- 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
news
Justice (Lonpicman, Wikimedia Commons)Father cleared of killing cyclist son by careless driving
A man has been found not guilty of killing his son by overtaking him in a pickup truck as he cycled on a single track road in the Highlands.
Andrew Tetsill, of Camelon, Falkirk, denied causing his son Craig's death by careless driving on a road to Wester Aberchalder, near Loch Ness, on 16 May 2013, and was found not guilty after a trial.
The charge alleged he caused his son to come off the bike by overtaking when it was unsafe to do so as they both left work near Gorthleck, above Inverness.
Andrew Tetsill is reported as saying in court: "Craig was standing at the side of the road as I approached. I was in first gear doing about 10mph. I passed him and pulled over as far as I could.
"I checked my mirrors and heard a thump. I stopped the truck and got out and saw Craig with one leg in front of the rear wheel of his bike and the other on top.
"I was screaming for help and hysterical and gave him CPR until the ambulance arrived."
Earlier in the trial a member of the pathologist team was reported as saying Craig would have survived with only a sore neck and head, had he been wearing a helmet when his head hit the tarmac.
Mr Tetsill said in court he was driving downhill in first gear before he overtook his son, who had gone into the mouth of a driveway, was moving slowly and balancing on his pedals. He checked his mirrors and moved over to the right and went into second gear to overtake, when he heard a bang against the tailgate of the Ford pick-up and his son's flailing arms in the mirror.
Constable Ian Mathers, of the roads policing unit, had calculated Craig was riding 16-20mph downhill on his mountain bike when his father passed at 38mph. The defence refuted this, along with Mathers' methods in calculating the speeds, using their own collision investigator, Jack Macbirnie.
Mathers' report said Craig lost control of his bike when the front wheel turned sharply to the right, before the truck's rear wheel ran over it, throwing him in the air. Craig and the bike ended up 15ft along the road, which police collision experts attributed to Andrew Tetsill overtaking too close. MacBirnie, however, said Craig had lost control of his bike as he moved into the driveway entrance.
A workmate and plant operator, George Law, said he saw Craig's handlebars turn 90 degrees, the bike tip up and throw Craig into the air, before striking the vehicle's rear light cluster.
Laura Laker is a freelance journalist with more than a decade’s experience covering cycling, walking and wheeling (and other means of transport). Beginning her career with road.cc, Laura has also written for national and specialist titles of all stripes. One part of the popular Streets Ahead podcast, she sometimes appears as a talking head on TV and radio, and in real life at conferences and festivals. She is also the author of Potholes and Pavements: a Bumpy Ride on Britain’s National Cycle Network.
Latest Comments
- Nick T 4 sec ago
Come again chief? The Tarmac in size 56 has a 73.5 degree HTA, the Addict in the same size comes in at 73.4 degrees. In terms of bike fit that's...
- TheBillder 1 hour 41 min ago
My new double glazed wooden framed sash windows are £1600 plus vat per (quite large) window. House built in 1904. The cost includes fitting and...
- galibiervelo 1 hour 57 min ago
We promote #bikefriday You dont need it - go for a spin. Nice bikes and kit are lovely, but not as noice as a dawn spin this friday morning with a...
- David9694 2 hours 51 sec ago
Council acting like ‘the Sheriff of Nottingham’ with parking charges...
- David9694 2 hours 4 min ago
Man taken to hospital after vehicle crashes into pub...
- David9694 2 hours 14 min ago
Car flips in Millennium Way, Sheerness, near former Aldi supermarket that reopens as Home Bargains this weekend...
- RoubaixCube 2 hours 44 min ago
Ive been using the same £2-3 dish brush I bought from wilko, tesco or pound land for as long as I can remember. I dont understand why anyone would...
- S.E. 4 hours 19 min ago
I'm thinking CX tyres...
- kingleo 4 hours 30 min ago
Crossing the road is the big danger for pedestrians, not the cycle path.
Add new comment
25 comments
Tragic, tragic story for everyone involved.
Hag, I think we are talking semantics:
The need for the helmet would not have needed to be discussed if the driver had not passed too close (to be very lenient) hitting the bike causing the rider to be propelled. The driver is the cause and has resulted in the death.
Thousands of other factors can be debated, maybe a racing bike may have acted differently to a mountain bike, a strong easterly breeze might have been a factor, the surface of the road.
What cannot be debated is that the driver hit an apparently stationary cyclist.
p.s. I wear a helmet
Message I take from this is that mutual respect is no substitute for proper infrastructure.
The were on a single track road in the Scottish highlands. Given we can barely build bad infrastructure in major cities, I'm really not sure what you're hoping for here, or how long you're prepared to wait for it.
Ah the old "he's not wearing a piece of polystyrene on his head" comment. Always sneaks in, with the suggestions he may have survived if he was wearing one.
We can speculate about whether or not he would have survived. But, we can be pretty certain he would have survived if he hadn't been run over. Was the Pathologist not bright enough to pick up on this or is it just more bullshit victim-blaming being wedged into the narrative?
An absolute tragedy, and unless there's a lack of remorse, this father has paid the price and prosecution is not in the public interest.
I'd go with 'concerned' rather than 'disgusted'. Sounds like the defence expert witness was a retired police accident investigator, so presumably he knew what he was doing and came up with something to cast doubt on the police's own interpretation.
But one can't help but wonder what the argument was. One hopes the jury looked at the competing arguments fairly.
Also - does this mean a poorer defendant wouldn't have been able to afford to hire such an expert so might have been convicted? That's a bit troubling if so.
a.jumper
I would offer my sincere condolences to the father and agree with the above that no sentence would serve anything like the guilt.
The bit that is unbelievable is that the bike would fly that far down the road with a 10mph collision, especially one where the front wheel had been clipped. Imagine pulling into a driveway at a virtual standstill and a jogger (yes they will reach 10mph) running into your front wheel. How far down the road would you expect to land?
I'm pretty disgusted that this story of the event would be a. offered and b. believed...
Hopefully his driving improves around other vulnerable pedestrians/cyclists given the harsh lesson 'learned'.
May his son RIP.
A terrible tragedy and a reminder to all that great care should be taken when passing other road users, even at relatively low speeds.
I'm surprised though that the CPS thought it was in the public interest to bring this case to court.
Why? Because it was his son he killed whilst in(not in) control of a motor vehicle?
I agree its a tragic accident, but should it matter who is driving for a prosecution to be brought?
TBH i would like to see what is the outcome of the FAI.
To a degree it does Das.
The CPS prosecution guidelines recognise that, for this offence, prosecutions may not be in the public interest because of the consequences of losing a loved one and being responsible for that loss, despite there being sufficient evidence to prosecute.
This is balanced against the need to ensure the safety of other road users and there seems to be little evidence that Mr Tetsill presents a continuing danger to other road users.
Guy balancing on bike loses balance as car drives past flicking front wheel out at right angles. Car hits wheel and flips bike catapulting son to ground where he hits head. Dies due to not wearing helmet.
Lots of people here prefer to believe narrative that father lies about circumstances of sons death, rather than believe the above.
I think it's not that people don't believe that's what happened (though a certain amount of scepticism about a helmet helping is understandable), it's that they believe that if you overtake someone so closely you can hit their wheel, that is careless driving, even if this case the usual statements about "the driver will have to live with this for the rest of his life, no other punishment is needed" would be more valid than usual.
ITYM dies due to car passing too close if "as far as he could" wasn't at least a 1.5m gap. That seems the first should-have-been-avoided thing in the chain of events. If the father's "Craig was standing at the side of the road" is correct, how did he lose his balance enough for his wheel to be caught? So many things seem strange in this case.
And yes, of course, it's an awful event, condolences to all concerned and no sentence will be worse than the loss suffered. It just bugs the hell out of me the way this has been leapt on to promote helmets when there are so many incredible aspects.
Terrible accident for all parties . Though once again we should take note of the pathologists report regarding helmets ! No I am not trying to stir things up regarding this old chestnut but it does highlight how easy it is to sustain head injuries !
Is there a non subscription link that explains that claim further? Did they test or is the pathologist speaking based on prejudice or assumption?
There was no evidence given by the pathologist to that effect. Instead the officer claims that he was told by the pathologist that a helmet would have helped.
http://www.strathspey-herald.co.uk/News/Inverness-court-told-helmet-coul...
So, the pathologist has not presented an official opinion under oath, and the claim is made by a police investigator whose other claims about the accident were not apparently accepted.
This is the usual helmet bollocks. People with a bee in their bonnet trying to ride a tragedy for their own weird ends.
The accident was probably caused by the driver being too close. However the death was caused by the cyclists head hitting the road and the pathologist was correct in saying that by wearing a helmet he may have sustained considerably less injury. After all that is what helmets are designed to do.
He was maybe guilty of careless driving or worse but he's be handed down a punishment far worse than any judge could give him
When a cyclist is killed by the actions of a driver (and it sounds like it in this instance) my blood boils but in this instance the fives w's don't really count.
Tragic doesn't even come close.
There's no punishment a court can hand out worse than what the father has handed himself. And the rest of his family.
The issue for me is that anyone in a vehicle can pass anyone else - on foot, bike or horse - with less than 2m distance at anything more than jogging speed and not automatically be found guilty of Damgerous Driving.
Agreed, but what they could and should have done is to ban him from every driving again. Someone who is this careless even around his own son is clearly unfit to drive on public roads.
>caused his son to come off the bike by overtaking when it was unsafe
>Father cleared of killing cyclist son by careless driving
WTF?
Such a desperately tragic accident. A moment of life and death, changes everything. On a human level I hope peace can be found for all those affected.
The bike ended up 15 feet along the road but the driver says he was only doing 10 mph. The police officer's calculation of 38 mph sounds much closer to the truth to me.