Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

Community order for hit-and-run driver who left cyclist with broken pelvis

James McIntyre also escaped driving ban following incident in Derbyshire earlier this year

A hit-and-run driver who left a cyclist with a broken cyclist when he hit him from behind has been handed a community order by magistrates.

James McIntyre, aged 24 and a bricklayer by trade, also escaped a driving ban after pleading guilty to driving without due care and attention and failing to stop following the incident in Belper on 19 May this year, reports Staffordshire Live.

Sentenced at South Derbyshire Magistrates’ Court, he was given a 12-month community order under which he will have to undertake 60 hours of unpaid work, fined an unreported amount, and had his driving licence endorsed with 10 penalty points.

McIntyre, from Overseal, was driving his Ford Transit van when he hit the cyclist, who in a statement read out in court recalled how he was thrown in the air when the van struck him from behind, his head hitting the ground as he landed and the impact fracturing his pelvis.

The motorist failed to stop at the scene, and passers-by looked after the cyclist, who also sustained a grazed knee and sprained wrist, before paramedics arrived and he was taken to hospital.

The victim said that since the crash he cannot accompany his children to school, and the collision has led to anxiety over getting back on his bike.

In mitigation, the court was told that McIntyre had a clean driving licence and believed he had clipped another vehicle, although he agreed that even if that had been the case he should have stopped at the scene.

Sentencing McIntyre, magistrates expressed concern regarding the extent of the victim’s injuries, but accepted the grounds for mitigation, including a testimonial from his employer as to his character, in not imposing a custodial sentence.

 

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.

Add new comment

21 comments

Avatar
Heinrich999 | 2 years ago
2 likes

This is a ridiculously light sentence. Yet again, the cyclist is an underclass who deserves less justice . Am I right that any citizen can challenge an unduly light sentence?

Avatar
OldRidgeback replied to Heinrich999 | 2 years ago
2 likes

It's an appalling case. It's depressing that the person who caused such a serious injury shuld get away with such a light sentence. A ban from driving of at least two years plus a compulsory retest would be a start.

Avatar
Muddy Ford | 2 years ago
3 likes

But we must push through the law to protect us from killer cyclists..... 

Avatar
steaders1 | 2 years ago
3 likes

Ridiculous

Sack the magistrates for incompetence

They should be setting sentences as a deterrent, this is less than a slap on the wrist and does not send the correct messages at all

Avatar
Tom_77 | 2 years ago
5 likes

Now that there is an offence of Causing Serious Injury by Careless or Inconsiderate Driving, hopefully we won't see so many drivers keeping their licenses after mowing down vunerable road users.

Draft guidelines call for a minimum 12 month disqualification - https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/offences/magistrates-court/item/cau...

Avatar
wtjs replied to Tom_77 | 2 years ago
3 likes

Now that there is an offence of Causing Serious Injury by Careless or Inconsiderate Driving, hopefully we won't see so many drivers keeping their licenses after mowing down vunerable road users

All that means is that the police/ CPS will refuse to use it, and will continue to charge under 'Not Quite Absolutely Perfect Driving', so that drivers aren't unduly inconvenienced by significant penalties

Avatar
EK Spinner | 2 years ago
15 likes

"believed he had clipped another vehicle, although he agreed that even if that had been the case he should have stopped at the scene"

So his defence was that he is so incompetent at driving that he cannot distinguish between a car and a cyclist, willingly drives in such a manner that he cannot safely pass this cyclist that he thinks is the size of a car, collides with them and knowingly drove away hoping to not be traced.

Tell me again why he still has a licence

Avatar
hawkinspeter replied to EK Spinner | 2 years ago
7 likes

EK Spinner wrote:

"believed he had clipped another vehicle, although he agreed that even if that had been the case he should have stopped at the scene"

So his defence was that he is so incompetent at driving that he cannot distinguish between a car and a cyclist, willingly drives in such a manner that he cannot safely pass this cyclist that he thinks is the size of a car, collides with them and knowingly drove away hoping to not be traced.

Tell me again why he still has a licence

It's the WAR AGAINST MOTORISTS, innit?

Avatar
Car Delenda Est replied to EK Spinner | 2 years ago
2 likes

Because life is a privilege not a right

Avatar
eburtthebike replied to Car Delenda Est | 2 years ago
0 likes

Car Delenda Est wrote:

Because life is a privilege not a right

As opposed to driving, which is a right, not a privilege.

Avatar
brooksby | 2 years ago
14 likes

Oh come on surprise

This is f-ing ridiculous.

No f-f-ing driving ban?!?

(and even ten points will be meaningless, because next time he gets points he'll just claim exceptional hardship)

Avatar
S13SFC | 2 years ago
12 likes

Huge claim against the driver via his insurance company will help mend the wrongs.

I did that after getting twatted and the OB saying there was insufficient evidence to prosecute. 

I ended up with a lovely 5 figure payout after pursuing it with a brief.

Avatar
wtjs | 2 years ago
7 likes

The aspect which attracts my derision is the desperation to accept any excuse no how pathetic so they can say something as an excuse for not imposing deterrent penalties. Obviously, he didn't think 'he had clipped another vehicle' and is lying, or some shyster lawyer is lying for him. Anybody who cannot tell he has hit the rear of a cyclist would be obviously guilty of driving while paying no attention at all. He should have received an immediate ban so that he would appreciate that a penalty was intended- now he can proceed to close-pass as many cyclists as he chooses and the police would decline to take any proper action 'because he could be banned'. What is behind all this is the assumption that cyclists must expect to be hit from time to time, as a penalty for being on the roads, causing traffic jams etc etc., and that drivers are expected to hit the odd one or two. We all know the prevalent attitude from the recent tragic case of the Welsh national competitor whose serious injury was described as 'an accident' and who 'collided with a car'!

Avatar
eburtthebike | 2 years ago
6 likes

"A hit-and-run driver who left a cyclist with a broken cyclist........."

And he still didn't get a custodial sentence? 

If you'd like a proof-reader, my rates are quite reasonable.

Staggeringly lenient sentence considering the damage and the pathetic excuse.

Avatar
Sriracha replied to eburtthebike | 2 years ago
1 like

You know when it's MacMichael!

Avatar
the little onion | 2 years ago
6 likes

Tell me again why cyclists need to be registered.......

 

Institutionally anti-cyclist

Avatar
PRSboy | 2 years ago
14 likes

Magistrates. Seriously.  Get a grip.

He drove into another road user and left the scene.  10 points.  And not even a driving ban??  Ah, I see, because he had a clean license and thought he'd clipped another vehicle. Thats ok then.

This is just bollocks, on so many levels.

But anyway, back to worrying about killer cyclists.

Avatar
chrisonabike replied to PRSboy | 2 years ago
3 likes

No previous driving convictions.  And he got a glowing testimonial from someone who was hoping not to lose his labour / the investment in training him could give a dispassionate account of his character!

In the same way I'm sure the driver has to drive to work.  So it would be economic stupidity to deprive him of his car and therefore work so we don't get the taxes.  Even worse he might not get another job and then we'd have to support him on benefits.  This also explains why we don't send drivers to prison if we can help it - it's doubly expensive.

Avatar
stealfwayne | 2 years ago
5 likes

Thats rubbish - good luck to all riders the  in Derbyshire and surrounding areas. 

Avatar
carlosdsanchez | 2 years ago
2 likes

Deserved a ban at least really.  Couldn't be allowed to suffer "unreasonable hardship" though...

Avatar
Flintshire Boy | 2 years ago
7 likes

.

Complete joke.

.

Latest Comments