- 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
Ying Tao.jpgLaw firm to challenge decision not to prosecute driver involved in Ying Tao collision
Law firm Leigh Day are to write to the City of London police asking them to review their decision not to prosecute the lorry driver involved in the fatal collision with cyclist Ying Tao at London’s Bank Junction last year. A three-day inquest at City of London coroner’s court heard this week that Lee Williams began indicating 1.44 seconds before turning left, the indicator flashing just twice.
The court also heard that an audible warning system and one of two side sensors on the 32-tonne truck were broken – although there is no legal requirement for HGVs to have these.
City of London police and the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) decided not to bring criminal charges against Williams on the grounds that the evidence did not meet the necessary threshold.
Speaking to the London Evening Standard, Tao’s husband Jin Chuan Zhou, said: “Given the evidence that has been shown in court it’s hard to understand why there was no prosecution.”
Leigh Day’s Sally Moore said: “Having carefully considered the police collision investigation and sat through the three-day inquest, we will be writing to the City of London Police on behalf of Ms Tao’s family requesting that they review their decision not to bring criminal charges against the driver.”
Moore, head of the personal injury team, said that Leigh Day would also be making a formal complaint regarding the evidence provided by City Police collision investigator PC Tim Harryman.
Harryman said Tao had been in the wrong gear; had placed herself in an unsafe position in a bike lane beside the lorry; and had been too slow to move off when the lights changed.
He told the court: “I don’t believe it’s a careless act... it’s a very busy junction with lots going on and lots vying for Mr Williams’s attention. I can understand how Ms Tao would have been missed in that situation.”
Moore called Harryman’s evidence “a clear case of victim-blaming.”
A City of London police statement said:
“Our thoughts and sympathies are with the family and friends of Ms Tao, as they have been since this tragic incident took place. The police’s role is to investigate all circumstances surrounding an incident, not to apportion blame.
“An investigation into the circumstances of this incident was carried out and concluded in November 2015 with the decision to take no further action. At this time we have no plans to review this decision.”
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
- David9694 1 hour 12 min ago
Theres not one scrap of self-help among drivers is there, it's always someone else's issue.
- Simon E 2 hours 56 sec ago
Oh dear. A single bike in a single size in one shop is not indicative of the entire UK market for bicycles. And the slump isn't just bikes, it's...
- hawkinspeter 4 hours 53 min ago
Ridiculed or is it just jealousy?
- Rendel Harris 5 hours 19 min ago
Thank goodness for that. I don't suppose anyone would want you to. You certainly behave like one though.
- Eton Rifle 5 hours 26 min ago
You do see some utterly ridiculous examples of car use....
- Eton Rifle 5 hours 49 min ago
Exactly. Every road death is a tragedy but this is at the "twat deserved it" end of the spectrum, looking at the state of that car.
- Rendel Harris 5 hours 56 min ago
I'm not the editor of this article, nor indeed of anything on this website. One would have thought that didn't require explaining.
- Eton Rifle 5 hours 57 min ago
I think the answer is in your question. I genuinely didn't know he was married to her. It does kinda explain it. Disappointing, nevertheless.
- Daclu Trelub 10 hours 42 min ago
In a perfect world, we'd have a measure of how easily distracted someone is, as part of their driving test....
Add new comment
22 comments
It's heartbreaking what happened to her yet still at that junction everyday cars motorcycles buses and lorries block the ASL making any chance of a safe crossing pot luck, for fuck sack just enforce the law and prevent anymore needless loss of life.
I agree.
And you can virtually smell the contempt some vehicle users have for people cycling - you can actaully tell the level of disregard from how far into an ASL box they will park (just the front wheels? - fill the entire space?- Ignorant or feigning ignorance?)
Drivers of HGVs from various family firms, refuse trucks, skip trucks: the kind of people that are let loose with these vehicles are free to throw their (several tonne) weight around on the public highway, side roads and back roads where 9mph should be a maximum, especially when there are so few kids walking or cycling to school.
I've received close passes from cars and refuse trucks alike perhaps because they didn't like the fact that I'd occupied my space in the ASL box (when I could just have easily passed through a red light once the road was clear but....), or else took the space in front of them as they were occupying the ASL box.
One driver overtook aggressively and dangerously only to rejoin the traffic queue ahundred metres or so ahead. I overtook and asked the driver of a police van, what coild be done about this driver. The officer's response?
"well, you really should be wearing a helmet and hi-viz".
I didn't wait around to hear any more.
Which is why helmet and high viz promotion are a complete dead end. In no other field of human activity is the symptom treated not the cause, only the laughingly misdescribed "road safety" sector.
Never mind the fact that the cause of the horrendous death and injury toll on our roads every year is bad driving, just tell the victims to wear a bit of plastic: job done.
Anyone promoting helmets or high viz is complicit in this fundamentally unjust system, and excusing the failure of the judicial system to protect people, almost all of which adopt the same stance. The officer you spoke to was just a little more overt than most of them.
Stop blaming the victims, stop promoting helmets, stop promoting hi viz and start tackling the real problem.
Next time you see Mrs. May ask (or shout) "Are you going to be getting tough on drivers who kill?"
Ugh as the police will tell you she doesn't like that. She got a bit upset at a police federation conference when that happened and she was posed with questions she didn't like.
She likes when her team vet the questions first instead. Which means she will ignore yours for ones she likes instead.
Awful. I can't understand why the driver hadn't checked his mirrors before turning.
The findings of the accident investigator don't make sense to me. Ok there's a lot going on in London but you bloody check where you're heading.
Leigh Day are top notch. No point entering a discussion about whether it's the police or the CPS guys, LD know what the legal procedure is and legal reporting is usually very sketchy. Just overlook things like that if you think procedure is being misreported.
We know from previous cases that even if the driver is convicted he is unlikely to face any prison time and at most be banned from driving for a year or two.
In this kind of scenario I don't understand why the police, CPS and the Courts remain unwilling to find criminal culpability on the part of drivers who kill through careless or dangerous driving as in my personal opinion the punishments handed down tend not to have serious consequences on the life of the convicted, and is already disproportional to the suffering victims suffer.
Police collision indicator confirms the cycle lane is dangerous, so what action is being taken against the road designers, and what is being done to correct infrastructure to prevent future incidents?
That photo in the standard story is sickening.
Totally unneccessary to publish that. I'm fairly comfortable in my view that if Ying Tao had been "Sharon Smith" they would not have published the photo. Our media are happy to show pictures of people who have died or are in the process of being killed unless they're "one of us" of course.
Its a horrifying picture and a bold decision for the court/Standard to publish it, but a defendable one. It is strong evidence in favour London Cycle Campaign's "Clear Vision" campaign, for example. Proper visibility from the cab may have saved her life.
So would have: "An audible warning system and one of two side sensors on the 32-tonne truck were broken. "
(dupe post)
(dupe post)
(dupe post)
there was nothing wrong with the evidence provided as shown in the orginal article. I said earlier the accident investigators statement would have been page after page listing everything about the deceased, her bike, road conditions, weather also everything about the lorry.
I'm an authorised vehicle examiner and a basic statement is in excess of 4 pages of A4 but for a fatal rtc it runs into reams. So if you only looking for and publish items about the victim then it will to an outsider look like victim blaming. The accident investigator only writes what he sees and finds.
Like "The rear wheel of Ms Tao’s bicycle came into contact with the front of a lorry that was turning across her path".?
That was actually the quote by the Coroner, who, in fairness, attempted to word his conclusion in a way that would not blame Tao and thus not affect the civil litigation, and a possible private prosecution.
The barrister for the family shred the cop to pieces. If the Coroner had any cojones, he could have voiced his disquiet with the quality of the investigator's evidence.
Just out of interest were you actually at the coroners court because it would help clarify some of the comments alleged to have been made by both sides ?
If so, in what capacity ?
Just from your comments i can only assume you were and have a good knowledge of vehicle accident investigation. Barristers are paid ridiculous amounts of money to make witnesses, both civilian and expert, look like idiots and thus making their evidence seem incorrect so perhaps you could enlighten us on how you thought the evidence should have been given ?
a bit confusing really as the Police don't make the decision it's the cps who decide, the Police only provide the cps with the file.
The Police can decide on minor cases but the authority to charge on serious cases such as this was removed by govt many years ago and in cases like this one the cps make the decision.
I'm in no way saying the Police did everything right as in my opinion (as a serving officer) he should have been taken to court given the evidence shown on this site alone.
absolutely, but the Cps rely upon the evidence gathered by police and specialist investigators. If the clear view of those investigating was that the evidential threshold was not met, when evidence was wrongly or poorly assessed as it seems here, then that is the evidence the cps will rely upon to decide whether to bring a criminal prosecution. Just imagine the weight given to that particular offices evidence given his stays and experience?