Thames Valley Police has arrested a 24-year-old man on suspicion of a number of driving offences in connection with a hit and run incident in Iver, Buckinghamshire, on 14 June when a cyclist was struck head on by a Volkswagen Golf.
The incident, which took place on Langley Park Road, left the unnamed male cyclist with neck and shoulder injuries, reports the Slough Express. After the collision, the motorist is said to have driven off along Mansion Lane.
According to police, a man from Slough, Berkshire was arrested last Thursday 31 July on suspicion of having committed six separate offences, and has been bailed until 29 September while investigations continue.
The offences the arrest relates to are suspicion of causing serious injury by dangerous driving, driving while disqualified, being the driver of a vehicle which failed to stop after a road accident, being the driver of a vehicle involved in a road accident who failed to report that accident, using a motor vehicle on a road/public place without third party insurance and fraud by false representation.
On June 14, cyclist Patrick Knetemann was riding on Langley Park Road when a Volkswagen car pulled across the road and hit him, as captured in this helmet cam video:
Knetemann said police officers had told him the number plates on the car that hit him were false.
He told ITV: "He came out of nowhere. The impact was so quick I had no time to stop.
"I hit the windscreen with my shoulder and it shattered straight away - that shows how fast and hard he hit me.
"I think he was turning right to go into the Kwik Fit garage and didn't see me.
"But I had a light on my bike, and I was wearing a bright red helmet.
"After one or two seconds he sped off leaving my there on the pavement."
Add new comment
35 comments
I don't think that because it's over simplifying. If the driver was distracted because they were:
Texting
Talking on a mobile
Driving too fast with the sun in their eyes
Looking at somebody on the pavement
Not paying attention to the road
Putting on makeup
Having a crafty sherman
Or whatever.
Then they made a decision to stop concentrating on the road and had this collision, I agree with the police for using collision instead of accident, and yes it implies it was deliberate. Accident implies unforseen/unpredictable event. This was neither. It's not a huge leap of faith to expect an "accident" if you take your concentration away from the task in hand.
The driver either was driving without due care or attention or dangerously. Which is it?
Fin.
Holy crap that helmet cam reached some height...
I'm not 100% certain but when you watch the slow motion replay it looks as if the driver has changed direction slightly towards the cyclist ie he has turned right to go into Kwik Fit then turns left directly at the cyclist.
Personally, given the well documented success in killing and maiming the motor vehicle is tainted with that is likely unprecedented even by the firearm I don't think it's too far a leap to label such conduct as attempted murder.
The driver was banned - irrespective of any secondary reasoning a court of law had decided the driver had no place on the road (albeit far too briefly as is always the case) but the driver chose to adopt the selfish and reckless path by getting back into a car, with the knowledge that he would have no insurance. Compounding this big #uck you to the entire world he then sought to evade further problems by leaving his victim thinking yet again of himself.
Ok, there may be no prior plan to set out and hurt or kill anyone but does that same reasoning wash if I go into the high street 364 days in a row and randomly point and fire a rifle?
Luckily no-one gets hurt but on the 365th day my bullet hits and kills someone. I didn't set out that morning to kill anyone and statistically I can argue it was an anomoly but does that mean I am excused of my actions? The common sense argument would surely prevail as such an act is both dangerous and I know it is wrong.
The problem comes when the same is applied to a motoring scenario such as this. 364 days a year I drive like a complete twonk and just wind everyone up and scare a few innocents but on the 365th day I kill someone. With the gun I can't claim 'Whoops', with the car I can.
Far as I'm concerned doing something plainly dangerous resulting in death is a form of prior planning when the reasonable person knows what they are doing is obviously reckless.
Driving off is yet more evidence that they know what they did was wrong. Attempted murder for drivers such as this latest idiot given the state of our roads is to my mind quite a reasonable charge.
To those saying "accident/deliberate" there is actually a third alternative that is neither. Negligent incompetence.
This means someone knowingly does something illegal and hasnt the skills or the social conscience to do the right thing should something go horribly wrong.
For that alone is just as bad as "deliberate" actions as it shows a level of premeditation in contributary actions. This too should mean a long spell in jail, but will the CPS and courts back up Plod and the public interest? Thats the real question.
Pages