Cyclist whose life was ruined by careless driver calls for harsher sentencing

blaming him for not wearing a helmet isnt a million miles away from the view the courts used to have on a rape victim that was wearing a short skirt!

will this madness ever end?

when I encounter dangerous driving if possible i make like I want to remonstrate with the driver and when the prick pulls over I simply make like I am about to punch him and whilst he is focused on my fist i am removing the ignition key. By the time he has noticed I have his key I am down the road with it looking for a drain or a ditch to throw it in unless of course they accept my generous offer of a reasonable 'fine' to have it awarded back to them. It is suprising how often these people pull over and even more suprising how many drivers give me a lot of room on the road if any driver wishes to use his vehichle as a weapon I wish to dissarm the fucker

Helmet law was invented here in the state of Victoria. There were four groups that got together for it, the transport accident commission, Vicroads, the department of Justice and most importantly and significantly, the RACV (Royal Automobile Society of Victoria).
In your own country one of the active groups that tries to put helmets on everybody is the GB equivalent of the RACV, the AA.
Elsewhere in Europe and the US it is mostly car manufacturers who desparately promote bicycle helmets.
This all says that it was about the DRIVERS to begin with. The WHOLE idea of helmets is, and always was, to take away responsability and accountability from the drivers.

In civil cases the reduction in copmpensation is based on the same principles for not wearing a seat belt (25% reduction if wear one would have stopped the injury, 12.5% reduction if it would have reduced it). But this could only apply to the head injuies obviously.

But I can't find anything in the CPS documents I have found that mentions safety equipment the victim was wearing or not.

As always the fact the driver only got four penalty points is a discrace. he should have had a decent length ban.

madness, injustice and just plain wrong! Let's hope British Cycling get some movement from the Government in respect to solving this situation.

I presume Old Ridgeback has the irony switch 'on' You should be able to go about your business, without being shot in exactly the same way you should be able to cycle without being hit by a motor vehicle in any public place, without having to dress for victim protection.

I have written to my MP (again) about sentencing guidelines with reference to this incident. May I urge all readers of this to do same?

Surely the victims injuries that affect him most stem from the head injury and not broken bones? If he had been wearing his helmet then perhaps the brain and eye wouldn't not have been sustained?

If you're in an area in London and catch a stray bullet not aimed at you, it's clearly your fault for going there. i live in an area with gun crime and an innocent lad was shot dead by a fully automatic weapon just last summer. Clearly it is my fault for choosing to live in such an area should something happen.

What chance would the victim in this instance have by appealing I wonder? And surely he should be due damages?

And noting the Chris Boardman commentary.

In parts of London there are shootings, so if I get shot passing through the area does the gunman get more leniency/I get less compensation, because I wasn't wearing a bullet-proof vest, in that part of town?

Just how does wearing a helmet stop you from being hit by a careless driver? That's surely the only way it can contribute to the punishment.

Following the same logic, a driver that knocks down a pedestrian should only get a slap on the wrist if the pedestrian wasn't wrapped in cotton wool.

Similarly, any whiplash injury claims from a car accident should be refused because there are neck braces designed to prevent such an injury. Doesn't matter that there's no legal requirement to wear one.

Talk about victim blaming.

Rob

I hope the civil action is a success and the perp' has to pay for his actions.

Clearly the law is not working here. I am unclear how in law a deliberate action the driver has chosen to make can be described as careless. Careless is forgetting to lock the car door, it is not making someone an invalid through poor judgement in a situation where your special training is supposed to kick in!

If I was carrying a loaded gun down the street, tripped and accidentally shot someone, would the courts be so lenient?

The Helmet thing comes up again and again. Can someone not produce a video that can be used court to illustrate the low level of protection a helmet gives in situations where you do not fall off your bike.

Quote:

its your own fault

But of course, everyone knows that cyclists are poor, they can't afford a car, that they jump red lights, terrorise pedestrians.

The only good cyclist is a dead cyclist, i wouldn't be surprised if the Daily Mail were to offer a bounty on the scalp of every dead cyclist.

The driver admitted it and only got a slightly larger penalty than not wearing his seatbelt or being on a mobile phone.

Total nonsense and something needs changed. It should have NO bearing on the outcome what the rider was wearing.

Whats next, expecting road cyclists to wear full off road body protection and if you don't its your own fault