been strongly criticised and given a written warning following his decision to release a driver without charge after he hit a cyclist while driving on the wrong side of the road, reports the Liverpool Echo. Misconduct proceedings were initially ruled out until the police watchdog, the IPCC, twice intervened.
In October 2010, Ali Farahani drove 60m on the wrong side of the road and hit 42-year-old Daniel Ayers after growing impatient with traffic on Liverpool’s Prescot Road. Witnesses described his manoeuvre as “reckless”, “irresponsible” and “crazy” and he was eventually jailed for 10 months for dangerous driving.
However, it was only when Ayers later died in hospital that the evidence was reviewed. Ayers had been admitted with fractures to his arm and knee and a piece of bone on his spine. An inquest ruled that the immediate cause of his death was a pre-existing condition, connected to alcohol dependency.
The initial decision to release Farahani without charge was made by PC Simon Lewis and Ayers’ sister, Georgina Moore, complained that he had failed to conduct a full and proper investigation and also that he was “discriminatory” because her brother, an alcoholic, was drunk at time of the accident.
Lewis was found to have carried out a substandard investigation and given a written warning, but was cleared of the discrimination allegation. Chief Inspector Phil Davies, who chaired the hearing, said Lewis’s behaviour “displayed a disregard of the policy and procedures expected of a roads policing officer” and told him: “Your decision to take no further action jeopardised the subsequent court trial and placed the reputation of Merseyside Police at risk.”
However, a High Court judge has now ordered a fresh investigation over the discrimination charge as well. Judge Stephen Davies said the decision to clear the officer at the police misconduct hearing was “not sufficiently reasoned” and has ordered a fresh inquiry by the force, led by a different investigator.
CTC’s Road Justice Campaign aims to improve the way the justice system handles bad driving in order to actively discourage irresponsible driving and raise driving standards. One of the campaign’s key objectives is to ensure the police and prosecution make appropriate charging and prosecution decisions.
On the campaign website, CTC writes:
“The police, prosecutors and the courts all contribute to protecting us from criminal behaviour on the roads. Much of the time they are effective and many bad drivers are prosecuted and receive the appropriate penalties. Yet, unfortunately, some bad drivers are treated leniently due to what CTC perceives as occasional failings of these institutions. This can send out the message that driving inconsiderately or in a way that puts others at risk is tolerated.”
Alex has written for more cricket publications than the rest of the road.cc team combined. Despite the apparent evidence of this picture, he doesn't especially like cake.
Latest Comments
- chrisonabike 46 min 12 sec ago
Apologies - you're quite right! Something about presentation and comprehension...
- wtjs 1 hour 6 min ago
You can find out whether they're lying about 'taking action' by asking them what they actually did. When they refuse to tell you, citing various...
- Bungle_52 1 hour 22 min ago
Blind spots eh. Just a reminder of the lorry driver who was aquitted after killing a cyclist on a roundabout where the jury obviously felt it was...
- GMBasix 1 hour 53 min ago
But don't forget to correct for altitude.
- chrisonabike 5 hours 51 min ago
Also don't forget - Sustrans are a charity *....
- chrisonabike 6 hours 3 min ago
Yes ... but (just due to the large numbers of people affected) this likely would only proceed in the UK at a very ... cautious ... pace....
- EK Spinner 6 hours 20 min ago
Arsehole in the van not with standing, how did they manage to get a risk assessment allowing a race (a group not a TT) group to be competing on ...
- RafaDy 6 hours 16 min ago
I think reviewer completely missed the point here trying to match bike's name with what it can do. Ribble is namin git's bike weirdly, the...
- Moist von Lipwig 9 hours 41 min ago
Bit of googling gone wrong in the article - the JAT is the Junction Assessment Tool, the Joint Approval Team appears to be a coutner terrorism...
Add new comment
13 comments
"unfortunately, some bad drivers are treated leniently due to what CTC perceives as occasional failings of these institutions"
OCCASIONAL failings?
Have the CTC gone deaf and blind, or are they deliberately ignoring the facts down at street level?
The police routinely refuse to investigate drivers who mow down cyclists in non-fatal collisions or refuse to accept evidence. The CPS routinely decides not to prosecute, and the courts routinely absolve perpetrators of very obvious blame, even when deaths are caused. Judges routinely give almost trivially light sentences even to killers, when the killer uses a car to carry out their crime.
The entire system, from road design, through 999 call, through the family weeping at the grave side, to the early release of the perpetrator, is inclined against the vulnerable road user.
The whole edifice is rotten, unfit for purpose. Occasional failings, my arse.
It wasn't murder or attempt murder in any event;
"An inquest ruled that the immediate cause of his death was a pre-existing condition, connected to alcohol dependency."
The driver was an ass, should be banned for life and was sent to prison for causing injury with his car.
The Police Officer has been dealt with and a Judge has ordered a second investigation. He may lose his job as a result, which he might well deserve.
I know we are vulnerable road users and justice doesn't always serve us appropriately but the over-reaction and petty insults I sometimes read here makes me feel that if certain cycling enthusiasts on here should not be fighting our corner.
When Dr Helen Measures drove on the wrong side of the road and killed a cyclist, we found out that the courts don't consider that such driving amounts to carelessness.
From this low point, the fact that there has been criticism of the police's decision not to prosecute in the current case is cause for some optimism. In time, we may reach a point where killers like Dr Helen Measures are removed from our roads.
Oink oink
Unbelievable! The hipocracy and inconsistancies of the law when it comes to doing bad things whilst in control of a 2 tonne object is astounding. To punish someone who screwed up whilst part taking in their God given right to drive is the ultimate taboo in our car crazed societies. It's like child sexual abuse and the Catholic Church 50 years ago. When are we going to come out of the Dark Ages people?
indeed to save a minute it has ruined many lives, 9 months, prob out in half the time ? that is not justice.
Just 10 months for murdering someone (and I use that term correctly !!) because of someone's irresponsible actions. That should be 10 years min
I concur. Set example to those drivers who think they own the road and can drive on the wrong side.
No, you don't use that term correctly. He didn't intend to kill the victim, so it is not murder. Case closed.
Then you call it manslaughter (a degree of murder), if you drive you are potentially driving something that can kill. Just like a knife is harmless with no bad intent but can kill with the wrong intent.
By crossing the line and driving like she did then for me that is manslaughter and not simply dangerous driving. If this was the case then you would see the roads become safer as people take less risks. Remember most car accidents are the fault of someone and you could argue any accident then you should see a prosecution.
Manslaughter requires intent to cause bodily harm. Did he intend to do that? No, so it's not manslaughter. You could maybe argue for negligent manslaughter, but at that point it's probably easier to make a charge of death by dangerous driving stick.
Stop trying to call things by the wrong names. If you have a problem with the severity of the sentence, then say so, and campaign for stiffer sentences for this sort of thing.
You can convict for Involutary Manslaughter through negligence or recklessness. There need not be any intent.
You can convict for Murder through indirect intent; when the death or grievous bodily harm is a foreseeable consequence of the defendants actions.
He drove a lethal weapon without care. Surely that was either intentional, or evidence of sufficient idiocy yhat he shouldn't be alowed out unsupervised. Inany case, murder is not just a legal term, it also has a common usage.