Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

Texting van driver cleared of responsibility for death of 18-year-old cyclist

Text exchange with girlfriend preceded fatal collision

A driver who admitted exchanging texts with his girlfriend before his van hit and killed an 18-year-old cyclist has been cleared of causing death by dangerous driving, and of causing death by careless driving.

Philip Sinden was driving the Vauxhall Vivaro that hit and killed 18-year-old triathlete Daniel Squire on the A258 at Ringwould in Kent at around 8:40am on September 7 2013.

After the verdict, the family of Daniel Squire shouted at the jury: “Were you not listening?”, “What a waste of time” and “I can’t believe that”, reports Kent Online's Paul Hooper.

During the trial the court heard that Sinden had sent 19 texts and received 22 from his girlfriend between 6.07am and 8.32am. He and his girlfriend continued texting until she sent a message at 8.39.49. He was alleged to have composed a message at around 8.40am which was never sent.

Prosecutor Dale Sullivan said: “The defendant had been using his mobile phone either just before or at the time of the impact and he failed to react to the presence of Daniel who was in front of his vehicle until the very last moment.”

But Sinden claimed that he had not been distracted by using his phone.

“I was texting just using my left hand. When I pulled out onto the road I was trying to keep my attention on the road, so I typed without looking at the phone.”

He claimed Daniel Squire had unexpectedly joined the carriageway from the pavement.

“I realised it was a cyclist on the pavement on my left hand side. He started to come off the pavement and I started to react. I started to brake and steer around the cyclist.

“It was all very quick but it seemed to me he had adjacened [sic] out slightly from the lane he should have been on.”

Sinden told the jury that Daniel had turned around and looked behind him “just before it [the van] struck the bike”.

“He just came out more than I expected. I spiked my brakes," he said.

Members of Daniel Squire's family attended every day of the trial at Canterbury Crown Court.

Judge Heather Norton expressed her “profound sympathy” for Daniel's family.

She told them: “I appreciate that is not the verdict you were expecting and was not the verdict you were hoping for.”

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

82 comments

Avatar
Guyz2010 | 9 years ago
0 likes

Guessing the jury have not been on a bike for a few years. Twats.

Avatar
Airzound | 9 years ago
0 likes

Wouldn't it be karma if Philip Sinden was killed in an RTA by a mobile toting moton …………… and it wouldn't even be murder, nor causing death by dangerous or even careless driving ………… he would be erased from this earth without so much as a wibble, as if he never existed, except to his family and those that knew him and us. A bit like Daniel Squire and his family.

The jury must have all been retards.

Now, how can I fit an AK47 on my bike?

http://uk.images.search.yahoo.com/images/view;_ylt=Az_6xdfxtwxVYXgAlN9NB...

Avatar
Bez | 9 years ago
0 likes
Avatar
harrybav | 9 years ago
0 likes

Sorry to say, this isn't an issue they'll take seriously while it's only cyclists getting killed.

Avatar
Metaphor | 9 years ago
0 likes

Another one for the Cyclists' Defence Fund?

Avatar
paddyirish | 9 years ago
0 likes

If it is as reported this is warped. Texting while driving should be an immediate fine and 3 points on license and that's for a 30mph. At any higher speeds it should be a ban. And the police need to enforce it.

Thought's with Daniel Squire's family

Avatar
matthewn5 | 9 years ago
0 likes

I've done jury service and the CPS solicitors - no offense meant - were hopelessly out of their depth and unimaginative.

Why not ask him to demonstrate to the jury whether he could drive a simulator and text at the same time?

Why not see if the chap could have cycled on to and off that narrow path as the defendent says?

They just don't have what it takes. Or they don't have enough time, more likely. Or any real axe to grind, since they have no stake in the case

By contrast the defence lawyer will have been some sleek City fellow full of the arts of pleading, and doing the 'jury stuff' that's their stock in trade.

The judge will have directed the jury that they must acquit if there is any 'reasonable doubt' about the case. It's the defence lawyer's job to sow the seeds of that 'reasonable doubt' and that's what they do. Circumstantial evidence (texting, etc) will not be good enough... so you can see why these people get off all the time.

Avatar
severs1966 | 9 years ago
0 likes

Essentially the problem here is that the public - and therefore the jury - completely approve of texting while driving, as they are all drivers who do this. The loss of the life of a bike rider is not something that most drivers care about, and they carry this attitude into court with them.

The public must be educated to despise this, in the same way that the socially acceptable drunk driving of the 1960s became generally accepted as "a bad thing" by many people by the mid 1990s and by the majority by about 2005.

I predict that texting and driving will be accepted as intolerable by the public by about the year 2040 to 2050 if a consistent campaign begins now, and continues non-stop.

It is probably a generational thing. Also, a lazy selfish thing.

Avatar
rockhoppingmad | 9 years ago
0 likes

His biggest regret was getting caught?

Avatar
klrsa05 | 9 years ago
0 likes

Dear road. Cc this article is shameful in that has happened but you have fallen in to the same trap as all other media reporting these types of incidents. The van didn't kill the poor bloke on his bike it was the driver. Until we get all media to realise it's the actions of the individual behind the wheel and not the object that's responsible for the death and injuries caused how can we expect Juries to convict. We need to get the actions attached to the driver not the vehicle.

To the family of the man who lost his life my condolences to you and I hope that despite the lack of a sense of justice, you can take some heart from the obvious outpouring of disgust at the way your loss had been dealt with in our legal system.

Avatar
Kim | 9 years ago
0 likes

It really is time that we ended the cult of the sacred driving licence, people are at the controls of a piece of heavy machinery in a public place have to take full responsibility for its safe operation. Using a mobile while driving is illegal for a reason and should not be socially acceptable.

Avatar
a_to_the_j | 9 years ago
0 likes

firstly what a disgrace the "justice" system is to the family of the rider - i echo everything above.

what we need is a voice...
where are you Sir Chris Hoy, Boardman, Pendleton and all the rest of the "cycling stars" - these people with their publicity and voice can cut deep into this Political tar that covers incidents like this so the general public doesnt see them....

i am not critical of them, by any means, i just think if they loved cycling like we do and they understood what weight them speaking out might carry, if it was me, i'd be marching on Downing Street with a banner held high until the "justice" system was changed for good!

Avatar
Housecathst | 9 years ago
0 likes

Remember this is Kent, the UKIP heartland, daliy Mail readers as far as the eye can see. Next to immigrants, cyclists are they public enemy number 2.

Avatar
ianrobo | 9 years ago
0 likes

this is where we need a system where relatives can challenge an obvious unjust verdict.

If you are on the phone texting that is dangerous driving and killing someone is for me manslaughter.

Avatar
atgni | 9 years ago
0 likes

The DPP should call this in for review if he can, especialy if the 'pavement' claim is untrue.

Avatar
mcmahonsport | 9 years ago
0 likes

Like me, write a letter to the Attorney General requesting that the sentence is reviewed. At the contact details below:

Rt Hon Dominic Grieve QC MP
Attorney General
Attorney General’s Office
20 Victoria Street
London
SW1H 0NF

Email: correspondence [at] attorneygeneral.gsi.gov.uk

Avatar
teakay | 9 years ago
0 likes

According to Dan's mum he only stopped after being flagged down by another motorist 125meters down the road. His lack of remorse is most shocking.

Avatar
levermonkey | 9 years ago
0 likes

BigglesMeister,
Thank you for clearing up the incident location for me. From the report and the timings (text and emergency call) I had assumed that the incident had occurred almost immediately after Sinden had turned onto the A258.

If his last text received was at 08.39.49 before he joined the A258 and the emergency call (from another driver) was at 08.40.44 then that only gives him 55seconds to go from a near standing start to go about 1.2miles. Now take off the time for the other driver to stop and call the emergency services (say 5seconds at best) and your down to 50seconds.

If you take into account the 0-60mph time of a Vauxhall Vivaro which is about 10seconds (depending on engine) then Sinden's testimony is clearly not credible.

I know it is wrong to sink into conjecture in these situations, but, I can't help feeling that Sinden has ploughed into Daniel Squire whilst being distracted by what he was doing inside the vehicle.

How this is not an 'open and shut case' of Causing Death by Dangerous Driving is beyond me. This is as gross a miscarriage of justice as you will ever find and it must be appealed.

Avatar
notaclimber | 9 years ago
0 likes

Appalled, no other words necessary.

Avatar
josh5034 | 9 years ago
0 likes

Utterly tragic for Daniel and his family. Just tragic for all cyclists. And a complete tragedy of the legal system.

Avatar
jimxc | 9 years ago
0 likes

this is sickening. the idiot was texting. end of. how they could accept he was left hand texting and driving speaks volumes of the jury's intelligence. no one could defend the victim who is now DEAD and GONE forever, all they had was the murderer's version and of course he would concoct some nonsense. he couldnt deny the texting but to say it was left handed and separate from his attention is despicable. i detest seeing people texting at the wheel it's the most idiotic thing to do in a car, right up there with smoking while your kids are in the back. thoughts to the victim's family who have lost their son while someone's else's son lives on. lives on as a murderer with no shame or remorse. pathetic justice system. also, the council could do more and clear the shrubbery blocking that damn pavement, i see it a lot, total lack of maintenance meaning riders are FORCED onto the road because of overgrown hedges. has happened to me countless times and thankfully i've not been killed. but they're probably too busy swigging ale with that throatless guffawing plonker Farage.

Avatar
I love my bike | 9 years ago
0 likes
Avatar
Gary613 | 9 years ago
0 likes

Bez has updated his Beyond the Kerb blog on 15 April with further evidence of the wrong verdict.

bit.ly/1FXiYLS

Many thanks for his sterling efforts.

Avatar
Bez replied to mcmahonsport | 9 years ago
0 likes
mcmahonsport wrote:

Like me, write a letter to the Attorney General requesting that the sentence is reviewed.

Rather of a waste of paper: You can't ask for his sentence to be reviewed. There was none. The defendant was found not guilty. You cannot appeal a not guilty verdict.

Avatar
Mark By replied to teakay | 9 years ago
0 likes

Please establish contact via Twitter -https://twitter.com/Kent_Cyclist
This could be important evidence that wasn't aired at the trial.

Avatar
mcmahonsport replied to Bez | 9 years ago
0 likes

Yes, noticed that  2 thanks. Written for 'a review' not sure that will work.

Avatar
mcmahonsport replied to Bez | 9 years ago
0 likes
Bez wrote:

Rather of a waste of paper: You can't ask for his sentence to be reviewed. There was none. The defendant was found not guilty. You cannot appeal a not guilty verdict.

There may be an opportunity to ask for a retrial in the public interest with the CPS

The decision to seek a re-trial will very much depend upon the public interest. Only cases involving significant public interest factors in favour of prosecution warrant a re-trial.

Avatar
bikebot replied to mcmahonsport | 9 years ago
0 likes
mcmahonsport wrote:

There may be an opportunity to ask for a retrial in the public interest with the CPS

The decision to seek a re-trial will very much depend upon the public interest. Only cases involving significant public interest factors in favour of prosecution warrant a re-trial.

If the victim's family, a prominent campaigner or cycling charity seeks support for such a petition, I'm certain the interest will be significant.

Avatar
BigglesMeister replied to bikebot | 9 years ago
0 likes
bikebot wrote:
mcmahonsport wrote:

There may be an opportunity to ask for a retrial in the public interest with the CPS

The decision to seek a re-trial will very much depend upon the public interest. Only cases involving significant public interest factors in favour of prosecution warrant a re-trial.

If the victim's family, a prominent campaigner or cycling charity seeks support for such a petition, I'm certain the interest will be significant.

So far ..

He was acquitted of "causing death by dangerous driving" and a lesser charge of "causing death by careless driving".

This does not exclude the possibility of further prosecutions for ..

a.) Manslaughter
b.) Conspiracy to pervert the course of justice (was Daniel ever on the pavement ??)
c.) Use of a hand held phone or similar device, when driving.

Lets just hope the numpties at the CPS that screwed this up the first time are replaced by some real mean prosecuting machines and that the MoFo van driver is carted away and locked up for a very very long time.

PS....

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4406129.stm

Pages

Latest Comments