Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

Fiancée of cyclist killed by drunk driver renews appeal for sentencing petition

59,000-signature petition for Parliamentary debate has until March 30 to hit 100,000

The fiancee of one of two cyclists killed by a drunk driver in Reading last year has renewed her appeal for drivers found guilty of causing death by dangerous driving to serve consecutive sentences for each death.

Tracey Fidler, the partner of Kris Jarvis, one of the cyclists killed, says a petition to examine a change in the law "needs 100,000 signatures to get to the Houses of Parliament and stand a hope of getting the law changed to make the road safer for everyone". The petition closes on March 30 and currently has almost 59,000 signatures.

Kris Jarvis, 39, and John Morland, 30, were killed by Alexander Walter, 31, on February 13, 2014. Walter was driving at 70mph in a 30mph zone, had over twice the blood alcohol limit, had used cocaine within the last 24 hours, was already banned from driving and uninsured, and had taken his partner's black BMW convertible without permission.

Walter entered a guilty plea and was sentenced to 10 years and 3 months in jail. He appealed against the length of the sentence but was turned down by Appeal Court judge Mr Justice Globe who observed that the prosecution had made an “overwhelming” case, and described the effect of Walter's actions as “devastating.”

Kris Jarvis had five children and was planning to wed Tracey Fidler in 2015. John Morland had two children and had set a date for his marriage to Hayley Lindsay in May 2016.

Kris Jarvis’s fiancée, Tracey Fidler and John Morland's fiancée, Hayley Lindsay launched a petition calling on the Government to change the law so that sentences for causing death by dangerous driving can be served consecutively rather than concurrently.

Renewing her appeal for signatories to the petition, Tracey Fidler said: "The aim is to get the law changed so dangerous drivers who kill, will get up to the 14 year maximum sentence per person killed, so when a multiple fatality [occurs], each victim is treated as individuals, and the 2 sentences will run consecutively, not concurrently, as they do now.

"We need 100,000 signatures to get to the Houses of Parliament and stand a hope of getting the law changed, to make the road safer for everyone. Please take the time to sign and share our petition to everyone you know. Kris and John would be really grateful, and myself and Hayley and the rest of our families are too."

The petition is supported by Alok Sharma, the Conservative MP for Reading West. In a House of Commons debate on sentencing last year he said: “If Walter had been given 14 years for each death, he would now be facing 28 years behind bars rather than being out in what will probably be a lot less than 10 years.”

For more about the campaign see the petition's Facebook page.

John has been writing about bikes and cycling for over 30 years since discovering that people were mug enough to pay him for it rather than expecting him to do an honest day's work.

He was heavily involved in the mountain bike boom of the late 1980s as a racer, team manager and race promoter, and that led to writing for Mountain Biking UK magazine shortly after its inception. He got the gig by phoning up the editor and telling him the magazine was rubbish and he could do better. Rather than telling him to get lost, MBUK editor Tym Manley called John’s bluff and the rest is history.

Since then he has worked on MTB Pro magazine and was editor of Maximum Mountain Bike and Australian Mountain Bike magazines, before switching to the web in 2000 to work for CyclingNews.com. Along with road.cc founder Tony Farrelly, John was on the launch team for BikeRadar.com and subsequently became editor in chief of Future Publishing’s group of cycling magazines and websites, including Cycling Plus, MBUK, What Mountain Bike and Procycling.

John has also written for Cyclist magazine, edited the BikeMagic website and was founding editor of TotalWomensCycling.com before handing over to someone far more representative of the site's main audience.

He joined road.cc in 2013. He lives in Cambridge where the lack of hills is more than made up for by the headwinds.

Add new comment

8 comments

Avatar
ronin | 9 years ago
0 likes

Just signed, I didn't see it increment the total though...69,591 and counting.

Now, some wonder the value of this petition, however, I wonder what would have happened if he was driving when a sportive or race was taking place and he killed 5 or 10. Would the sentence have been still 10 years?

In future, do terrorists need only drink and take drugs and choose the car as their weapon of choice to receive a lighter sentence?

OK, now it's 69,607  1

Avatar
kitkat | 9 years ago
0 likes

Signed  1

Avatar
DrJDog | 9 years ago
0 likes

What is different about a death by dangerous driving and any other criminal death case? In what cases are judges allowed to deliver consecutive sentences, if any? Yes, it's hard for the families involved, but I don't see the point in changing the law for only these circumstances.

Avatar
d10brp replied to DrJDog | 9 years ago
0 likes

DrJDog, while I have some sympathy for your opinion you maybe could have approached it in a different way. For some reason we, as cyclists (me included), tend to be very opinionated and like to express our opinions very directly on forums like this. While we're discussing lane positioning or danger awareness or clothing that's fine but two people died here and people are hurting. You could perhaps have been a little less blunt.

I did see this and think it was unlikely to succeed as all I ever seem to see is concurrent sentences given to multiple offenders. However, the sentence here does seem light. While the convict probably didn't intend to kill, if they put themselves in that kind of situation (drugs, drink, drive) they should be treated like murderers imo.

Avatar
Joeinpoole replied to DrJDog | 9 years ago
0 likes
DrJDog wrote:

What is different about a death by dangerous driving and any other criminal death case? In what cases are judges allowed to deliver consecutive sentences, if any? Yes, it's hard for the families involved, but I don't see the point in changing the law for only these circumstances.

Exactly. Hard cases make bad law, as the saying goes.

Avatar
Sedgepeat | 9 years ago
0 likes

What utter nonsense. A murderer has to deliberately and with intent attack more than one person with the intent to kill each.

A road accident is totally unintentional and if more than one person dies from it that is from one unintended action. Now I know some cyclists are daft, but surely most of us can see the difference here? So anyone who votes for this is either daft or wants drivers treated with a special hatred.

The next aspect is dangerous driving. That is entirely perceived and subjective. It is the only long prison term offence which depends on the opinion of non experts and hostile witnesses. In every other such case, ordinary people must stick to fact in evidence and opinion is reserved for expert witnesses only. Once again any honest and intelligent person will accept that there should never be a lower burden of evidence accepted in any cases involving long terms of imprisonment. Why should drivers be discriminated against when it comes to evidence?

The driver should be sentenced for their actions that resulted in the death. And there was enough on this one to warrant a prison term. However, I have to point out that had no-one been killed or injured and there were only bent metal, a sentence would be far less. So from the terrible coincidence that human flesh intervened from exactly the same action, we want to jail people for long terms.

In view of all that, I feel this petition is ill conceived.

Avatar
Wolfshade | 9 years ago
0 likes

The url has a , where it needs a .

It is sad that it comes to this where government needs petitioning for something like this.

Avatar
dts3_1999 replied to Wolfshade | 9 years ago
0 likes
Wolfshade wrote:

The url has a , where it needs a .

It is sad that it comes to this where government needs petitioning for something like this.

... and they've missed an "s" off epetitions! The correct link is:

http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/67911

Latest Comments