- 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
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
news
Statue of Justice, Old Bailey (licensed CC BY 2.0 on Flickr by Ronnie Macdonald).jpg"Blaring music" meant driver didn't know he'd hit cyclist, court told
A motorist has told a court that he didn’t see a cyclist he knocked off his bike and injured because he was distracted by playing music too loudly in his car.
William Whincup said he only realised there had been a collision between himself and cyclist Mark Douglas when he got home and spotted the damage on his BMW 530, reports Metro.
He got back in his car and retraced his journey, eventually finding Mr Douglas being care for by a passer-by at the roadside.
He told the cyclist: “Sorry mate, I didn’t see you. I think it was because I had my music blaring.”
The incident happened on 2 October 2016 on the A193 near Blyth. Whincup had been driving home to Cramlington, Northumberland from his work as a service manager at a motor dealership.
Ian Lowther, prosecuting at South East Northumberland Magistrates’ Court, said that Whincup had “pulled straight out” into the cyclist’s path.
“Mr Douglas was unable to react and he felt himself turn to the right as he struck the vehicle,” he continued.
“He landed on the carriageway, becoming separated from his bike. He suffered a fracture to his hip, which required surgery, and a deep cut to his left elbow.”
“It was about 15 or 20 minutes before the defendant returned to the scene and said to Mr Douglas, ‘Sorry mate, I didn’t see you, I think it was because I had my music blaring’.”
In mitigation, Mark Harrison said his client drove more than 20,000 miles a year for work and had never been involved in an incident of that nature previously.
“But for this defendant returning to the scene of the accident, I don’t think there’s any question he wouldn’t be appearing before you because nobody noted down the registration number of description of the vehicle when he left the scene,” he said.
“The only reason he mentions the music playing loud is because he didn’t hear the impact of the car and Mr Douglas.”
In a victim impact statement, Mr Douglas said: “I live with my wife and two daughters, aged two and seven months. I had to struggle upstairs using the handrail and crutches as the bathroom and bedroom are on the first floor.
“Fortunately, my wife is on maternity leave at the moment, as I’m unable to look after the children on my own,” he added. “I’m unable to lift or bath them or get up during the night to check on them.”
Whincup, who pleaded guilty to careless driving, was fined £375 and ordered to pay £85 costs plus a £30 victim surcharge. His licence was endorsed with five penalty points.
Simon joined road.cc as news editor in 2009 and is now the site’s community editor, acting as a link between the team producing the content and our readers. A law and languages graduate, published translator and former retail analyst, he has reported on issues as diverse as cycling-related court cases, anti-doping investigations, the latest developments in the bike industry and the sport’s biggest races. Now back in London full-time after 15 years living in Oxford and Cambridge, he loves cycling along the Thames but misses having his former riding buddy, Elodie the miniature schnauzer, in the basket in front of him.
Latest Comments
- chrisonabike 3 sec ago
Accessibility issue. Of course by necessity / co- evolution the Dutch generally provide a fairly "one size fits standard bikes" parking solution -...
- Kapelmuur 10 min 49 sec ago
Thanks for the heads up. I wore it the first time the temperature fell below 10C, with a merino base layer. A short ride of about 90 minutes, I...
- SimoninSpalding 58 min 21 sec ago
Based on the report the organiser seems completely unconcerned that someone died....
- Steve K 1 hour 15 min ago
I'm there now too, if anyone wants a follow/wants to follow me. @cyclingtheseaso
- Shepton 1 hour 50 min ago
I totally agree. I used to commute through Long Ashton and only started getting agro from motorists when the pavement was made to be a shared path....
- Rendel Harris 2 hours 14 min ago
She was still there in Greenwich when I cycled past her on Wednesday!
- Rendel Harris 2 hours 24 min ago
It's obviously a very personal thing but if I was in the market at your budget I would take a serious look at the Ribble AllRoad SL Pro, currently...
- Hirsute 4 hours 15 min ago
No driver involved https://www.gazette-news.co.uk/news/24728452.car-crash-station-way-colch...
Add new comment
23 comments
"a £30 victim surcharge"
Get in!
Hit em where it hurts!
I think I'll get myself one of those BMWs. I mean if you are not even aware of a cyclist slamming into you, potholes, expansion joints and other road defects will never be felt!
I suspect that the problem was more to do with the BMW slamming into the cyclist...
(sorry - being a bit pedantic).
it does seem a bit unclear from the story - I got the impression that the car pulled out and the cyclist hit the side of the car, possibly, but the language used makes it a bit ambiguous.
The car was a BMW, quelle surprise.
Wow congratulations BMW for the amazing soundproofing you provide at your cars! At your next commercial you could use this example instead of speeding and drifting cars in public roads as you usually do...
And a few more points for having a stupid name.
So anyway, let's make more cars which can interface with your smartphone and have Internet access or wifi so you never miss a FB update while listening to your Dolby surround sound car entertainment system... Cos that's always a good thing, right...?
OK, so it all sounds (no pun intended) rather odd, and like others, I suspect the only reason he went back was that he thought he'd be caught anyway, but look on the bright side: his insurance is going to pay the victim a lot of money, and his next insurance quote is going be stupendous. I was also going to point out that having the beemer repaired would cost a grand as well, but given his job, he'll get it done for nothing.
Dear god. This eejit apparently failed to see, hear or even feel the impact with his victim, and isn't even banned from driving. How the hell does that work?
It just goes to show how a sense of hearing/ability to hear things can at times be important for all types of road users.
I have long believed that vehicle entertainment systems, and also the portable systems used by some cyclists, should be banned. Listening to music can be a distraction, and likewise listening to a radio commentary, discussion programme, etc.
And just what is it with these people who can't manage to walk to the corner shop without listening to some music?
well that was a novelty, pleading guilty instead of hoping for a jury of fellow motorists...
Well, at least next time someone mentions that cyclists shouldn't wear earphones whilst cycling, we have a nice story to link to....
5 points!! Seriously!?!? I got 7 points for careless once and the only person I hurt was myself!
Notwithstanding the accident, he did at least have the decency to return and own up.
so how did he know by retracing his steps, the cyclist lying in the road being treated, was in anyway related to the damage on his car if he claims he never saw the cyclist...
Can't believe the police/judge system fell for this blatant lie. It was clearly a hit and run, then blind panick worrying if someone saw the incident. "I know I'll tell 'em I had loud music playing"...
Yes. This.
As a concientous person I would like to think the same of others and give the benefit of doubt. The fact that he owned up at least means the victim can claim from his insurance and not have to wait for the Motor Insurance Bureau.
Absolutely this!
It's a compelte bullshit story and the judge bought it.
I got 5 points once for driving too close to the car in front of me...
or was he just bricking himself in case someone had got his number and decided to go back for damage limitation?
That must have been very loud music to have affected his vision that much.
And,
"In mitigation, Mark Harrison said his client drove more than 20,000 miles a year for work and had never been involved in an incident of that nature previously."
How's he going to know? I'm guessing that his music is never quiet enough to be able to have effective vision, he could have had many such incidents but never looked hard enough for damage on his precious car.
So a bit like......
In mitigation the defendant hadn't murdered anybody in all his 52 years until that night when he stabbed the deceased 38 times in a frenzied knife attack.....
Sounds like a winning defence argument