Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

Driver who killed cyclist Clifton James handed suspended sentence

Pleaded guilty to causing death by careless driving

The driver who hit and killed cyclist Clifton James in June 2015 has been sentenced to four months in prison, suspended for a year. Mishal Alshammary had been due to stand trial for causing death by dangerous driving, but pleaded guilty to the lesser charge of causing death by careless driving after the prosecution accepted that he had not been driving over the 30mph speed limit at the time.

Clifton James, 60, was riding his bike home at around midnight on June 20 2015 when he was hit by a car driven by Alshammary as he crossed a mini-roundabout in Forward Drive, Harrow.

Alshammary failed to slow down as he approached the junction and James, who was just yards from his home, suffered serious head injuries and was pronounced dead at the scene.

The London Evening Standard reports that investigators’ attempts to gather evidence had been hampered as the scene had been disturbed by the paramedics fighting to save James’ life.

Alshammary was also ordered to carry out 300 hours of community service and was banned from driving for 15 months.

“The sentence doesn’t try to place any kind of value on Mr James’ life — that is beyond measure,” said Judge Anthony Bate.

James’s widow Sandra was unimpressed with the sentence.

“He has put us through hell by not admitting his crime until 20 months after the crash,” she said. “Now, for him to walk away from court a free man is nothing short of a travesty of justice.” 

James had once been offered a police bravery award for helping to catch a mugger, but had turned it down as he did not want the attention. He had tackled the man as he tried to rob an elderly lady and pinned him down until police arrived.

Sandra said: “He was quite simply one of the nicest men you could ever meet and his passing has left a huge hole in our lives. To us he was our idol and our hero and he will always be missed.”

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

14 comments

Avatar
wycombewheeler | 7 years ago
0 likes

what strikes me most is the contrast between this case and the following http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-39368964
Maybe we need to do away with death by careless driving and treat it as manslaughter by negligence.

it should be "perfectly obvious to anyone" that going through a roundabout without looking/slowing/ giving way "carries a serious risk of death."

but we just tolerate these deaths again and again as a society.

So is the difference
a) people are expected to be ruthlessly efficient at work and never make mistakes, or allow those they supervise to make mistakes while driving is just a bit of a lark and shit happens

or b) lawyers are important and cyclists less so on the eyes of the law.

Avatar
oldstrath replied to wycombewheeler | 7 years ago
0 likes

wycombewheeler wrote:

what strikes me most is the contrast between this case and the following http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-39368964 Maybe we need to do away with death by careless driving and treat it as manslaughter by negligence. it should be "perfectly obvious to anyone" that going through a roundabout without looking/slowing/ giving way "carries a serious risk of death." but we just tolerate these deaths again and again as a society. So is the difference a) people are expected to be ruthlessly efficient at work and never make mistakes, or allow those they supervise to make mistakes while driving is just a bit of a lark and shit happens or b) lawyers are important and cyclists less so on the eyes of the law.

 

I think it's actually (c), most lawyers , judges and jurors drive, and almost certainly will have gone through at least one junction without looking. So they sympathise, and hope for similar leniency if ever caught. On the other hand they have probably never  dealt with heavy window frames, and so find it more believable that "this was avoidable".

Avatar
FluffyKittenofT... | 7 years ago
1 like

This story is tangentially-related to the issue. Driving bans, much like community service, really need more reliable enforcement.

People who misbehave need to be closely supervised to stop them creating new victims. In many cases it's probably better that happens in the community than in prison (because prisons are brutal environments and brutality usually doesn't improve people) but if they are left out in the community to carry on breaking the rules that discredits the whole thing.

http://www.stokesentinel.co.uk/mechanic-spared-prison-after-being-caught...

Avatar
brooksby replied to FluffyKittenofTindalos | 7 years ago
0 likes

FluffyKittenofTindalos wrote:

This story is tangentially-related to the issue. Driving bans, much like community service, really need more reliable enforcement. People who misbehave need to be closely supervised to stop them creating new victims. In many cases it's probably better that happens in the community than in prison (because prisons are brutal environments and brutality usually doesn't improve people) but if they are left out in the community to carry on breaking the rules that discredits the whole thing. http://www.stokesentinel.co.uk/mechanic-spared-prison-after-being-caught...

Enforcement? Didn't there used to be those dedicated, Erm, I think they called them "traffic police" or something...

Avatar
WillRod | 7 years ago
2 likes

Until there is a specific conviction of causing death by careless driving, these joke sentences will be handed out.

Also, the line between careless and dangerous needs to be clearer.

Sometimes people drive carelessly, rather than dangerously, but still kill someone and that is where the legal issues start. Perhaps vehicle manslaughter could be included?

If I recall correctly, manslaughter doesn't apply to traffic offences, which means you can get done for manslaughter for all sorts of careless things, such as not checking a taxi's tyres before crashing after a blowout. (I mean, hoften do you check your car tyres?) but you can't be done for manslaughter for not checking a roundabout is clear when you cross?

 

 

Avatar
Yorkshire wallet | 7 years ago
6 likes

More amazing leniency from the wacky world of sentencing. 

Why do judges bother even making comment? It's always some crap like "you have committed an atrocious crime" or "this was a sustained act of depravity" but when it comes to sentencing it's as it's "this was only a minor offence and nobody was really hurt". 

America has a lot of things wrong but sometimes their sentencing seems a bit more 'robust'. 

Avatar
brooksby replied to Yorkshire wallet | 7 years ago
1 like

Yorkshire wallet wrote:

More amazing leniency from the wacky world of sentencing. 

Why do judges bother even making comment? It's always some crap like "you have committed an atrocious crime" or "this was a sustained act of depravity" but when it comes to sentencing it's as it's "this was only a minor offence and nobody was really hurt". 

America has a lot of things wrong but sometimes their sentencing seems a bit more 'robust'. 

We could re-introduce the stocks or one of those mediaeval hanging cages, and install it on the central reservation of a nearby motorway...

Avatar
nniff | 7 years ago
7 likes

Why go to all the trouble of arranging a drive by shooting?  You get 10 years for carrying the gun let alone killing someone with it.  Far easier to run them over which is near as dammit without consequence.

Avatar
Gourmet Shot replied to nniff | 7 years ago
5 likes

nniff wrote:

Why go to all the trouble of arranging a drive by shooting?  You get 10 years for carrying the gun let alone killing someone with it.  Far easier to run them over which is near as dammit without consequence.

Always said this...pointless hiring someone to kill your business partner, poisoning your cheating wife or killing that bloke down the pub you had a fight with last xmas........just run them over and say you had a few drinks, was snapchatting at the time and the sun was in your eyes so you didnt see them as they weren't wearing a Hi-Viz jacket....3 months suspended, 1 month ban and you're laughing.  Result.

 

 

 

Avatar
thelighterthief | 7 years ago
4 likes

I'll never understand why driving isn't considered a privelidge. If somebody drives to court and is then banned, does the court take the keys or impound the car. No. If the numbers of banned drivers caught driving whilst banned is anything to go by he wouldnt be the first to drive home from a driving conviction. 

Avatar
Russell Orgazoid | 7 years ago
4 likes

Only 4 months...SUSPENDED!

An insult is putting it mildly.

Avatar
peted76 | 7 years ago
4 likes

“The sentence doesn’t try to place any kind of value on Mr James’ life — that is beyond measure,” said Judge Anthony Bate.

Eh.. he's a judge! The law just doesn't work in some cases, the justice dept should acknowledge this and do something about it!

Avatar
the little onion | 7 years ago
2 likes

 

 

Avatar
Dicklexic replied to the little onion | 7 years ago
3 likes

the little onion wrote:

And it appears he was free to retain his driving license. Probably drove home from court.....

 

How is it actually possible to be convicted of killing someone through dangerous/careless driving, but still be allowed to retain the driving license, and (potentially) kill someone else tomorrow? We wouldn't accept it if someone was driving a forklift truck in a warehouse, but it is OK if they are driving  a car on the road.

 

"Alshammary was also ordered to carry out 300 hours of community service and was banned from driving for 15 months."

 

He did lose his license, but certainly not for long enough!

Latest Comments