- 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
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
news
A170 Kirkdale Road, North Yorkshire (Google Maps)Teenage cyclist killed in collision with driver “should have been on footpath”, inquest hears
Drivers who passed a teenage cyclist on a rural road moments before he was fatally struck by another motorist told police that he “should have been on the footpath”.
Police collision investigator Nigel Varney also told the inquest into 17-year-old Charlie Cornick’s death that the teenager, whose mother had passed away just weeks before the tragic incident, was “not clearly visible” at the time of crash and had failed to follow the Highway Code’s recommendations that “cyclists should always wear light or reflective clothing and have working lights and a suitable helmet”.
Apprentice mechanic Cornick was cycling home from work on the A170 between Kirkbymoorside and Beadlam, North Yorkshire, just before 5.30pm on 19 November 2021 when he was hit from behind by a driver and thrown onto the car’s windscreen near Welburn crossroads.
The 17-year-old, who suffered a serious head injury in the collision, was flown to James Cook University Hospital in Middlesbrough, where he died the following morning.
The teenager’s tragic death came just weeks after his mother, Susi Cornick, passed away from a terminal illness, aged 46.
The driver who struck Charlie, 26-year-old Rachel Adams, was not arrested or charged in relation to the incident.
“Not clearly visible”
Earlier this week, an inquest at Northallerton’s County Hall heard that several drivers who passed Charlie on the unlit A170 remarked that the cyclist was not clearly visible and “should have been on the footpath”, the Yorkshire Post reports.
According to the inquest Cornick, who was travelling home from his job at Kirkby Mills Garage to a rented property in Nawton at the time of the collision, was wearing dark clothing and did not have working lights or reflectors attached to his bike.
Charlie had told family members that he cycled primarily on the pavement during his commute along the A170, apart from a short section of 50 metres where the path stops, and where the collision took place.
Kirkby Mills Garage’s co-owner Paul Grayson, who gave Charlie the mountain bike after his mother was unable to drive him to work, told the inquest that he had spoken to the 17-year-old about road safety and had advised him to use lights, wear a helmet, and not to have earphones in while cycling.
Grayson, who said that he “cared deeply” about the teenager and was devastated by his death, also noted that Charlie usually wore a reflective jacket but was not wearing it on the night he died.
> Cyclist’s bike ‘snapped in half’ in fatal collision, inquest hears
Motorist Rachel Adams, who lives locally and went to school with Charlie’s sister, told the inquest that she had been travelling at 50mph on the A170 but had slowed as she approached the crossroads. Adams claimed she did not see Charlies as she was “dazzled” by an oncoming car’s lights, and was unable to swerve to avoid the cyclist because another driver was passing in the other direction at the time of the collision.
Nigel Varney, North Yorkshire Police’s collision investigator, said that there was a “clearly defined footpath” along the A170 with a short break section. Varney added that when the scene was searched, a non-working USB light – believed to have belonged to Charlie – was found, but that no lights or reflectors were fitted to the bike.
The investigator also noted that a visibility study established that at 50-60mph, Charlie would only have been visible for between four to five metres in darkness. Varney concluded that Charlie was “not clearly visible”, before pointing to the Highway Code’s recommendations that “cyclists should always wear light or reflective clothing and have working lights and a suitable helmet”.
Senior coroner for North Yorkshire, Jon Heath, recorded a conclusion of death in a road traffic collision.
“A gifted, incredible young man”
“Before she died, Mum depended on Charlie and they were so close,” the teenager’s sister, Ashleigh Brown, said after the inquest. “He had to grow up quickly and he was fiercely independent. Charlie could go into a room with a million people and come out with a million friends. He never excluded anyone and had a heart of gold.
“His personality was so rich. He partied a bit, but nothing excessive. He could turn his hand to any sport – he did regional-level athletics with our brother Jake, football and parkour. He was a gifted, incredible young man.”
She added: “Charlie’s death has changed the dynamics of our family. His funeral was on his 18th birthday and he is buried with Mum. People have been so kind.
“I know the driver and she isn’t a bad person. I loved my baby brother and I will make sure my son knows all about his uncle.”
In the wake of Charlie’s death, friends renewed a campaign to install a cycle path on the notoriously dangerous A170.
Marcie Hughes, whose son was a close friend of Charlie, told the Gazette and Herald last year: “In light of the tragic accident on the A170, I urge Ryedale District Council to consider pushing forward the plans for the Kirkbymoorside cycle path.”
The Ryedale Cycle Forum, working alongside the Kirkbymoorside Environment Group and Kirkbymoorside Town Council, have launched an appeal to raise funds for the installation of an 800m segregated cycling and walking route on the A170, which the group says will mark the “first stage” of a cycling and walking network connecting Kirkbymoorside and Helmsley, through the villages of Nawton, Beadlam, and Wombleton.
Hughes added: “Had the path been in place at 5.30pm on a winter evening, our dear Charlie might still be with us. Instead, I have spent the week comforting my youngest son and his friends, as they try to come to terms with the senseless loss of their beloved friend.
“They are 17-year-old boys – traumatised, devastated and utterly bewildered. Surely this must now be considered to be a priority and possibly named in memory of Charlie.”
Ryan joined road.cc in December 2021 and since then has kept the site’s readers and listeners informed and enthralled (well at least occasionally) on news, the live blog, and the road.cc Podcast. After boarding a wrong bus at the world championships and ruining a good pair of jeans at the cyclocross, he now serves as road.cc’s senior news writer. Before his foray into cycling journalism, he wallowed in the equally pitiless world of academia, where he wrote a book about Victorian politics and droned on about cycling and bikes to classes of bored students (while taking every chance he could get to talk about cycling in print or on the radio). He can be found riding his bike very slowly around the narrow, scenic country lanes of Co. Down.
Latest Comments
- Destroyer666 2 sec ago
Laughing on the outside...
- mdavidford 4 min 27 sec ago
You're so far wide of the point here that you haven't even missed it.
- ceppm 7 min 48 sec ago
Something along those lines should be added to the scheme. It breaks my heart the number of abandoned bikes I see in my neighborhood. If charities...
- hawkinspeter 12 min 19 sec ago
Watch car seriously stuck after careering off the road and smashing through fence...
- check12 24 min 19 sec ago
continental 29"x2.0" anyone?
- ktache 35 min 31 sec ago
World championships there next year. I understand it will be very safe...
- chrisonabike 36 min 14 sec ago
I'd forgotten - there's Upride.
- ktache 38 min 15 sec ago
And if the professional had done that there would have been no crash, no severe injuries and no ban.
- kevgravelkev 1 hour 13 min ago
So much BS from all sides here. This is the end of Ride London. They will water it down until it becomes just another sportive with virtually no...
- chrisonabike 2 hours 3 min ago
Cycling: activity with the potential reduce road death and injury (and incidentally free up police - if only they *were* doing road policing of...
Add new comment
72 comments
Other motorists testified that they they did see him, therefore he must have been visible.
So we must ask, given that he was visible, why did Adams not see him. She has answered that question:
"Adams claimed she did not see Charlies as she was “dazzled” by an oncoming car’s lights".
So the question of Charlie's lights and reflectors seems to be a red herring. Undoubtedly Charlie could have been ticketed for his regulatory infraction, but it should not be used to draw fire from the real offence here.
Exactly. She was completely dazzled by the headlights of an oncoming vehicle, to the degree that she couldn't see anything in front of her in her lane, and she thought that the best course of action was just to carry on at 50mph in a straight line. Not stop and put on her BOLAS. Not even slow down. Just carry right on...
I regularly drive a 50mph limit winding road. In daylight, you can drive it within your visible stopping distance nearly all the way at 50mph, with a bit of speed reduction on a couple of sharper bends (not a roadholding limit, a vision limit).
At night I wouldn't drive it at more than 40-45 and with oncoming lights dazzling I'll reduce to 35ish while looking away from the oncoming car to preserve vision.
Without knowing the road, is certainly be questioning whether the speed at night was appropriate on an unlit road. If the person was dazzled, the first question I would ask is did you slow or brake? This doesn't appear to be part of the thought process here.
I was driving through a local village on Saturday evening, going below the 30mph limit, headlights on, no street lamps, no adjacent houses. A road I know very well as I used to live not 100m further back. Approx 30m - 40m in front something caught my eye for just a fraction of a second at road level. I thought it was the glint of an animals eye. I couldn't see anything else, even when I then tried hard to make out what was there. Only when I got level with it did it become discernible as 4 people, all dark clothing, no reflectives, walking diagonally across the road. I couldn't believe how hard they were to spot. Gave me a wake up call, especially as my passenger didn't see them at all until we were literally right on top of them. They totally blended in with the dark background of hedges and road. I presume what I had seen was a slight reflection from a shoe sole or trainer flash or something but just a split second inattention or looking away and I would have missed it and then I would have been in real trouble. If asked after the event to describe what happened, I would have said I saw them but they weren't at all visible, exactly as described by witnesses here.
And yet those "several" other drivers did see him and did avoid him, so presumably he was more visible than the pedestrians in your case.
I'm not condoning cycling without lights and reflectors at night. But in her own testimony that was not mentioned by the driver as the reason she did not see him.
I am wary of reading too much into one media report of exactly what was and wasn't said at the inquest. Personal professional experience tells me media reports are neither 100% accurate or anything like a complete record of what is said in such circumstances. In my case, I didn't recognise my own testimony from what was reported in the local rag.
Several folks on here saying "I just can't see them". Given we're all clearly careful and observant when out I'm wondering whether there's some selection bias e.g. average age here? That has numerous effects on vision (as well as our reaction times) although at least for vision it seems it's a complicated story.
Just wondering if this suggests our rules may need an update for the current reality e.g. larger number of older people driving, changes in car lights and the lighting environment at night in general?
On a main road for the fifty metres where the council had, for whatever reason, decided that there would be no footpath/shared-use path/rutted track made available for him to ride on.
Let's once more highlight the contradictions of the witnesses. They seemed to agree that the cyclist should have been cycling illegally on a pavement that did not exist where he was hit.
Which raises the question, did the council put up warning signs for pedestrians in the road at that section? And would a pedestrian in the road have been expected to be wearing hi-viz, helmet and lights by the court?
"4-5 metres" is strange. Do they mean for 4-5 seconds? 4-5 seconds of visibility at 50 mph works out as being visible from a distance of 100 metres, assuming the headlights work and the road is straight. To me this sounds like a lot of time to react?
I think it means when they think she would have seen him staring into dazzling headlights.
A similar calculation was made iirc in the case of Councillor Paul James iirc, but that was sun dazzle.
The description makes it sound like driving is really dangerous, requires particular specialist skills, and maybe we should rethink the whole thing.
Cyclist collides with pedestrian in the road and kills them. Police go to great lengths to re-enact riding a bike without a front brake to prove this was the reason the pedestrian was killed and its all the fault of the cyclist and jail them.
Driver collides with cyclist and kills them. Ah it was dark, and it was only a cyclist. Nothing to see here, move along.
"The Ryedale Cycle Forum, working alongside the Kirkbymoorside Environment Group and Kirkbymoorside Town Council, have launched an appeal to raise funds (link is external) for the installation of an 800m segregated cycling and walking route on the A170, which the group says will mark the “first stage” of a cycling and walking network connecting Kirkbymoorside and Helmsley, through the villages of Nawton, Beadlam, and Wombleton."
The final obscenity; to be safe, cyclists have to raise money while driving safely is paid for by all of us.
RIP Charlie.
How many years in jail would you get in your legal system, if you took a gun and went to a parking lot and shot some random car driver in the head while he was starting his car?
I'd be interested on how this would be handled in different jurisdictions - NL, DE, FR?
And your actual point other than whataboutery is......?
"Adams claimed she did not see Charlies as she was “dazzled” by an oncoming car’s lights"
Highway Code / Country roads / 154
Take extra care on country roads and reduce your speed ... at junctions and turnings ... Be prepared for pedestrians, horse riders, cyclists ... Make sure you can stop within the distance you can see to be clear.
Doesnt apply because cyclist maybe? So fed up with biased car-centric judiciary in this country.
Perhaps now that cars are computerised we need speed governors that activate with the headlights.
Possibly more pertinent in this case is Rule 115:
You should [...] slow down, and if necessary stop, if you are dazzled by oncoming headlights.
Interesting choice: "Adams claimed she...was unable to swerve to avoid the cyclist because another driver was passing in the other direction at the time of the collision."
So she'd rather run over a vulnerable road user than risk sideswiping another motor vehicle? Personally not the choice I'd make. I'd be slamming on the brakes, giving way and hoping the oncoming motorist had the sense to do the same at seeing me coming in their lane.
well I dont know if youve noticed, but Adams approach is pretty much the attitude alot of drivers take towards cyclists on the roads.
Im not sure this is entirely fair. Its likely that as an instinct reaction you would flinch away from the fast and bright moving object in preference to the dark slowly moving one.
I dont think we can assume her reactions were reasonable or thought about in advance.
I don't do much night driving now that I WFH so maybe I'm out of practice, but I do find modern headlights to be dazzling, the light is very white and seems to produce areas of sharp contrast. A further contributory factor is that headlights are higher off the road, due to the prevelance of SUVs and trucks (and I note that the Tiguan is sort of a mini-SUV). I drove back from London on Wednesday night and once off the motorway found that I had to drive well below the speed limit to have adequate visibility, and fully dip my rear view mirror due to dazzling from an SUV behind. This was on the same sort of lanes as this tragic case.
Wholeheartedly agree that infrastructure is the primary cause, but I can also believe the driver here, having only avoided a donkey because I was doing 30mph (40 limit) and I had space to swerve into the opposite lane.
I do find the same thing, though I can't rule out age being in my mid 50s.
Although I do find that a good cross section of people comment on the 'too much brightness' of modern lights. Then you get people who put stronger lights on their car but where the car is not designed for them, causing issues.
And don't get me started on the number where one headlight is out of alignment.
Yesterday's night experiences
Tesla with offside beam way too high
Driver with one side light, other headlight shining a thin beam about 5m ahead (my bike light is more powerful than that) on an NSL no streetlights.
Driver with one DRL only on an NSL no streetlights
Several new cars with really dazzling lights.
I do think LED lights on new cars should be banned or required to be tinted some degree of yellow like old French cars. The current situation of how bright and dazzling they are even when correctly dipped is just madness.
People can blame whoever they like while descending into the depths of "if drivers behaved properly we wouldn't need cycle lanes". It doesn't matter. The lack of safe infrastructure for vulnerable road users ultimately caused this death. Had it been in place, he'd be alive.
I've looked on Google Streetview at the crossroads and the path is visible. And look how massively overgrown with years of soil it is. Look how shitty it is, compared to the billiard-table-smooth carriageway. Councils are criminally neglectful of paths like this across the country, and getting them to fix it is nigh-on impossible.
https://goo.gl/maps/vgsPVSJofGMeudXz8
It is entirely typical of North Yorkshire County Council to fail to make decent cycle provision.
They are spending £69 million to realign the A59 at Kex Gill, including £13 million of the council's own funds. They have a budget of £0 (zero pounds) of their own money for cycling.
literally acres of verge where a decent path could be put in.
Adams claimed she did not see Charlies as she was “dazzled” by an oncoming car’s lights, and was unable to swerve to avoid the cyclist because another driver was passing in the other direction at the time of the collision
BS. Either she couldn't see him or she did see him but was unable to swerve, not both.
if only she had been driving a car with lights and brakes.
when the scene was searched, a non-working USB light – believed to have belonged to Charlie – was found
I wonder what on earth could have just happened to cause the light to not be working?
the teenager’s sister, Ashleigh Brown . . . . “I know the driver and she isn’t a bad person"
Very forgiving and a credit to her brother.
Pages