Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

Back to news
news
Casualty
Collision
Crime & Legal
Lorry driver who killed cyclist at Ludgate Circus given community service and driving banJustice (Lonpicman, Wikimedia Commons)

Lorry driver who killed cyclist at Ludgate Circus given community service and driving ban

Driver was alerted to the incident by the screams of pedestrians
by Alex Bowden
Fri, Dec 11, 2015 15:22
9

A lorry driver who hit and killed a cyclist at Ludgate Circus on April 3 last year has been spared jail by an Old Bailey judge. 54-year-old John Green, who hit Spaniard Victor Rodriguez in his 32-ton truck after making a late decision to turn left, was found guilty of causing death by careless driving.

32-year-old Rodriguez had come to London from Spain to learn English and was on his way back from a job interview at around 10am when the collision occurred. He was the first of two cyclists to die as a result of crashes at Ludgate Circus in 2014. In October, Janina Gehlau died after being crushed by a tipper truck. The junction is earmarked for improvement as part of the north-south Cycle Superhighway.

London24 reports that Rodriguez had been cycling down Fleet Street towards Ludgate Circus and was telling his girlfriend about the interview on his hands-free mobile phone. As the lorry driver waited at the Ludgate Circus lights, he cycled down the nearside of the vehicle into the junction’s cycle lane. Green – who denied causing death by careless driving – turned left and collided with the cyclist, who was riding straight on towards St Paul’s.

The court heard that Green was alerted to the incident by the screams of pedestrians. London Ambulance Service pronounced Rodriguez dead at the scene.

Prosecutor Kenneth Millett told the court:

“We suggest that if Mr Green had looked in his mirrors immediately before or at the time he made the decision to turn left he would have clearly seen Mr Rodriguez and then not made his manoeuvre of turning left. Although Mr Green was to insist in interview he checked his mirrors, in fact he had not done so.”

Green said he didn’t see Rodriguez in his mirrors; that if he had seen him he wouldn’t have made the turn. Asked why he didn’t see him, he replied: “I scanned the mirrors, I never seen the man.”

Green was convicted of causing death by careless driving. He received a 12-month driving ban and was ordered to carry out 150 hours of unpaid work.

Sentencing, Judge Charles Wide, QC, said:

"The sadness and tragedy of what happened has hung over this trial and everyone involved with it throughout has been truly conscious of the loss that his family have suffered, and indeed all those who knew him.

"It has been right in the forefront of everybody's minds, although during the case we have had to focus in quite a technical legal way on the issue of Mr Green's driving.

"The fact that we have had to do that does not mean that anyone has forgotten what his family and friends have been through."

Wide continued by saying: "I'm very conscious, as all judges are, that no sentence I can pass can bring a victim back. There's no way of making reparation or compensation through the sentence for your loss, and it's very important to understand that a sentence passed in a case like this does not in any way seek to equate or make equivalence to the value of the life."

Ludgate Circus
cyclist fatality
John Green
Victor Rodriguez
Alex Bowden

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.

Add new comment

9 comments

Avatar
ironmancole | 8 years ago
1 like

Quote "I never seen the man"

Either he didnt look or did and couldnt see anyone as the lorry is dangerously designed as we now all recognise.

So, a manufacturer will recall a product if a fault is found with it that could present danger to the public, we're all familiar with seeing these.

So...vehicles are exempt for some reason?

As for sentancing as ever a lifetime ban is quite appropriate but not given. Usual excuse rolled out about no sentance bringing someone back blah blah.

How come the same approach isnt taken by judiciary when HMRC bring a prosecution?

So, a businessman falsifies accounts and hides £500,000 but spanks it all on a flashy lifestyle and parties, travel, women etc then gets caught.

Can his defence lawyer roll out the excuse that 'Well its all been spent now so not a lot of point punishing my client as no amount of custodial time can bring the money back'?!

Try that and watch it fail. Again we're left asking why is it ok to kill 'by accident' with a vehicle?

The motor manufacturers industry, famously renowned for uttering all manner of excuses to protect the industry at all and any cost, seem to be in bed with government.

Why do we get to pay for this with our lives?

 

Avatar
I love my bike | 8 years ago
1 like

He's the perfect person to escort large trucks with poor visibilty through London (riding a bike and carrying a red flag)!

It would at least provide a service, while highlighting to everybody how dangerous trucks can be. John Green, assuming he survived & was permitted to drive again, might take proper care.

Avatar
Housecathst | 8 years ago
3 likes

Only in a case involving a killer in a ton plus of metal box would a judge get away with say this. 

"in a case like this does not in any way seek to equate or make equivalence to the value of the life."

 

Avatar
mike the bike | 8 years ago
0 likes

The only glimmer of hope is that the Traffic Commissioners may revoke his licence when his ban expires.  Fingers crossed.

Avatar
ironmancole replied to mike the bike | 8 years ago
1 like

mike the bike wrote:

The only glimmer of hope is that the Traffic Commissioners may revoke his licence when his ban expires.  Fingers crossed.

Only if we collectively demand it. If they refuse we instead demand that the government department effectively vouching for his competence by refusing to remove him from the road network accepts full liability should he go on to kill or maim again.

The insurance industry is a big problem here, they put anyone on the road and collect money making a profit using the lives of the public as collateral when it all goes wrong.

Its immoral and a big reason why we have so many dangerous drivers out there, kill someone, take a slap on the wrist then have a dozen 'specialist' insurers compete to get you back on the road as cheaply as possible when the actual response should be 'We're sorry but youre not fit to drive and we are not putting you back to cause more harm'.

If they drive with no insurance in defiance of the law and with contempt for the lives of the public there is a mandatory 5 year sentence, no arguments or whinging. 

The roads are rammed, surely its a good thing to remove the dangerous and reckless to also free up space for people who take their responsibility on the road seriously?

Avatar
Zebulebu | 8 years ago
0 likes

"I'm very conscious, as all judges are, that no sentence I can pass can bring a victim back. There's no way of making reparation or compensation through the sentence for your loss, and it's very important to understand that a sentence passed in a case like this does not in any way seek to equate or make equivalence to the value of the life."

Great. So, instead of passing down a sentence that might in the very least, in some small, miniscule way, make the cyclist's death a little more meaningful by giving a deterrent to potential future offenders, he seems to have gone out of his way to insult the man's memory by dishing out the same sort of sentence you'd get for not paying your council tax, nicking something from Tesco, or drunkenly damging someone's car.

Seems legit
 

Avatar
levermonkey | 8 years ago
6 likes

As soon as a Judge says "no sentence I can pass can bring a victim back" you know that some piss-poor lame sentence is going to be handed down. True it won't bring them back; but it will send out a clear message that this is unacceptable.

Green killed a fellow human being because he was careless and so proven himself to be an unfit person to hold a driving licence for that class of vehicle. His licence should be revoked!

If the holder of a Firearms Licence kills someone through carelessness then we don't hesitate to revoke their licence, so why is it so different for motorists?

Avatar
Mendip James | 8 years ago
1 like

Jesus wept

 

Avatar
schlepcycling | 8 years ago
8 likes

A 12 month ban and 150 hours of unpaid work for causing death by careless driving is a f*cking disgrace.

Latest Comments