Home
Jason Hurrell said to be travelling at excessive speed when he struck teenage girl, leaving her with head injuries

A cyclist who collided with a pedestrian on Southend seafront, leaving her with life-threatening head injuries, has been sentenced to four months’ imprisonment suspended for 18 months, and has also been ordered to carry out 200 hours of community service.

Jason Hurrell, who had previously pleaded guilty to a charge of wanton and furious driving was travelling at “significant speed” when he rode into Olivia George, then aged 16, on Marine Parade at around 9.45pm on the evening of Friday 1 February this year, Basildon Crown Court heard.

The Enquirer reported that the victim spent several weeks in hospital following the incident and is continuing to make “a good recovery” from the injuries she sustained in the incident on Marine Parade.

The newspaper adds that Hurrell could have used a marked cycle path or gone on the road, but instead chose to ride his bike on the footway.

Commenting on the case, PC Chris Rowland of Essex, said: "Cycling on the footpath is often perceived as a minor offence and public nuisance but this case highlights the very real dangers that exist if cyclists fail to ride without due regard for other road users, and pedestrians in particular.”

He continued, "The sentence Jason Hurrell has received today reflects the seriousness with which Courts view this type of incident and should serve to remind all road users of their responsibility to place safety before any other consideration when using the public highway.”

Although it’s not clear from the reports exactly where on Marine Parade the incident took place, concerns were previously raised over the £7.6 million revamp of part of Southend’s sea front back in 2011 that envisaged cyclists and pedestrians sharing space, rather than a dedicated cycle lane being installed on the road.

The council emphasised that cyclists needed to keep their speed in check when using it, with cabinet member for transport and planning, Mark Flewitt saying: “The enhanced paving area at City Beach is designed to be used by both pedestrians and cyclists.’

He added that the council was “looking at ways of managing this designated shared space, but it will not involve the type of engineering measures employed elsewhere on the seafront where sections of pavement have been removed and coloured cycle tracks have been introduced.”

But local resident Carmel Bishop of Shoebury said at the time: “You used to get serious problems, particularly in Chalkwell during busy periods when pedestrians were dodging cyclists. It looks like we’re going back to that.”

Born in Scotland, Simon moved to London aged seven and now lives in the Oxfordshire Cotswolds with his miniature schnauzer, Elodie. He fell in love with cycling one Saturday morning in 1994 while living in Italy when Milan-San Remo went past his front door. A daily cycle commuter in London back before riding to work started to boom, he's been news editor at road.cc since 2009. Handily for work, he speaks French and Italian. He doesn't get to ride his Colnago as often as he'd like, and freely admits he's much more adept at cooking than fettling with bikes.

20 comments

Avatar
Legin [95 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes

They're good at overreacting down here. One idiot on a bike causes an accident through his own stupidity and suddenly some women who lives 3 miles from the accident site is quoted in the local press. Why didn't they ask the other 250k people who live in the greater Southend conurbation what they thought!

Southend seafront is 5 miles long and about 400 metres of it are the City Beach Shared space that some local nimby motorists like to whinge about. It is a great concept that has revitalised the "Golden Mile" element of Southend sea front. There are relatively few bike/pedestrian issues in this area but plenty of idiot motorists who won't give way and won't drive at 20 mph max.

This accident happened on a footpath down the rather steep Pier Hill approaching the shared space; not on it; but when you have an agenda any excuse will do.

Avatar
swelbo [33 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes

I stay away from the sea front and prefer to cycle off into the country. It's a shame because the front is nice. I do take my old bike down there for a run around though.

Avatar
kie7077 [877 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes

FFS the guy didn't cause an accident simply because he was cycling off of the designated bike path, he caused an accident because he was an idiot who was cycling too fast for the conditions and didn't leave the pedestrians enough space. And WTH is 'significant speed' - very vague.

Avatar
paulrbarnard [182 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes

Contrast this sentence with the £150 fine and 3 point a woman was awarded for killing a cyclist in Devon because "her baby kicked". The sentence in this case was right, the cyclist deserved it. I just wish the law treated car drivers with the same level of conviction.

Avatar
drfabulous0 [409 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes

Pavement riding is a menace, I don't care about anyone who goes along slowly and is considerate of everyone else, but there are loads of people who hurtle around at road speeds on the pavement and something should be done. Perhaps providing somewhere better for people to ride.

Avatar
jmaccelari [241 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes

Wow. Wonder what some of the comments would have been if this was a motorist who had hit a cyclist in a cycle lane. Mass indignation and self righteous criticism, no doubt. This maniac seriously injured a young girl and should have been more severely punished.

Avatar
Guyz2010 [304 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes

Fair sentence for the crime, looks about similar to what a car driver would get for a similar offence typically.
I hope the young girl made a full recovery.

Avatar
bendertherobot [1071 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes
jmaccelari wrote:

Wow. Wonder what some of the comments would have been if this was a motorist who had hit a cyclist in a cycle lane. Mass indignation and self righteous criticism, no doubt. This maniac seriously injured a young girl and should have been more severely punished.

Indeed. I'd go as far as to say a short prison sentence or, at least, a suspended one. The max sentence here is 2 years. Had this been on the road then there is no custodial sentence.

My view? He should be in jail. Short because he did admit to the offence. Therefore, in line with all sentencing, he is entitled to credit.

But the bigger question here is whether, if we look at other road users sentencing, this is an unduly lenient sentence. My view is that it is not. Indeed, it's actually fairly consistent.

My view is that all road (or indeed pavement) offences need to be taken much more seriously.

Avatar
KiwiMike [1200 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes
Guyz2010 wrote:

Fair sentence for the crime, looks about similar to what a car driver would get for a similar offence typically.
I hope the young girl made a full recovery.

'About similar'?

You clearly haven't seen any reported 'sentences' for motorists who've maimed or killed cyclists recently then. A sentence, even suspended, is very rare.

Avatar
tourdelound [157 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes

Just goes to show, there are total clowns using any type of transport you care to mention.

I notice though, that the cyclist got a more severe sentence than the pregnant motorist who took a cyclist out.

"British Justice" eh?

Avatar
Legin [95 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes

Many of the really poor cycling I see comes from Cameron's "new working poor" who would be driving cars or using public transport if they could afford to, instead they ride bikes as badly and as inconsiderately as they would drive.

Avatar
Guyz2010 [304 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes

To KiwiMike
"You clearly haven't seen any reported 'sentences' for motorists who've maimed or killed cyclists recently then. A sentence, even suspended, is very rare."

I clearly have!

Avatar
Leviathan [1975 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes
paulrbarnard wrote:

Contrast this sentence with the £150 fine and 3 point a woman was awarded for killing a cyclist in Devon because "her baby kicked". The sentence in this case was right, the cyclist deserved it. I just wish the law treated car drivers with the same level of conviction.

http://road.cc/content/news/102198-pregnant-woman-blames-collision-elder...

The cyclist didn't die. Please don't sensationalize the argument, that is exact what the anti-cycling brigade do. It is your job to be more reasonable than them.

Avatar
tourdelound [157 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes
Legin wrote:

Many of the really poor cycling I see comes from Cameron's "new working poor" who would be driving cars or using public transport if they could afford to, instead they ride bikes as badly and as inconsiderately as they would drive.

If that's the case, and I would debate that, where's the evidence?, let's hope they remain "poor". Think of the havoc they would bring to the world if they were driving motor vehicles.

Avatar
Legin [95 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes

The evidence is on the streets of London and in areas like Southend during commuting times.

Avatar
FluffyKittenofT... [1198 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes
jmaccelari wrote:

Wow. Wonder what some of the comments would have been if this was a motorist who had hit a cyclist in a cycle lane. Mass indignation and self righteous criticism, no doubt. This maniac seriously injured a young girl and should have been more severely punished.

Is it only 'self rightousness' and 'mass indignation' when its _other people_ talking about maniacs and demanding more severe punishments? When you do it its fine, right?

Avatar
cyclingDMlondon [488 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes
paulrbarnard wrote:

Contrast this sentence with the £150 fine and 3 point a woman was awarded for killing a cyclist in Devon because "her baby kicked". The sentence in this case was right, the cyclist deserved it. I just wish the law treated car drivers with the same level of conviction.

The law never will, because we live in a society which idolizes the internal combustion engine as a vector of 'personal freedom', and which associates the prosperity of the nation with it.

This might change, given a generation. Maybe two. But by then, I suspect that an alternative fuel source will exist, and so cars will be just as big, just as unwieldy, and driven by the same mouth-breathing chimps that drive them today.

Avatar
Legin [95 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes
tourdelound wrote:
Legin wrote:

Many of the really poor cycling I see comes from Cameron's "new working poor" who would be driving cars or using public transport if they could afford to, instead they ride bikes as badly and as inconsiderately as they would drive.

If that's the case, and I would debate that, where's the evidence?, let's hope they remain "poor". Think of the havoc they would bring to the world if they were driving motor vehicles.

Perhaps I could have worded this better but I get the feeling you have deliberately missed the point.

Avatar
tourdelound [157 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes
Legin wrote:
tourdelound wrote:
Legin wrote:

Many of the really poor cycling I see comes from Cameron's "new working poor" who would be driving cars or using public transport if they could afford to, instead they ride bikes as badly and as inconsiderately as they would drive.

If that's the case, and I would debate that, where's the evidence?, let's hope they remain "poor". Think of the havoc they would bring to the world if they were driving motor vehicles.

Perhaps I could have worded this better but I get the feeling you have deliberately missed the point.

I'm sorry Legin, I may well have missed your point, but I can assure you it was/is not deliberate.

Avatar
Recumbenteer [166 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes
drfabulous0 wrote:

Pavement riding is a menace, I don't care about anyone who goes along slowly and is considerate of everyone else, but there are loads of people who hurtle around at road speeds on the pavement and something should be done. Perhaps providing somewhere better for people to ride.

What about pavement driving?
The pavement cycling danger is a myth propagated by junk journalists, writing for junk tabloid pseudo-newspapers. It's a man bites dog story, blown out of all significance. Motor-vehicles injure and kill people daily, it's not newsworthy and is rarely more than local news, whereas a cyclist killing someone on the pavement has received national coverage.
Between 2005 and 2009 (five years), pavement drivers killed 266 pedestrians, whereas between 2000 and 2009 (ten years) pavement cyclists killed three pedestrians. That's a ratio of 151:1. That's one every eight days for pavement drivers vs one every three years four months for pavement cyclists.
I don't believe the statistics are much different now. DfT statistics.
If improving Public safety is the target, one can safely ignore pavement cycling and concentrate on pavement drivers and vehicles parked on the pavement, which must have been driven there.

As for hurtling around on the pavement - utter BS & fiction. I've never seen anyone cycling fast on the footway / pavement, they're almost always on BSO pseudo-mountain bikes with underinflated knobbly tyres, in the wrong gear (often the small chainring to small rear sprocket) and very slow.
I normally ride on the road, but occasionally use shared paths and very infrequently pavements alongside busy fast roads where cycling on the road would be suicidal and there aren't any pedestrians anyway. These surfaces are so rough that 'hurtling' anywhere is a pipe-dream.