Driver in Mary Bowers case acquitted of dangerous driving, found guilty of careless driving

F me...i want to cry.
I urge you all you write to your MP (its dead easy www.theyworkforyou.com).
I'v had a right good moan at mine about punishments for drivers and road saftey and ended up getting invited to commision thing.

The courts growing a pair and that only happen with political support.

The sentence for the driver by no means reflects the damage that he caused. I agree hands-free phones should be illegal also, though I disagree about sat-nav devices that attach to the windscreen.

I'd like to hope that the victim of this horrible incident can recover, though she may never do so.

If the truck driver has any moral values, he'll never get behind the wheel again.

Shamefully inadequate justice

Disgusting. Utterly disgusting, both this and the car-door killer. They just don't give a fuck, do they?

Sarah, I am so sorry that you had to be a witness. I was not intending on putting blame on anyone, especially not Mary. I apologise if my clumsiness of phrase caused offence.

Unfortunately it will take someone really famous to be killed/nearly killed for the general public to really take note. This is a real travesty!

My apologies too, I'd heard the "lifetime ban" from a twitter feed.

On returning to this thread having ridden home, I now see it's only 8 months.

In no other mode of transport would this kind of thing be tolerated. Can you imagine if 3000 people a year in the UK alone were killed in plane or train crashes? That's like 10 jumbo jets crashing every single year. But cos it's cars and it's a "way of life" and a "culture" that we're somehow beholden to, it's just accepted as being "one of those things". The sentiments here are exactly the same as for the thread on the cyclist killed by the car driver opening his door into him.

Whilst appreciating the anger and frustration the majority feel about the outcome of this and similar cases, I concur completely with Colin's sentiment that it is possible, given that we don't know all the circumstantial facts involved in the collision, that Ms. Bowers' proficiency (or lack thereof) may have contributed to the sad event.

One of the problems (along side poor infrastructure, us-and-them culture etc) is that, given that literally anyone can get on a bike and ride on the road, there is a massive range of ability and awareness out there demonstrated by people riding bikes. Yes, the weight of burden of responsibility lies with the driver of any vehicle, but I strongly believe that we cyclists have to take responsibility for own actions as well. That means being aware of potential danger and positioning oneself correctly at all times.

We all see ignorance of this demonstrated by bike riders every day and I feel part of the solution is more promotion of cycle proficiency training, to adults as well as children.

I anticipate this may be an unpopular stance on here, and many readers will believe they are seasoned enough to be beyond advanced training. But I will say this is naive and arrogant, because until one tries Bike Right training, has an instructor ride behind them and has habitual errors pointed out to them, it is impossible to be fully aware of how one appears to other road users.

I'll get down off me soap box now and finish by expressing my deepest sympathy and condolences to Mary, Keith Harding, the other 117 lost in 2012 and their loved ones and hope that the stats are kinder in 2013...

While I think that the laws of the road do not adequately reflect the harm of bad driving (whether it be a driver harming another driver, or a driver harming a pedestrian or a driver harming a cyclist). I think people should reflect a little on the facts or lack of them in this case.

I wish that I knew the circumstances before passing my own judgement. Was he indicating a left turn? Was she cycling in his blind spot? How was she hit by the truck? I ride the streets of London all the time and there are so many cyclists that are at risk from their own cycling that I cannot pour judgement on the motorists themselves.

If Bowers was riding in a unsafe position, unaware that she was in danger, then the driver is only guilty of careless driving. As it states, hands-free mobiles are not illegal, no more so than having a conversation in a car, or singing along to the radio.

I think the publicity that Mary Bowers has given road safety is a great thing. It should highlight the dangers of cycling and dangerous driving, but we should not loose site of the fact that we share the roads. Drivers and cyclists all need to ensure that they are properly educated on road use. But if we are to take things forward we need to take action in the right way (by which I mean that we don't jump down the throat of every motorist involved in a bicycle accident, but ask questions about the way it happened and how situations can be avoided).

We all want justice, but in this case I'm not sure the judge could issue dangerous driving as a cause, because the only tort that can be proved is that the driver may not have been as attentive as he might have been, and so was careless (i.e. not taking care that his action did not endanger lives - passive), rather than having taken an action which endangered another road users life (active).

In the meantime I wish Mary well, and hope that she makes a full recovery sometime soon. My thoughts go out to her family at this difficult time.

As has been mentioned in posts above, the problem lies with the jury - far too many drivers who've empathised with the guilty party and let him off with a slap on the wrist.
If there's to be a review of sentencing on cycling related accidents it's going to have to deal with this as a priority - the jury has in effect tied one hand behind the judge's back, preventing them from imposing a just sentence.
I wonder how any of the jury members would feel if it was a member of their family that was injured, they should all hang their heads in shame as justice wasn't meted out (yet again).
The comparison with the Rothko painting sentencing is worth reiterating, damage to property should never be greater than damage to human life. That jury panel are just inhumane.

Re enforcing bans: true. The punishment for driving whilst banned should be sufficiently severe as to be a powerful deterrent. (eg a significant custodial sentence plus community service plus the obvious extension of any ban to lifetime.)

An 8 month ban? Sickening. And all too typical.

This just reflects peoples attitudes on the road. Drivers will happily squeeze past me, not look, etc. Anyone who rides a lot especially on larger roads knows how common it is for people to endanger our lives, because they are either impatient or just not paying attention. In most peoples minds this is fine and is just like speeding a bit, etc. So when these tragic 'accidents' happen people see it as an inevitable consequence of us being on the roads, not because of any real fault of the driver, hence the 8 month ban etc. I am not sure what you have to do with a car or lorry to be considered dangerous?

We need a massive culture change where people will be content to wait behind a bike for 20 or 30 seconds, or will let us change lanes when we indicate rather than stepping on the gas to shut us out! Just a bit of patience and consideration (we also need to cycle with consideration) In my mind unless we have many many billions to spend on a fit for purpose cycle infrastructure (not going to happen) crappy cycle lanes and shared paths are a total red herring for people who use cycling for a large part of their transport.

edit: As the reply below correctly said, its not right for me to judge this particular case as I do not know the details. My point of view above is due to poor driving I see every week, and because of the the numerous people who have been taken out and killed in pretty damning circumstances. On clear straight roads you can kill someone, even fail to stop at the scene and still get only a couple of years ban (just have a search of the news archives). A guy at work was given brain damage, broken neck etc when someone drove into the back of him and the police showed such a lack of interest they even failed to process it properly so they could not charge the guy! Someone even drove into my girlfriend from behind the other day (thankfully at slow speed) just because they were too close and not paying attention.

Don't the family have leave to appeal the sentence within a time limit? don't know, just asking.

I wonder what evidence it would take for a jury to return a guilty verdict of dangerous driving.

Surely, being distracted on a phone call and not checking mirrors and view through the windows is dangerous?

It's really sad that the 12 members of the jury have so little respect for the value of the promising life and career lost in that tragic crash. A fine and an eight month ban is no deterrent to encourage HGV drivers to clean up their act..

A lifetime ban or 8 month ban, that's only in the UK. He is free to go back to Romania and carry on driving lorries Heaven forbid a Judge in this country were to grow a set...

Sarah Barth, please pass on our best wishes to Mary and her family. I'm sure i speak for the whole of Road.cc

Well, it's good to see a lifetime ban. (Why was it reported that the judge could only impose a fine?)

To be honest I think the ban the important bit. Fines are neither here nor there and I have doubts as to the value of a custodial sentence in these cases.

The problem we need to address is how the law is used to *prevent* these things happening in the first place. It needs to have power to address bad practices of all road users before people get killed. 99% of these tragedies are, after all, just perfect storms of multiple bad practices; incompetence rather than malice.

Just seen that the sentence is a fine of £2700 and a driving ban for life.
Considering that he got done for careless rather than dangerous, that's well up at the upper end.

[edit]
Having said that, I still think that the penalties should be far stiffer but at the moment that's about the limit of what the judge can impose. It's not sufficient but it's a step in the right direction.

Hands free mobile, but yes. Also admitted not properly checking his windows and mirrors.

If she had been killed, and it was death by careless driving, then it would be up to 7 years in jail.

But she survived (in a way - she will probably never again be properly conscious) so he gets a fine and a short ban.