- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Tubeless valves
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
news
Statue of Justice, Old Bailey (licensed CC BY 2.0 on Flickr by Ronnie Macdonald).jpgHit-and-run uninsured and unlicensed driver who seriously injured cyclist avoids jail
A judge has told an unlicensed and uninsured driver who seriously injured a cyclist than fled the scene that he had escaped jail “by the skin of your teeth.” In response to the case, the national cycling charity Cycling UK has repeated its call on the government to make good on its pledge to reform sentencing in road traffic cases.
The male cyclist sustained life-changing injuries when he was hit by a car driven by 23-year-old Brandon Tate in Washington, Tyne & Wear on 16 June last year, reports the Sunderland Echo.
The motorist, from South Shields, failed to stop but reportedly returned to the scene on foot shortly afterwards to ask how the victim was faring, but failed to call the emergency services, South Tyneside Magistrates’ Court heard.
He then left again, and sent his step-sister and her two children, all of whom had been passengers in the borrowed Peugeot car at the time of the crash, back to the scene.
The step-sister, who was described as “distraught,” took 15 minutes to call 999, with the court told that she possibly delayed through not wishing to implicate Tate.
The cyclist sustained injuries to his foot and leg, including a damaged artery, and was in hospital for 12 days afterwards.
Grace Taylor, prosecuting, said: “He decided to hold back and not take the bend. The Peugeot came around the bend on the wrong side of the road and collided with him.
“The first contact was the front bumper, which hit his knee, and the wheel hit his foot.
“He was ejected from the bike, and came to rest on the other side of the road. The Peugeot was nowhere to be seen.
“He was crawling along and he saw the defendant walking, and he asked if he was alright. [The victim] said that he needed an ambulance.
“He said he then heard the sound of car wheels screeching. He then saw a woman and two children.”
Tate, who had no prior convictions, admitted failing to stop after an accident, driving without insurance and driving without a licence.
District Judge Kathryn Meek sentenced him to an 18-month community order and ordered him to undertake 250 hours of unpaid work.
She told him: “You leave for your own reasons, your own cowardly reasons. There’s so many things that you have done wrong here, and I don’t mean bad decisions, criminally wrong. It must have been clear to you there were significant injuries.
“You panicked and you panicked because you knew you shouldn’t have been driving the car, you knew you shouldn’t have been in the car.
“You went off, leaving the injured person and two young children and your step-sister at the scene, having to deal with it.
“Your step-sister was, presumably, torn about how to deal with the situation,” she added. “You are so lucky this wasn’t worse.”
Tate was also banned from driving for 18 months, and was ordered to pay costs of £85 and a £95 victim surcharge.
Duncan Dollimore, head of campaigns at the charity Cycling UK, told road.cc: “It’s nearly seven years since the [fthen] Secretary of State for Justice Chris Grayling promised a full review of road traffic offences and penalties, but there’s been scant action to progress this since.
“Tougher penalties for ‘hit and run’ drivers who leave the scene of a collision where they knew, or ought to have known, that the collision was likely to have resulted in serious or fatal injury, should have been looked at within this review, and is something Cycling UK has repeatedly called for.
“The maximum penalty for that offence is six months custody, which is perfectly adequate in most cases, but where a victim is left in need of urgent medical attention yet the driver flees without calling for assistance, delaying the provision of a breath test, the courts should have greater sentencing powers.
“There has to be consequences for running away rather than remaining at the scene, calling for help, providing a breath test and co-operating, otherwise there’s almost a perverse incentive to leave.
“The government can take the first step to fixing this and other anomalies with our road traffic laws by doing what it promised in 2014 and reviewing traffic offences and penalties.
“Over 12,000 people have died on our roads since they made that commitment, and further delay is simply disrespectful to the victims of road crashes and their families,” he added.
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.
Latest Comments
- David9694 38 min ago
And I asked the store clerk what is the one thing that every city resident wants?
- Mr Blackbird 35 min 33 sec ago
Susan Hall deserves a huge amount of respect. Had she not been a halfwit, she would have, won the election and made a terrific Mayor of London.
- the little onion 1 hour 26 min ago
How about spending the money on infrastructure? It's the ONLY thing that makes people feel safe, which is the biggest barrier to cycling....
- cmedred 1 hour 32 min ago
Dan, Dan, Dan: "Ironically co-authored by a former BBC fact-checker" would suggest that BBC fact-checking is usually stellar. One could argue,...
- dubwise 2 hours 7 min ago
Thanks to Rendel and Simon for the suggestions. All the best to all for 2025
- David9694 2 hours 37 min ago
Police name man charged after car smashes into wall outside barbers...
- David9694 2 hours 44 min ago
Teenager arrested after car flips over in crash on Rainham High Street near Otterham Quay Lane...
- Rendel Harris 3 hours 47 min ago
These 971 signatures (in itself a pretty pathetic number given that the BCP council area covers more than 400,000 residents), how many of these...
- brooksby 6 hours 27 min ago
Oh, of course: Jodie wotsit falling off a cliff in Last of the Mohicans
- Velophaart_95 6 hours 54 min ago
Nino Schurter - 2017; Won Cape Epic, won every XCO World Cup, and the World Championship.
Add new comment
64 comments
District Judge Kathryn Meek sentenced him to an 18-month community order and ordered him to undertake 250 hours of unpaid work
What we need on here are some authentic but trustworthy crims who can tell us how 'community orders' and 'unpaid work' are enforced at pandemic time.
Cor blimey guv, strike a light, trustworthy crim here honest as the day is long. Anyway, one Saturday there was a party doing grass cutting in a country churchyard, dressed all in orange and some had COMMUNITY PAYBACK stamped on their backs.
Does your honesty vary during the year? what happens when the clocks change?
This sort of outcome is why after 3 years of commuting by cycle into work, I will be buying a car later this year.
Illegitimi non carborundum
I feel I take a balanced view on these cases. I am a cyclist and also ex-police. I understand the workload they are under (though this article is in respect of the courts) and most people would not belive the volume of crap they have to deal with. I also am aware that sometimes cyclists are in the wrong, or there is simply a lack of evidence.
However, a potential 10 years in prison for not being honest about a Covid test (not that any court would impose that), versus this outcome. Madness.
Not sure your comment has any relevance here - the police did their job in finding and arresting the driver, the driver pleaded guilty, there is no suggestion that the cyclist did anything wrong or that evidence was lacking. The sentencing is the only problem. How would you take a "balanced view" of these facts?
Um - you seem to have missed the key part of the comment.
Um, it would be useful if people were honest enough to admit they've edited their comments to ensure they are relevant after others have commented on their lack of relevance. The words "versus this outcome" were not present when I commented.
Well either there's a rift in the space-time continuum, or you're mistaken, because it was definitely there when I first read the comment, and your response didn't appear until some time later.
And it wasn't just the "versus this outcome" bit you omitted - you left out that entire paragraph, which was the substantive part of it. The rest of it, which you quoted, was basically just so much preamble, which could have been summarised as "I'm by no means a raving cycling fundamentalist, but...".
When I read the comment the last sentence ran: "However, a potential 10 years in prison for not being honest about a Covid test (not that any court would impose that), madness."
I quite accept that wasn't what the poster meant to say and s/he subsequently edited it to say what s/he meant, but that was what it said when I read it.
Must be time travel involved then - velochris went back in time to before you replied in order to edit the comment. Or possibly you just misread it?
I take a balanced view of these cases - ie those involving varying outcomes of incidents involving car and cyclists. I think sometimes, as cyclists, we often assume the cyclist is never at fault. Not that I said that, but was highlighting that it takes a lot for me to comment on such cases.
I specifically stated that the issue is with the court in this case.
The relevance of the post, which others have understood, is that I do find the outcome quite unbelievable, particularly when compared with other polar extremes of potential sentences.
Slightly inaccurate. As a car driver, I take the view that the rider is never at fault. If I hit someone in my car it is down to me not taking enough care.
This situation is nothing to do with that though
Maybe not often at fault, but not always without fault. However, it would be good to see legislation, similar to some other counties, which places the onus the driver of a car to show they were not at fault in an incident with a more vulnerable road user.
A cyclist going through a red light?
Like you, I am keen to see presumed liability, and let's be fair, I'm a driver myself
A cyclist going through a red light is an action where the rider is at fault indeed.
My driving experience is that people (drivers, riders, peds) break red lights. So if I approach a junction/crossing/whatever in such a way that I don't mitigate that possibility, then I am at fault for my part. Dwelling on whether other people are at fault moves us towards a more risky style of driving
So, when I am driving, I approach it that the more vulnerable is never at fault, and I should attempt to mitigate all possibilities. Their actions are only a risk due to my presence.
A cyclist going through a red light is an action where the rider is at fault indeed.
My driving experience is that people (drivers, riders, peds) break red lights.
Sorry, folks! Can't let this one go. The problem is that the police, in Lancashire, at least view this as 'not a real offence because everybody does it'. It's not the questionable ones where they're immediately in front of the stop line when it turns red, it's the ones where they're far in the distance when it turns amber, still way back (behind this photographer, frequently) when it turns red and up to 3 seconds after it turns red when they speed over the stop line- these drivers always speed up when amber comes on. Still the police contrive to do nothing.
Hello wtjs. I certainly understand your frustration. My view is how other people's likelihood of infraction influences my driving style, not whether they should be ignored by the the rozzers. If I had a dashcam, I would also use that to report on folk being dicks.
However, break lights people do (mmhhhmm, young paduan). I can't treat the fact that "nobody should" as "nobody will". I just don't want a crash, no matter how little it is my fault, particularly with someone who is more vulnerable than me.
Shame you didn't say that originally but then edited to make it look as though you had. Standard copper behaviour I suppose, editing the notebook after the fact!
I think I edited a typo, that is all. No changes of any words.
Your streotyling is much akin to the stereotyping applied by many parts of the media towards cyclists.
What's streotyling? You're absolutely correct, you didn't change any words. You did add some, however.
"Typical copper behaviour."
As mdavidford said, you seemed to have missed the point of the post, which I think at least we agree on, a disgraceful outcome.
Condolences as well to the rider. Must feel like an extra kick whilst down.
And as I said, you edited your post after I'd commented to add the point I supposedly missed.
I still want to know what streotyling means.
I still don't know what part of the apparant edit you mean. You did quote most of my post, which explained that in this case the issue was with the courts. As stated, my point was observed by others.
The stereotyping, referred to the "typical copper" reference.
Anyway, at least we both agree on the fundamental point of the article.
Oh I give up, it's just not worth it. I promise never to streotyle anyone in future.
I thought it best, given the context, not to edit a typo this time, so left it as it was.
Wow! What a lovely person you must be!!
Okay... but on a single track road, what exactly can a stationary cyclist do (or fail to do) that would have caused this collision? (I can't think of anything)
What possible reasons could there be for not charging the driver with causing serious injury by dangerous driving (or at the very least careless driving). Why is the punish less than would have been for drink driving when the driver didn't submit to a breath test (should fleeing the scene should be considered equivalent to refusing to give a sample).
It's HORRENDOUS that you seem more concerned about cops having it 'hard' (by complaining the "workload they are under" and "volume of crapp they have to deal with") MORE THAN THE POOR VICTIMS OF DANGEROUS CALLOUS DRIVERS - who often have little to fear from cops on vast number of cases despite submission of compelling evidence, as published on Road. cc and else where.
I'd just like to thank you for giving us the perspective of an ex policeman. I can accept that police officers are overworked and always try to be polite when I submit footage and I am always grateful when they get back to me. I'm not sure that this is a satisfactory situation however as I believe we should have a right to get feedback on our submissions. I was just wondering if you have any practical suggestions on what we could do to improve this situation.
Pages