Highgate hit-and-run driver who left cyclist seriously injured faces jail after guilty plea

hawkinspeter wrote:

Interesting to see whether he gets a harsher sentence than Alliston.

not necessarily a relavent comparison, that one was a fatality, I will happily stand corrected but I don't think he fled the scene of the collision though unlike the driver here

EK Spinner wrote:

hawkinspeter wrote:

Interesting to see whether he gets a harsher sentence than Alliston.

not necessarily a relavent comparison, that one was a fatality, I will happily stand corrected but I don't think he fled the scene of the collision though unlike the driver here

However, Alliston was found not guilty of causing her death, so I think the comparison is valid. I don't think Alliston fled the scene, but cyclists don't have the same legal responsibilities after collisions anyway.

hawkinspeter wrote:

EK Spinner wrote:

hawkinspeter wrote:

Interesting to see whether he gets a harsher sentence than Alliston.

not necessarily a relavent comparison, that one was a fatality, I will happily stand corrected but I don't think he fled the scene of the collision though unlike the driver here

However, Alliston was found not guilty of causing her death, so I think the comparison is valid. I don't think Alliston fled the scene, but cyclists don't have the same legal responsibilities after collisions anyway.

Its debateable for sure, but the courts take leaving the scene & severity of the injuries that resulted as the far more serious aspects of the charges presented, than the actual collision in the first place. Had the BMW driver stopped,reported the collision etc etc,its unlikely it would have gone much further than a slap on the wrist 3pts and one of those driving courses,fine paid to victim. It's only in leaving the scene & the cyclist having had serious injuries that a jail term has even come into consideration. FWIW the last case I read where a driver left the scene after hitting a cyclist, they got 20 weeks. This guy only got 16 months and he deliberately knocked a cyclist
down and then fled https://road.cc/content/news/237865-driver-who-deliberately-knocked-cycl...

Awavey wrote:

hawkinspeter wrote:

EK Spinner wrote:

hawkinspeter wrote:

Interesting to see whether he gets a harsher sentence than Alliston.

not necessarily a relavent comparison, that one was a fatality, I will happily stand corrected but I don't think he fled the scene of the collision though unlike the driver here

However, Alliston was found not guilty of causing her death, so I think the comparison is valid. I don't think Alliston fled the scene, but cyclists don't have the same legal responsibilities after collisions anyway.

Its debateable for sure, but the courts take leaving the scene & severity of the injuries that resulted as the far more serious aspects of the charges presented, than the actual collision in the first place. Had the BMW driver stopped,reported the collision etc etc,its unlikely it would have gone much further than a slap on the wrist 3pts and one of those driving courses,fine paid to victim. It's only in leaving the scene & the cyclist having had serious injuries that a jail term has even come into consideration. FWIW the last case I read where a driver left the scene after hitting a cyclist, they got 20 weeks. This guy only got 16 months and he deliberately knocked a cyclist down and then fled https://road.cc/content/news/237865-driver-who-deliberately-knocked-cycl...

If the BMW driver had not fled the scene, there's a chance he would have been drink/drug tested and his vehicle searched.  When a driver flees the scene there probably should be an assumption that they are hiding something.  I knew of someone who crashed into some parked cars and went home - the Police turned up on his doorstep later that evening and he was convicted of drink driving (even though the Police were not able to prove that the alcohol had not been consumed after arriving home).

hawkinspeter wrote:

EK Spinner wrote:

hawkinspeter wrote:

Interesting to see whether he gets a harsher sentence than Alliston.

not necessarily a relavent comparison, that one was a fatality, I will happily stand corrected but I don't think he fled the scene of the collision though unlike the driver here

However, Alliston was found not guilty of causing her death, so I think the comparison is valid. I don't think Alliston fled the scene, but cyclists don't have the same legal responsibilities after collisions anyway.

It's an interesting mix - you're right that Alliston wasn't convicted of manslaughter, only for the lesser charge of wanton & furious driving (i.e. serious injury caused by manner of 'driving', including of non-motor vehicles) . But the fact that his offence resulted in a fatality will still have been taken into account when assessing the level of harm for the purposes of deciding the sentence - see para 11-12 of the sentencing remarks. So while the offences being charged in the two cases are similar (serious injury by [X]), I think the different severity of outcome will still factor in the sentence.   

the little onion wrote:

Shall we have a sweepstake to guess the punishment? I'll go for:

-6 month suspended prison sentence

-18 month driving ban

18 months prison

24 months driving ban.

Remember he'll be out in 9 months.

If the judge does not imprison then there must be a referral under Sections 35 and 36 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988.

Anything around the Charlie Alliston mark would be a disgrace given Alliston deliberately tried to avoid the pedestrian who ran into his path, was not on the wrong side of the road, was not travelling at excessive speed, did not ride off.

The early guilty plea is bullshit and to get such a large amount of your tariff taken off when the case is clear as day is utter pants.

Xena wrote:

I remember a few years ago I was heading down highgate  hill west ,if you have never been up or down the hill there are little road islands in the middle of the road . I was heading down hill, the traffic going up was at a standstill.  About I’d estimate a third of the way down (I was shifting as my side of the road was clear ) a BMW decided to jump the traffic jam swing out to my side of the road round a island ,heading face onto me . I got as close to the curb as possible and managed to squeeze past . It was so fast I had no time to think ,I did stop ASAP and gassed it up the hill but the car had gone , had his / her foot down . To be honest being a ex cycling courier  it just brought back a lot of memories of my time doing that job , so many crashes and near death close calls .  Someone who’s headed on the wrong side of the road and caused injuries must be accountable.  I’m not a fan of just chucking people in prison especially if they are not violent and are of no physical threat to anyone ,but ramifications to the injured rider and some kind of long term community service and the loss of his license would seem a good way to go . Make the wrong doers pay but not at our cost.

Never had this experience as a cyclist, but twice have, as a pedestrian crossing the road, nearly been knocked down by drivers on the wrong side of a traffic island who were dodging a queue of traffic at the lights (they were also jumping the lights, and possibly speeding).

I really think some drivers very deliberately behave like that out of some sort of 'too cool for school' machismo rather than incompetence or even impatience.  Slowing down or following rules isn't compatible with their 'fast and furious'  image of themselves.

cbrndc wrote:

The damning endictment is that the victim had to investigate the incident and source the cctv footage himself because the police were not interested in doing so.

I think this point was addressed in an earlier thread on this same story. Can't remember details, but basically it is often far easier for a member of the public to obtain the CCTV footage for evidential purposes than it is for the Police who have to jump through a number of legal technicalities for the evidence to be admissable, or something....

Mungecrundle wrote:

cbrndc wrote:

The damning endictment is that the victim had to investigate the incident and source the cctv footage himself because the police were not interested in doing so.

 

I think this point was addressed in an earlier thread on this same story. Can't remember details, but basically it is often far easier for a member of the public to obtain the CCTV footage for evidential purposes than it is for the Police who have to jump through a number of legal technicalities for the evidence to be admissable, or something....

I remember someone stating that, but I argued against it as in my experience, police just have to ask for CCTV footage and most businesses will be happy to comply. In this case, the police were simply too busy and stated something along the lines of it'll take them a week to get around to asking.

I think that a hit-and-run should automatically involve a prison sentence.

hawkinspeter wrote:

Mungecrundle wrote:

cbrndc wrote:

The damning endictment is that the victim had to investigate the incident and source the cctv footage himself because the police were not interested in doing so.

 

I think this point was addressed in an earlier thread on this same story. Can't remember details, but basically it is often far easier for a member of the public to obtain the CCTV footage for evidential purposes than it is for the Police who have to jump through a number of legal technicalities for the evidence to be admissable, or something....

I remember someone stating that, but I argued against it as in my experience, police just have to ask for CCTV footage and most businesses will be happy to comply. In this case, the police were simply too busy and stated something along the lines of it'll take them a week to get around to asking.

I think that a hit-and-run should automatically involve a prison sentence.

Totally agree HP. I would actually argue that the restaurant giving out the footage to a member of the public and then them passing on to the police could actually be against certain data rights nowadays. I'm assuming police didn't even attend the initial RTA being as one of them didn't go across to try to get the footage then, especially as it looked more deliberate on each viewing. 

quiff wrote:

I can understand the cynicism, but this case has already been transferred from the Magistrates to the Crown Court (increasing the maximum available sentence from 6 months to 5 years), and the judge has indicated that a custodial sentence would be the norm. The early guilty plea is likely only to reduce the length of the custodial sentence - he may get a reduction of one third for the early plea. 

I think the judge having asked for reports is looking to find some positive stuff so he can reduce the sentence by a lot more than a third. I don't believe the sentence will be anything like three years. I'd like to be wrong though........

Road CC wrote:

has been told by a judge that he could face jail

Car driving judge wrote:

This is a serious matter which would normally attract an immediate prison sentence

Anyone taking bets - no chance he's going to jail!