- 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 'dazzled' by sun who killed cyclist handed suspended sentence
A motorist who admitted he was blinded by the sun when he struck and killed a cyclist in June last year has been given a suspended prison sentence.
Dr Vincent Cavaliere, aged 58, died in Leeds General Infirmary 11 days after he had been hit by 46-year-old Mike Buck, who had been driving a Land River Sport, reports the Yorkshire Post.
Bradford Crown Court heard that Dr Cavaliere, who was aged 58 and had two children, had been club doctor at Bradford City FC since 1992.
Michael Smith, prosecuting, said that both Buck and the cyclist had been travelling towards Ilkley on Moor Road on the evening of 22 June.
He told the court that despite the road having a 50mph speed limit, Buck had been “dazzled” by the sun, leading to him cleaning his windscreen, lowering his sun visor and reducing his speed to around 30mph.
He said: “At about 30mph up to the point of the collision Dr Cavaliere should have been in his view for about 20 seconds.
“It is clear from all the evidence taken together that the sunlight caused real visibility issues for the drivers.”
Another motorist driving on the same road described the sun as having been “the brightest he had ever seen it” and reduced his speed to 5mph.
Today (Fri) a “guilt-wracked” Buck, of Southfield Road, Burley-in-Wharfedale, was given a six-month prison sentence, suspended for a year, and ordered to do 250 hours unpaid work for the community after he admitted causing the doctor’s death by careless driving.
After the collision, Buck said that he had not seen Dr Cavaliere. When he was interviewed subsequently by police, he told officers he had been reasonably confident of the road being clear until he hit the cyclist, who landed on his bonnet.
Mr Smith added: “We acknowledge that on the evidence the defendant took some steps to deal with the difficult driving conditions but ultimately those steps were inadequate.”
Defending Buck, who had pleaded guilty to causing Mr Cavaliere’s death by careless driving, Paul Greaney QC, for Buck, denied his client had attempted to “wriggle out of his responsibilities.”
He said: “The defendant slowed down to well below the speed limit, but he acknowledges that he could have slowed down even more and that we suggest is the extent of his failing that evening.
“Mr Buck is a thoroughly decent man who regrets extremely deeply what has happened.
“It would not be an exaggeration in this case to say that Mr Buck expresses extreme remorse of an enduring nature.”
Sentencing him on Friday, Judge Jonathan Durham Hall QC said that the collision “should never have happened.”
He handed Buck a six-month prison sentence, suspended for a year, and ordered him to do 250 hours unpaid community work as well as banning him from driving for a year.
“The family have been subjected to lifelong damage and their grief, and perhaps anger, will last forever,” the judge said.
He added: “There are some, and it may be in this case, who will never be able to forgive you – although only in that perhaps will healing start – but you recognise also you will never be able to forgive yourself.”
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
- JMcL_Ireland 11 min 20 sec ago
I absolutely stand by my criticism of Elite (note: I'm not criticising the volunteer marshals). They charge an arm and a leg for these events but...
- chrisonabike 18 min 2 sec ago
Oh come on! Still 37 days (many of them working) to go - that's just anti-social!...
- Destroyer666 24 min 37 sec ago
There's a lot of good stuff here, but shoe reviews are still lagging on average when comparing to for example bike or tire reviews. Specs relating...
- galibiervelo 57 min 29 sec ago
Loved the Bastion in the flesh but Lemond's bike has the soul. Nice event and met some friends and contacts but like the magazine, it does promote...
- Rendel Harris 1 hour 3 min ago
I don't know if you know Richmond Park, the roads are vehicle roads with segregated pedestrian provision usually a metre or two off to the side,...
- chrisonabike 1 hour 50 min ago
Awaiting the next feckless driver asking the judge to delay the start of the sentence because "they owe a few more cyclists a proper goodbye"....
- Hirsute 3 hours 7 min ago
All in the article - road tax.
- chrisonabike 4 hours 21 min ago
Ah, but: in UK, if a motorist drives into you (or simply parks in a cycle lane, forcing you out into the path of another motorist) then the council...
- hawkinspeter 5 hours 23 min ago
You're right. I just use the main Long Ashton Rd to get between the A370 and Ashton Court/B3128. Looking at a map, Festival Way doesn't go far...
Add new comment
29 comments
A bit more context would help. Such as was this the first time the driver had been on the road, had he never seen a low sun before, was he wearing sun glasses as a prudent driver heading in to a sunset on a regular route would surely do? And is there anything covering driving in to low sun / sun set or sun rise? Shouldn't there be instruction in driver training to have sun glasses ready for such occasions and use sun visors - which by the way aren't fit for such occasions as they don't come down low enough ( because otherwsie they'd cover bits of the windscreen if they did ) -so why can't car makers install extendable visors? They are available as after market items. There's no reason why HM Govt cannot learn from even one accident and amend driver tuition and speak to can makers about the inadequacy of sun visors for low, strong sun
Or they could just adjust their speed to the conditions.
If I can't see very well or I don't know the road, I slow down as required.
Perhaps this is no longer part of the driving test
Highway Code section 93.
"Had he never seen a low sun before" Fucking what? I've seen the sun most days for the past 37 fucking years, so obviously I'm way smarter than this 46 year old moron who isn't aware that looking right at it makes it hard to see.
Stop apologising for this shit.
Total joke the sentance.
I had the question of sunlight blinding drivers on my driving test 29 years ago.
The 2013 onwards comes in at 2144 kg which is rather a lot more than some of the top 10 sellers in the UK. A Nissan leaf is hardly a normal car.
A third more mass is not a small bit more kinetic energy.
Others have pointed out the shape as well as increasing the risk to the other party.
This is the chopped bike frame to prevent it falling into someone's hands.
IMG_0603.JPG
Been there! Hit from behind by a car travelling at 40mph; broken ribs, and only later (after payment of compensation) displaced pelvis; see pics (that is how far the bike went after impact and stopping distance of the car. The driver is in the picture on the right. Driver was not even charged with anything but only warned about the state of his windscreen. He did not want it to go through his (his son's) insurance and the police advised him to pay for the damage to the bike (which was a write-off because you cannot trust carbon frames after impact). It cost him a lot in the end as I don't think the police or drivers realise how expensive high-end bikes are plus clothing, compensation for injuries, loss of amenity of using the bike, a spoiled planned and paid for weekend etc. I doubt he ever informed his insurance company (a crime). The driver was genuinely remorseful, but the biggest injury is the don't care attitude of Hampshire Constabulary and the dismissive attitude of the nurse in A&E which has left a bitter taste to this day.
IMG_0556.JPG
You should have taken down his plate, paid the few quid to find out who his insurer was and contacted them for him. Fuck what he did or didn't want.
"He said: “The defendant slowed down to well below the speed limit, but he acknowledges that he could have slowed down even more and that we suggest is the extent of his failing that evening."
Extent of his failing? You have got to be kidding me. As a list of the top of my head:
but,but,but..the driver said he's sorry..
..if a pedestrian walks into the path of a cyclist,you can be bankrupted or be sent to prison;
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/public-raise-36k-for-cyclist-who-...
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2017/sep/18/cyclist-charlie-all...
Part of it is an attitude that such an urban tank can engender, assuming that the only things that are going to hurt you are things that are bigger than your beheamoth, and those are easier to see.
Allows a more "plow on regardless" attitude.
I would have liked to have seen a longer ban. 3-5 years to show how dangerous this driving is.
Last couple of Sundays the final leg of our club ride has been a long straight, slightly uphill, 60mph A-road, directly into the winter sun. It is hard enough to see clearly without the added distraction of a smeary winsdscreen and yet the number of motorists driving past, far too close at or near the speed limit is really quite alarming.
Why is slowing down to account for conditions such a hard thing for people to do?
Why is slowing down to account for conditions such a hard thing for people to prosecutea gainst?
Have an A-road section like this on my commute in Winter, and it's the only bit that concerns me. Uncharacteristically, I try to keep as left as possible, and also flash 1W rear LED, but it probably doesn't compete with the sun too well.
The collision speed was relatively low - apparently hit from behind by a vehicle travelling at 30mph. So collision speed would have been less than this, assuming the cyclist was moving and hadn't stopped.
This raises the important question - what are the chances that Dr Cavaliere would have survived the crash had the driver been driving a 'normal' car and not an oversized 4*4?
Sorry but 30mph is 'speeding' and excessive speed, massively so, in fact SIX times faster than a careful driver would be going for the conditions! They might as well have had their eyes shut for all the view ahead they could see!
Define normal car, it's rather irrelevant because there are too many variables involved.
I'd say having a mass of 1/3 more than 'normal' is relevant to the physics of the situation.
Sorry but for a start the Land Rover Sport isn't a 1/3 more, Nissan Leaf 1580-1731 Range Rover Sport 1844-2020. were a person might be struck massively changes things, we cannot know from one crash to the next how much such a small increase in kinetic energy might have changed the outcome.
The vehicle type is irrelevant, motors are driven by criminals, even if they are larger they need not present any significant fear or pose any increased threat of harm if they are driven better. You can be snuffed out by a fiat 500 or a 40ton HGV, if the latter is driven correctly it can pose zero threat of harm to you taking into account everything you should do, if the Fiat 500 is driven in the same way as the killer then that could still have killed the cyclist!
Braking doesn't come into the equation as there was no braking, he wasn't aware of the person he killed until he'd struck him! If the judgement was that he and everyone else passing the driver just fine had 20 seconds to see Cavaliere then his 30mph was dangerous if he could not see ahead of him someone who was plain as day to other drivers!
I'm not disputing that the driver was too fast for the conditions - I fully agree. I know the road well - it's the Cow and Calf road, and it is a twisty and narrow road with lots of ups and downs. Not one to speed on.
My point is that a Landrover and their ilk are demonstrably more dangerous to pedestrians and cyclists than a, say, Ford Fiesta or similar because of their weight, height and bonnet/bumper shape. We have seen a 40% increase in sales of 'SUVs' in the last 10 years - as these are more dangerous to pedestrians and cyclists than a hatchback, estate car etc, this surely will contribute to an increase in road deaths relative to the amount that there would have been had these people bought smaller, less dangerous cars.
This is fundamentally the issue. All the ped safety features brought in c.2005 - high bonnet-line, void above the engine, steeply-raked windscreens conveniently don't apply to Chelsea tractors. If you're hit by one of those what typically happens is that you're pushed partly on to the bonnet in the initial impact and as the driver slows you fall back in front of the vehicle and get crushed at low speed. The whole point of the passenger car safety requirements is to scoop the pedestrian on to the bonnet and keep them there, with their head cushioned from impacting on the top of the engine.
According to the Tesla Cybertruck story pedestrian fatalities have increased 41% in the US since 2008, something the tweet author claims is partly attributable to the increased uptake of SUVs.
I was at a bus stop the other week, noticing a few cars go by and wondering why these massive bmw X series, audi Q series and those VW ones are allowed on the roads. There is no need for a vehicle that size.
This is no different to driving with drugs, alcohol or distracted by a mobile phone or obscured vision due to deliberately placing a tray to obscure your necessary view of the road, the potential and indeed actual consequences are exactly the same.
A Polish driver got 10 years for killing the occupents of a car whilst driving dangerously, this should be no different, the justice system yet again acts unlawfully in how it treats people on bikes when they are victims of heinous crimes compared to others. Truly sickening!
Yet another person who can't adapt to the conditions
This is on one of my routes. I was going to go out this way just now. I'm not going to bother. The sun is bright and low and so if I die, rather than getting a pittance of a sentence, they'll just totally get off.
1 year driving ban for a 'collision which should never have happened.'
Don't worry, there's that in depth review of road traffic safety and sentencing that's surely just about to happen.
I'm sure it was in the tory party manifesto, along with unicorns; the only problem is they're all liars. And they've promised it before.
My deepest sympathies to the family and friends of Dr Vincent Cavaliere.