- 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).jpgDriver who used van "as a weapon" to knock cyclist from bike jailed
A man who used his van “as a weapon” to knock a cyclist from his bike and threatened to kill him has been jailed for 22 weeks.
Danny Hughes, aged 26, pleaded guilty to threatening behaviour, dangerous driving, driving without a licence and driving while uninsured, reports the Daily Echo.
Southampton Magistrates’ Court heard Hughes, a plumber, beeped his horn and was revving his engine “in an aggressive manner” as he drove behind cyclist Mark Chamberlain on Tollbar Way, Hedge End, reports the Daily Echo.
He then overtook the rider so closely that he clipped him with his wing mirror begore carrying out an emergency stop that caused the cyclist to crash into the back of his van, sustaining facial cuts and bruises and an injured shoulder.
“I was aware of a vehicle behind me,” Mr Chamberlain told the court. “I could hear the engine revving in an aggressive manner.
“I cleared the roundabout and could hear the horn. I was scared as there was nowhere to stop. I feared stopping because I knew the vehicle was so close.
“The vehicle was alongside me,” he continued. “The passenger window was open. He started to shout abuse at me … its front wing brushed up against me. I was struck from behind – this was the wing mirror.
“It unbalanced me up to the point that I hit the kerb. The vehicle conducted an emergency stop. I was unable to stop as I collided with the vehicle. I lay there for a second. I couldn’t quite believe this had happened.
“The abuse started immediately – it took me by surprise. Hughes said ‘I should kill you – if it wasn’t for my kids I would kill you now’.”
According to a pre-sentencing report, Hughes was found to have anger management issues.
District Judge Peter Greenfield told him: “You used the vehicle as a weapon. You go back for a bit more – giving the cyclist quite an earful. You could have killed him.”
Besides the 22-week jail sentence, Hughes was ordered to pay £300 in compensation, £85 costs and a £115 victim surcharge. He was also banned from driving for 12 months.
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 2 sec ago
This is an impressive new way of avoiding work by the police! Several crimes here - is the new game "if we can identify *one* of those as having...
- HeadDown 21 min 5 sec ago
Which explains a lot. I reckon the standard of driving in the UK has noticeably decreased in the last 5-10 years. A host of factors no doubt, but I...
- Keykey1985 56 min 15 sec ago
He wasn't brake-checking me, he was trying to get me to stop. Nothing good would have come from me stopping.
- PRSboy 1 hour 13 min ago
It was designed around 28mm tyres but there's lots of clearance and could certainly take bigger tyres.
- Cugel 1 hour 16 min ago
A dinosaur version is shurely for the kiddies. Myself I'd like The Hindenburg. There may be The Freisian, filled with methane rather than hydrogen,...
- Rendel Harris 1 hour 30 min ago
When I see SLOW HORSES I always think ah, so this is where the ones I bet on are kept...
- ktache 2 hours 6 min ago
The proximity to the Transport Research Labs at Crowthorne means that the area often gets weird new stuff.
- chrisonabike 2 hours 12 min ago
No great mystery in either case, surely? Both US politician and the motor trade say "choose us and your life will be better and easier!" And other...
- stonojnr 4 hours 24 min ago
theres an attitude I encounter alot locally, and demonstrated in bucket loads by drivers on my commute home tonight, that cyclists shouldnt be on...
- Keesvant 5 hours 43 min ago
If the chains snap that is lack of build quality or material.....
Add new comment
21 comments
I notice that the youth (arguably a cyclist though they had transformed into a pedestrian at the moment of the offence!) who smashed a car window with a 'zombie knife' has just had his sentence increased to 42 months. I guess that particular scrote is another example of making the wrong choice of weapon.
People with anger-management issues take note - always use a car, guys. It's what the legal system requires of you (otherwise you won't qualify for the special ultra-low-jail-tariff scheme known as road traffic law).
Do you think sentencing depends on what type of road user it is?
This person was jailed for two years:
https://www.newsshopper.co.uk/news/17230718.man-who-hit-elderly-women-with-his-electric-wheelchair-jailed/
Wow! Thanks for that, a useful comparison, especially for the language used by the police "Detective Constable Iain Hill said. "Ali has used a means in aiding movement as a weapon,....." Exactly what the van driver did, but the buggy driver was charged with actual bodily harm because he knocked down two pedestrians. The van driver deliberately attacks a cyclist but isn't charged with ABH.
I'm so glad that we are all equal under the law. Never mind, the government's review of road law will sort all these problems, just as soon as they get around to it.
Apples and Oranges I think. Buggies aren't motor vehicles, the victims were pedestrians, and they were on the pavement.
The issue is that Road Traffic Law fundamentally doesn't handle injury/death in the same way as the rest of the law and as such it is very rare/almost impossible for a driver to be convicted of Common Assault/ABH/GBH.
it's not a 'buggie', it's an electric motor scooter designed for mobility, it still is a vehicle in law (a carriage), that is absolutely clear and why they have maximum speed limits set on them.
That someone using a vehicle that has potential for far less harm gets a sentence FIVE times greater is a clear indictment of the imbalance in the way people on cycles are considered and their assailents disproportionately given lenient treatment and sentences IF they are indeed found guilty at all!
The 'law' in itself is fine, it's just that instead of using the crimes against the persons act, somehow government, police and CPS have managed to downgrade assaults when you use a motor so have motoring laws, it's an absolute disgrace. Sorry i hurt you through my callousness and unthinking behaviour whilst I ioperate this weapon, why the vast majority think it's just a bit 'careless' when you kill or seriously harm someone is just incredible!
If we used the crimes against the person laws instead of motor laws maybe we would have better driver behaviour when faced with a jail sentence for ramming their weapon of choice down your through as it were or simply using it th thrreaten with even if no physical contact made, which is clearly an assault in law!
I wonder if there were witnesses or camera footage of the incident as he pleaded guilty. It doesn’t say in the news article.
"Hughes said ‘I should kill you – if it wasn’t for my kids I would kill you now’.”
Take his kids away for their own sake, either that or just buy them a bike for when he returns to his van (in about 12 weeks)...
"According to a pre-sentencing report, Hughes was found to
have anger management issuesbe a cunt."Fixed that
Note - he already had no license and no insurance. Either because he's never had one, or because he had already had it taken away from him. Presumably he was using his van for work? In which case his employer should surely be culpable for not checking his legal privilege to drive?
At some point, the tide of opinion has to turn against this sort of shit. That sentence is absolutely fuckign pathetic.
He should never be allowed to drive again. But he clearly will as he didn't have a licence or insurance when this happened anyway. How can we get the law changed so people like him cannot drive?
Short of technical devices (e.g. continuous iris recognition or fingerprint/heart rhythm sensors) I think the only way is a sliding scale of penalties. Driving whilst banned should be a mandatory prison sentence of several years - even a year would suffice. Sliding scale for repeat offenders.
Also, bear in mind that Tollbar Way is a dual carriageway with a 40mph limit
Doesn't that mean the van driver had a whole other lane they could have used to overtake in?
Some of it is dual, some single.
Yep
It's a fun road, popular with the local boy racers because it runs past Maccy D's, BK, & KFC and has plenty of cambered roundabouts for practising your best Gran Turismo/Tokyo Drift moves. Which is the main reason it's been dropped to a 40mph and at least used to have regular anti-social driving patrols.
(I may have done all or some of the above in my younger, less-enlightened/responsible years)
Utterly pathetic sentencing, yet again.
Wonder who he works for?
Well that dispells the myth that Dangerous rather than Careless driving convictions are any more likely to result in appropriate sentencing.
Judge says "You used the vehicle as a weapon".
However, he was found guilty of three driving offences, and threatening behaviour, but not ABH, assault or any other crimes against the person. If he had swung a heavy metal bar around as a weapon, clipping someone and making them fall over resulting in similar injuries, I'm sure he would have been charged with crimes against the person.
So, CPS, if the judge says that the car was used as a weapon, why don't the charges match?
Well, the jail sentence is totally deserved, even if its length could be disputed, but banned from driving for a year is just ridiculous. Someone who has used their vehicle as a weapon and threatened another, perfectly legal road user with death should never be allowed to drive again. If he'd threatened to kill someone with a gun and shot and injured them, would they ever get a gun licence again?
Yet another gross example of the double standards in our laughably named justice system.
Judge says "You used the vehicle as a weapon".
Defendent was "found to have anger management issues".
He also apparently didn't have a license at the time; "driving without a licence."
And yet...
"He was also banned from driving for 12 months."
If he had been operating a shotgun without a license, and used that as a weapon to intimidate and then injure someone, and also had identified anger management issues, I doubt they would be allowing him to theoretically obtain/regain a shotgun license after 12 months. Or only send him to prison for 22 weeks.
22 weeks is pathetic given the judge acknowledged that death could have resulted.
We need harsher sentencing for people like this.