A driver who deliberately reversed at a cyclist, knocking him off his bike and injuring him, has escaped jail, instead being handed a community order.
Chroniclelive.co.uk reports that Rhys Bell, aged 22, had sworn at two cyclists ahead of him on a country rode, yelling at them to get out of the way.
As he passed the riders, one slapped his car – with Bell, from Cramlington, Northumberland, then stopping and reversing back at them, knocking one of them from his bike, before driving off.
The cyclist who was knocked off his bike, Alexander Turner, sustained grazes and bruising as a result of the incident which happened at around 1330 hours on Sunday 4 October 2020, and his bike was written off.
A jury at Newcastle Crown Court acquitted Bell of dangerous driving, but found him guilty of the less serious charge of careless driving as well as failure to stop.
Sentencing Bell to a 12-month community order and banning him from driving for six months, Recorder Andrew Latimer told him: “You swore at Alexander Turner and told him loudly to get out of the road.
“As you drove off he slapped the side window of your vehicle and began to cycle away from you. The incident could have ended there with you going in opposite directions.
“What happened next was your fault. You chose to reverse and go back to speak to him. I'm sure, having heard the trial, you reversed at speed and in doing so you wanted to make your presence felt.
“He saw you reversing and the GPS printout shows he increased his speed to try to avoid the impact.
“You collided with his bike. You knocked him to the ground and reversed over the rear wheel of that bike, coming within inches of his foot.
“He was shocked and believed the vehicle was about to reverse over him. I'm sure that's exactly what he feared. It was a frightening experience.
“You should have stayed at the scene at that stage. In fact, you drove off. You left him on the ground on a country road.
“Four days later you handed yourself in to the police, probably when you realised they would be looking for you.”
In a victim impact statement, Mr Turner said: “Beyond my superficial physical injuries and damage to my bike I've never feared for my life in such a way.
“After the incident I was shocked and angry but relieved he had not run over me.”
Bell was also ordered to pay Mr Turner £600 in compensation and fined £400.
The circumstances of the incident, and the charges brought against Bell have attracted comment on social media, with @CycleGaz saying on Twitter: “How in the hell can deliberately reversing into someone with a car and injuring them be only careless? It's a premeditated conscious action using a vehicle as a weapon?”
Add new comment
29 comments
Good grief is this what the forum has come to ?
Road cc is this what you really want ?
Off topic but we appear to have gone there (100 posts+ is often a sign) - is no-one old or young enough to remember Star Wars?
Another driver who has proven they shouldn't be allowed to drive ever again...
Dangerous for us
But only Careless for them
It's one of the changes to the driving test, they've ditched reversing round a corner and inserted reversing into a cyclist instead. He was found careless because he only hit one of them.
Given the actions and physical / psychological injuries, that should also have had a charge of assualt causing ABH or GBH.
it should have, but if the jury werent convinced that reversing into a cyclist who was cycling away from the driver passed the threshold for dangerous driving, I wouldnt have held out much hope for any assault charges, though if the local papers comments section is indicative of the jury, we're lucky they didnt find the cyclist guilty.
would be interesting to hear what the defense came up with to excuse their clients behaviour, sometimes I think those using a car as a weapon cases hinge on knowing the drivers intent, like if he'd shouted Im going to run you over, and then does that, thats the evidence of the intent, if the driver simply runs you over, you dont know if they intended to do it, even if we can assume it, and its often what the prosecution has to overcome in the juries minds.
"I reversed to speak with the cyclist but some mud caused me to skid into him".
well yep, but explain it to a jury who seem to think wearing lycra makes you automatically in the wrong
Is it mandatory to include your IQ in your user name? Asking for a friend.
Errm - no.
Feels like I've being saying this for years, probably because I have, but where is the comprehensive review of road law that was supposed to address cases like this?
This is a travesty, an almost complete denial of justice, when a driver uses his vehicle as a weapon but it is only seen as careless driving.
I've been saying this for years too; literally incredible.
Cyclist hits a pedestrian that steps out in the road, and she unfortunately dies. Deemed dangerous not careless. Gets 18mth prison sentence. Driver stops then reverses car into cyclists. Deemed not dangerous, but careless. Driver gets suspended sentence. Dickheads on the jury and one regular dickhead commenter here say that using a 2 ton weapon is self defence when the victim dares to slap that 2 ton weapon with their hand.
Since juries are showing such reluctance to convict motorists should the lawyers acting for a cyclist be challenging any jury members who have a driving licence?
I don't think that's a thing in our legal system, like it is in the US.
How about going the other way and have juries just composed of driving instructors?
Ooh that might be good.
As long as they aren't all Ashley Neal adherents.
Are you sure you're quoting the correct CycleGaz twitter account...?
I'm sure if he had reverse-rammed a police car, it might be a bit more than a careless charge.
I think the CPS needs to update their website as the current information seems inaccurate. I suggest something like this:
Don't forget "killing someone" - after all there's "causing death by careless driving". You probably shouldn't read the starting points and mitigating factors either if you're of an irritable disposition and knowing that often the CPS just goes for "careless" rather than "dangerous".
This shows the justice our families can expect if we're KSI'd- a joke non-sentence
One view I saw
"I'd guess that the driver claimed that he reversed to talk/argue with the cyclist and the collision was not deliberate."
Not sure how that fits with the statement
“You should have stayed at the scene at that stage. In fact, you drove off. You left him on the ground on a country road."
And: I bet £600 compensation wouldn't replace his bike.
I assume £600 was compo for the trauma and the bike would be insurance.
How the AF is that "careless"???
He didn't kill the cyclist, ipso facto careless.
The above Twitter comment expresses my exact thoughts.