- 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
Justice (Lonpicman, Wikimedia Commons)Man who drove away from fatal collision with bike caught under car given 20-month jail sentence
A Derbyshire man has been jailed for 20 months after admitting causing the death of a cyclist by driving without due care and attention. Conner Lynch hit Maxx Church near a set of lights at the junction of Abbey Street and Mercian Way in Derby on October 28 last year.
The Derby Telegraph reports that 18-year-old Church was hit so hard by Lynch’s Audi A3 that he was flung 28 metres. Derby Crown Court heard that Lynch had been driving at 45mph in a 30mph zone in dark and wet conditions.
Judge John Burgess said: “It is a well-known fact that the chances of a pedestrian or cyclist surviving a collision at 30mph are far greater than the chances of surviving a collision at 40mph.”
Lynch did not stop after the collision, but instead drove on for 350 metres, dragging the bike which was caught beneath the car.
He eventually pulled over in Woods Lane, removed the bike and left it propped up against a wall before setting off again. He parked the car in a dead-end and then handed himself into police 90 minutes after the collision. Church died in the Royal Derby Hospital the following day.
Judge Burgess described it as “a sad fact” that Church had been riding a bike with no brakes and no light, had not been wearing a helmet and had ridden through a red light. Maxx’s mum, Nikki, expressed similar sentiments, but said she struggled to understand Lynch’s behaviour following the incident.
"He drove off and just left him there. I wouldn't even leave an animal in the road. I just don't understand that at all, and I never will.
“Maxx wasn't wearing a helmet and of course he should have been, but a car is a lethal weapon and he chose to put his foot down and speed. I don't know how anyone could carry on driving after that."
When claiming insurance, Lynch had given a false name and date of birth and said he had held a driving licence for nine or more years. Burgess felt that this too might have contributed to Lynch’s behaviour.
“This case arose because of what might initially have seemed, to those involved, as minor transgressions. It began when you, Conner Lynch, obtained cheap insurance for your car by pretending to be someone else and making yourself the named driver... the fact that you were aware your insurance was fraudulently obtained may well have had a bearing on your subsequent driving after the collision.”
Lynch admitted causing death by driving without due care and attention, dangerous driving and making a false statement to obtain insurance. As well as receiving a 20-month jail sentence, he was banned from driving for four years.
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
- Rendel Harris 11 min 23 sec ago
The Battle of Thermopylae (480 BC) was one of the most important battles of the ancient world, where 7,000 Greeks, led by the Spartans under...
- ktache 8 hours 11 min ago
They also do it in orange. I'm after a deep winter jacket after the past week.
- ktache 8 hours 10 min ago
The people at Hexlox have asked me to tell others about their black Friday deals, but I don't quite know what the offer is yet. But saving anything...
- VIPcyclist 8 hours 54 min ago
Whilst I was reading this I was thinking : sounds familiar, yep, that's right . Then I read the bit about being referred for a fitness to drive and...
- Dnnnnnn 9 hours 7 min ago
I'm unclear how simply considering the views of people who travel through an area is voting for rat-runs. No need to explain though.
- David9694 10 hours 6 min ago
When you don't know for sure what the whinge would be if this work was postponed to January, but you know there would be one:...
- biking59boomer 10 hours 47 min ago
Sadly the cyclist hate in this country seems to have worsened of late. Dangerous motoring combined with anti-cycling officialdom in some places is...
- Cyclo1964 13 hours 18 min ago
Brilliant 🤣
Add new comment
27 comments
Conner Lynch should be put up against a wall and shot. The judge should also be as well for such inappropriate remarks and for giving such a pathetic sentence.
Condolences to the family.
Yet another case where the CPS have taken the easy option and gone after a lesser offence ti secure conviction.
Driving at 45 in a 30 is dangerous, period.
Irrespective of conditions. They need to scrap these offences and make new ones where families actually get that thingy called justice.
I agree, but put that in front of a jury of motorists and they will not see a problem with somebody doing 45 in a 30 and hand down a not guilty verdict, they would even turn a blind eye to using a phone at the same time.
Manslaughter!
Genocide!
It does feel like it some days.
I know you're legally quite correct, but a trivial sentence for hitting someone hard enough to kill them and then driving away seems hard to justify morally.
No mention of a re-test. All drivers involved in an accident which results in serious injury of anotehr road user should be subject to re-test. Their comptetance has to be proven.
Serious question, not trying to troll: First of all I agree that not having helmet, light and brakes, and jumping a red light doesn't excuse the driver.
But I thought that the judge's summary is a formality that has to include facts that have been considered; not necessarily everything in it actually affected the ruling. Can some legal expert explain if I understand this correctly?
Not having brakes and lights (I assume this was at night) and jumping a red light was breaking the law, so it seems fair to me that this was discussed in court. If my understanding is correct, I wouldn't criticise the judge for including it in the summary. The report is just not clear if it affected the ruling in any way.
Helmets (not being compulsory) is a different issue, they shouldn't matter at all in a legal sense.
Stephan - You are correct - The judge is merely stating the facts of the case here by reflecting on the lack of lights, helmet, brakes and running a red light. These may or may not have been part of the cause of the incident.
Where this message gets warped is in shoddy reporting of the case, where the cause of the incident is not reported. This then gets spun out of control in chat rooms such as this, with the inevitable for and against helmets argument being pulled out and all of us jumping to our own conclusions.
Whilst we all love a good bit of speculation, a bit of hard and fast evidence would be far more beneficial when these stories get reported so that we can at least make informed decisions.
A bit more professional reporting please, Race CC
How can I meet this man after he gets out of jail? I would love to have a chat.
I hope that the insurance companies are paying attention to this, and that Mr Lynch finds himself blacklisted... Mind you, he'd probably just get some more in another made up name. How does that work, anyway? I thought insurance companies do some checks to at least determine whether the insured person *exists*.
On his driving, I hope that he (and, definitely he and not some random homeless guy he's given a tenner to) has to resit his driving test at the end of the four years ban.
And finally, let's be fair here - even though whether or not Mr Church was wearing a helmet is completely irrelevant to the result of a 45 mph collision between a car and bicycle, Your Honour - at least the judge did give Mr Lynch time in gaol. That's going to have a knock-on effect on the rest of his life, I'd think.
As far as I know, insurance companies only check your details when you make a claim. It's cheaper for them that way. And if you made a false statement in the proposal form, then they don't have to pay the claim.
I thought they were going to start checking with DVLA at the time of application?
As far as I know, insurance companies only check your details when you make a claim. It's cheaper for them that way. And if you made a false statement in the proposal form, then they don't have to pay the claim.
A 20 month jail sentence is very severe when you compare:
Getting into a car and knowingly driving with invalid insurance
Speeding at night and in poor weather conditions
Driving without due care and attention
Leaving the scene of an accident knowing that someone must be severely injured
The trivial issue of killing someone (even though it was probably their own fault for not wearing a helmet capable of absorbing the kinetic energy of ~1500Kg of metal travelling at 20meters per second)
To the atrocity of:
Knocking a judges wig off
Which earned the offender 18 months in prison
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/man-jailed-for-contempt-after...
if the cyclist was invisible, and had run a red light, so was on a piece of road he shouldn't have been on in the first place, the only fault the driver committed was hitting him at 45 and not 30.
Don't forget leaving the scene of an accident. You never know, the cyclists might have survived had he received help sooner.
The cyclist was thrown 28m, I don't think he would have survived. By the same token, a cycle helmet would have been absolutely no benefit and I'm not sure that the fact the bike had no brakes had any relevance to the crash. But, the cyclist DID run a red light and DID NOT have lights.
I don't disagree with anything you say there oldridgeback, but the driver should still stop and not just drive off
Wrong. Failing to stop. Driving without insurance. Not driving to the conditions.
And the judge is happy to see this thug back behind the wheel in 4 years!
Also missed the fact that the driver wasn't legal to be on the road at all.
Hurt without helmet: Should have worn a helmet because its like a Star Trek forcefield that will save you no matter how hard you get hit.
Hurt with helmet, lights and everything: "They shouldn't be on the road"
FFS can't these people just get on a bike and see what it's like to cycle with people like them on the road? If you aren't paying attention and driving like a knob it doesn't matter if there's a boeing 747 on the road they'll still hit it.
Gobsmacked.
Could you imagine in the trial of a rapist:
"It is a sad fact that the victim was wearing a short skirt with no tights, had been walking alone and had been drinking alcohol"
There would be uproar.
Fair enough, the cyclist wasn't doing himself any favours, but how is:
Lynch had been driving at 45mph in a 30mph zone in dark and wet conditions.
and through a junction no less not considered to be Dangerous driving. 50% higher than the speed limit in the wet and dark... what speed would he be going In good conditions?
20 months? For three serious offences? Jeez
Do pedestrians have lights? This is not a mitigating factor when it comes to the sentence, another sentence which is too low.
If people are able to obtain insurance without proving they had a valid license then the law needs to change.
Whilst i am firmly in the pro helmet camp (but not making it mandatory), its an absolute disgrace that its dragged up in court like its some kind of contributing factor. A full faced motor cycle helmet would have done F**k all help if your mowed down from behind at 45 mph with the driver making little of no attempt to stop.