A lorry driver who caused “permanent and irreversible” injuries to a cyclist he struck while overtaking directly towards two oncoming HGVs, in a manoeuvre described as a “terrible miscalculation” by his barrister, has been handed a four-month prison sentence suspended for two years and banned from driving for 12 months.
James Templeton admitted causing serious injury by careless driving after hitting a cyclist, leaving him hospitalised for six months with a string of serious injuries, on the A629 Halifax Road near the village of Cullingworth, West Yorkshire, in March 2023, the Yorkshire Post reports.
This week in Bradford Crown Court, a witness to the collision – a brief clip of which, filmed by the cyclist’s rear-facing camera, was shown to the court – said that 66-year-old lorry driver Templeton was not giving the cyclist, who was wearing high-visibility clothing, “enough room” as he attempted to overtake him.
The witness then said that they saw the man’s bike “fire off” into the bushes, as he rolled down the road following the collision.
After “hearing a bang”, Templeton stopped his lorry and later told another witness that he had “just clipped a cyclist”. The 66-year-old also told police that two other lorry drivers were approaching in the opposite lane at the time, and that he assumed that had passed the cyclist.
The cyclist suffered several serious injures in the collision, including damage to his spinal cord, a fractured pelvis, a skull fracture, several broken ribs, and a collapsed lung, and spent the next six months undergoing treatment in hospital.
> Woman who drank "five pints and measure of spirit" before killing cyclist on drive home from pub jailed for six years
Judge Sophie McKone told the court this week that the cyclist and his wife’s lives were “now unrecognisable” since the incident, and that he had gone from being a hard-working, independent man to one who is now “completely dependent” on his wife for even the most basic needs.
The judge added that the victim required a wheelchair to go out and is in “constant pain”, telling Templeton that “his and wife’s lives will never be the same again”.
In a victim impact statement read to the court, the cyclist explained how his life had been turned “upside down” by the collision, and that, without work, he now felt “useless” and that he “no longer has a purpose”.
Defending Templeton, barrister Darren Finnegan described the lorry driver as a “fundamentally decent man who was profoundly remorseful for his actions”, adding that he had not renewed his HGV licence since the collision and was in the process of surrendering the operator’s licence for his ground works business.
Finnegan argued that his client, in attempting to pass the cyclist, had “miscalculated terribly” and that this misjudgement had “tragic consequences”.
The barrister also told the court that an immediate prison sentence would impact Templeton’s partner and son, and added that his client had a history heart attacks, including a mini stroke since the collision.
> Motorist who killed cyclist in “a few seconds of very bad driving and inattention” handed suspended prison sentence and five-year driving ban
Judge McKone accepted that Templeton had admitted the offence at the earliest opportunity and that his remorse was genuine, but argued that he had been carrying out an unsafe overtake which left the cyclist with “permanent and irreversible” injuries.
Noting that the sentencing guidelines for the offence of causing serious injury by careless driving indicate a minimum of six months in custody after a trial, the judge however concluded on Wednesday that Templeton was entitled to a third off his sentence due to his guilty plea.
McKone also decided that the lorry driver’s four-month term should be suspended for two years, taking into account his age, plea, lack of previous convictions, and his personal mitigation.
She also disqualified him from driving for 12 months and imposed a six-month home curfew between the hours of 7pm and 6am.
Nevertheless, Judge McKone conceded that such a sentence would appear to the victim and his family to be “totally and utterly inadequate”, and fail to reflect what they had suffered and what they would continue to suffer for the rest of their lives.
> Suspended sentence for drunk cyclist who knocked pedestrian unconscious, as Mr Loophole uses case to call for new laws and bicycle number plates
This sentencing of a motorist who left a cyclist with serious injuries comes in the same week a drunk cyclist, who hit two women on a pavement in Cheshire before riding off, leaving one of the victims unconscious, with broken teeth and an injury to her little finger that later had to be amputated, was also given a suspended jail sentence.
Carwyn Thomas pleaded guilty to two charges of causing bodily harm by wanton or furious driving and appeared before a judge at Chester Crown Court, who called his actions “shameful” and sentenced the drunk cyclist to a 14-month prison sentence, suspended for two years.
That particular case has been leapt on this week by certain sections of the media, with Nick Freeman, the lawyer known by his Mr Loophole nickname and famous for obtaining not guilty verdicts for celebrities charged with driving offences, appearing on TalkTV to make the case for updated legislation and cyclists to be required to display a number plate.
“If you don’t have legislation and you don't make people accountable then they’re going to do whatever they want,” Freeman said.
“It would be like taking number plates off cars, people would drive dangerously.”
Add new comment
25 comments
If we are not willing to punish those who drive dangerously when they cause serious harm because prison is deemed damaging to the them and their families, we have to punish all those who we detect driving dangerously much more severely. A years driving ban for sny one close passing a vulnerable road user, and immediate prison for anyone caught driving with a licence ban for the duration of the ban.
And a perfect example for the recent set of discussions re insurance for cyclists...
People complaining about <£1000 damage to a car;
Heres someone who will need several £1000/week in care for the rest of their life...
(IMHO injuries sound like needing 24/7 expert care; 168 hours in a week, 40 hour shifts = minimum 5 carers; add in some allowance for holidays, admin, sickness and at least some of the time needing multiple carers and you now need 6-7; Ok at that point you move into a care home so carer's can be shared; But I suspect you still need at least 1 carer per resident at this level of injury - so £1k/week just to cover salary before any other costs (employing someone is usually ~2x salary)
So need £50k/year to cover employing carer. And it wouldn't surprise me if you could easily double that.
£100k * 20 (big enough investment pot to cover at sustainable 4% return) = £2m. (For a 'minor oups, I clipped a cyclist' incident...)
The driver was very lucky to get away with such a light sentence.
I found it disturbing an HGV driver was aloud to continue driving after having a series of minor strokes. Friends and family have had one of these 'minor' strokes, though not incapacitating, in the moment of them occurring they are not quite there. Being 'not quite there' for a few seconds in an HGV could mean death for a lot of people, why was this not flagged by his doctor to him and to the DVLA for review?
Minor point of pedantry, but I'm not sure judges 'argue' things, do they? Isn't that the lawyers' job? The judge more 'concludes' things, at which point there's no more argument to be had.
"The barrister also told the court that an immediate prison sentence would impact Templeton’s partner and son, and added that his client had a history heart attacks, including a mini stroke since the collision."
If the driver wanted to avoid any impact on their partner and son... maybe they should have considered driving a lethal vehicle safely?
Could people with multiple children/dependants then get away with other serious crimes...?
Tough shit.
"causing serious injury by careless driving" - in an HGV. Longer ban, shouldn't be allowed to drive one ever again. He should also quit the self-pity.
Some community service wouldn't go amiss either, perhaps tidying roadside rubbish while vehicles whizz past a few inches from his shoulder. Then maybe he'd be genuinely remorseful.
As usual, more concern for the family of the arrogant and impatient driver who has been caught, than the life changing injuries, mental & physical, of the person cycling.
Driving in the UK isn't a Right, it's a mental illness.
The usual life sentence for the cyclist and .......nothing.
And in the nominations for "Understatement of the f-ing century..."
I read that initially and was horrified at what I saw as the callousness of that statement until I realised it could have 3 different meanings and the one I had attributed was probably not how it was meant. It's impossible to tell the meaning from the written sentence.
Just clipped a cyclist - it could have been much worse, I could have run over a dog
Just clipped a cyclist - hardly catching him at all.
Just clipped a cyclist - not 20 seconds ago.
I suppose…
Except as Hlab has said. That clip that the driver has a perception of can be quite serious for the cyclist when physics is factored in. I know several cyclists who have been clipped and they've had some really serious injuries. In the same way when I shouted at a motorist who had just close passed me. He stopped to tell me he had given plenty of room. I told him he was close enough for me to slap his car and my arms were obviously not 1.5m long. He huffed and puffed and after a short standoff drove away.
Totally agree. One man's clip is another man's killer blow. Motorists that close pass me rarely perceive their dangerous manoeuvres to be anything other than perfectly safe whilst I perceive them as potentially lethal.
My comment was saying nothing more than the words as shown in the original article have multiple interpretations. My initial interpretation when I read it was along the lines of it was only a cyclist and I was horrified at how callous that was. It took a few seconds to realise that although he may possibly have been callous as well as dangerously incompetent, it is more likely he meant he had recently clipped a cyclist. Still dangerous and incompetent and imho deserving of greater punishment though.
I think it's less 'perceive then as totally safe' and more 'just don't give a s**t' (because nothing of consequence will happen to them).
I had exactly the same conversation with someone. They couldn't quite fathom how the fact they didn't hit me didn't mean they gave me enough space. I whacked his car with a bent arm he was so close.
Its a ludicrous terminology as a 'clip' with a metal object at tens of meters per second is essentially equivalent to laying onto them with a steel baseball bat!
He maybe did just clip the cyclist or felt he did but when you're driving an object 20x the size or more thats all it takes to do serious damage, its called physics
One day, being sorry for doing things that ruin peoples lives won't be enough. One day you will actually have to not do the thing that was really really fucking stupid/dangerous to be able to avoid serious punishment.
I constantly have people overtake me on my bike when its not safe. They often don't pass me too closely but overtake when there isn't a chance they can see its clear in the other direction. Overtaking on corners. Overtaking on hills near the top. People who come flying around country lanes far too fast considering they are barely a single lane.
All of these incidents could end up in court with a driver being very apologetic about their "miscalculation" or "moment of madness". When you roll the dice dozens of times every journey, its intentionally bad driving that has just become normal because you have got away with it.
Imagine if we just treated any other crime in the same way. Domestic abuse. "Well, she only went to the police this time so it was probably just this one time and hes definitely a stand up guy before this and i'm sure he is very sorry and won't do it again".
To be fair, the driver in question has not renewed his HGV license.
Probably because he knows the Traffic Commissioners are unlikely to allow an immediate renewal. Sort of jumping before he is pushed?
I know that's sarcasm, but I've read news coverage of domestic abuse cases where that really was the defence.
Poor choice of comparison as domestic abuse has a history of being treated even more leniently than road crimes.
Exactly this. Dangerous and anti-social driving has become the norm for quite a few drivers.