A driver who braked suddenly then reversed into a cyclist who had banged on his car window after a close pass has been banned from driving for 12 months.
The motorist, Matthew Scarpellini from Warwick, aged 25, was given a conditional discharge after admitting dangerous driving at Warwick Crown Court, reports the Leamington Observer.
The incident happened in May 2013 when the cyclist, named as a Mr Green from Coventry was riding along Myton Road in Leamington Spa.
As he approached a traffic island, Scarpellini drove up behind him and sounded his horn, and what was described as “a bit of argy-bargy” between the pair as the driver tried to overtake the cyclist at the point where the road narrowed due to the traffic island.
During the court case, the prosecution said that Mr Green had banged on the car’s window with his hand.
That led to Scarpellini braking suddenly and reversing into the cyclist, who sustained a grazed elbow and knee after falling off his bike, which was also damaged. He drove away, but police found him later the same day.
Judge Sylvia de Bertodano said: “This was an altercation with a cyclist. It matters not in the least whose fault it was.
“The cyclist didn’t like the way he was driving and hit his side window, and he stopped and reversed back and hit the bike.”
Scarpellini was ordered to pay the Mr Green £100 compensation and will also have to pay a £60 victim surcharge.
58 thoughts on “Driving ban for motorist who reversed into cyclist”
Wow. I hate to roll out the
Wow. I hate to roll out the tired old comparisons, but this seems fairly light punishment. The facts were he was an aggressive driver, blaring his horn at a cyclist who was doing no wrong, then tried to over take at an island (I bloody hate when people do that) was so close the cyclist could tap on his window, and then tried to reverse over/in to him.
Sounds like a very angry, aggressive man, who could very easily seriously injure or kill someone.
Can any lawyers on the forum
Can any lawyers on the forum please inform us what the threshold would be for instances where a driver deliberately drives into a cyclist to be considered as assault or attempted murder? I have the strong feeling that if the driver in this case had an altercation with a pedestrian, then deliberately reversed into them, they would not be up for a charge of dangerous driving but rather for something more serious.
There was an instance in Yorkshire recently where a driver deliberately drove into a pedestrian following an argument, seriously injuring them. The driver was charged with attempted murder. I do wonder if such a charge would have been brought if the pedestrian were a cyclist.
the little onion wrote:Can
Attempted murder is where someone deliberately tries to kill someone else. Not tries to scare, or hurt, but can be shown to have every intention to kill them. It’s quite hard to prove because unlike actual murder there is no death. Ipso facto you have to prove that the intention was to kill but the perp just failed to do so.
Usually that is going to require some sort of premeditation ie that there was a thoroughgoing plan. Or that an attack was sustained. so not lashing out but a continued beating, use of a weapon specifically for the purpose.
This gets nowhere near the level of evidence necessary for an attempted murder charge. If he’d knocked him off and than continually drove over him several times so that the intent to kill was demonstrated then maybe.
Attempted murder requires that the Crown can prove that the attacker actually intended to kill the victim.
OOOh, local
OOOh, local story!
Fortunately, I think we’re quite lucky round here and generally drivers aren’t as bad as other parts of the country.
Saying that, on her commute my girlfriend did once have a guy driving slowly next to her whilst shouting at her for something she did wrong. I don’t think he realised the irony of accusing wrong-doing whilst driving slowly down a busy road shouting at a female cyclist whilst holding up traffic.
I cycle this road frequently
I cycle this road frequently and it’s by far the worst one I know around this area for close passes. Mostly by parents driving their precious ones to school in their Range Rovers, paying little attention to anything other than finding somewhere to stop. I take primary position when approaching the islands – I’d rather be shouted at and/or tooted at than nearly knocked off my bike every time. Slapping a window/bodywork of a car is almost a given every time I ride there.
griffly16 wrote:I take
Yep, it’s the only way. Unless there is already someone right on top of me I make an effort to get right into the middle of the road, because otherwise some moron is guaranteed to try to squeeze through.
Has it really taken over 2
Has it really taken over 2 years to get this dangerous driver off the roads?! :/
A cyclist feels threatened by
A cyclist feels threatened by a car and reacts. This is considered as “argy bargy” giving the impression that the victim and aggressor were on a level playing field.
We have a ton and a half of car (arbitary figure as I don’t know what car was being driven) being reversed at a cyclist and the judge considers “This was an altercation with a cyclist. It matters not in the least whose fault it was.”
Does she consider bullying as being a bit of bants too?
I suggest the judge is investigated as she seems to be firmly biased against cyclists and unfit to make correct rulings.
#Shocking
As someone who cycles in the
As someone who cycles in the Warwick/Leamington area regularly, on the whole it’s not too bad but, I’ve encountered my fair share of ignorant/stupid/dangerous/absent-minded drivers.
I had an incident in Warwick where a road was narrowing and cars continued to squeeze past me until a lady in a Chelsea Tractor barely squeezed past and then had to slam her brakes on as cars were coming the other way. I barely had time to pull up and unclip to avoid riding into the back of her.
I was so incensed with the fact that she had no regard for me or my safety that I smacked the back of her car which then produced a foul-mouthed torrent of abuse from her before she drove off at speed.
IMHO, all drivers (I’m one too, don’t worry) should have to resit their test every 10 years and spend time as a cyclist as part of that so that they can appreciate what we have to put up with. It’s not just other road users but the state of the roads themselves that must be negotiated.
Seems like a reasonable
Seems like a reasonable punishment to me. Driver acts like a dick. Get’s his privilege to drive taken away.
If I were the cyclist involved I’d be satisfied that justice had been served.
jon86boi wrote:Seems like a
Driving while banned charge incoming in 3… 2…
Actually, he’ll never get caught, as there are now only 3 traffic policeman in the entire country.
jon86boi wrote:Seems like a
Wearing a clown suit to work is ‘acting like a dick’. Deliberately reversing 2000 kg metal into someone is really rather more serious than that.
Doing a search for “Using a
Doing a search for “Using a vehicle as a weapon” and you’ll notice countless incidents that drivers end up in prison… unless it involves a cyclist. It’s evident that the courts are soft on drivers who injure cyclists, deliberate or not. There must surely be some research somewhere to back this up.
Useless lawyers. As usual.
Useless lawyers. As usual. Motorist lawyers.
It was clearly an assault. The wrong charge was used. The mens rea was there for an assault charge.
It appears that a clear
It appears that a clear intent to injure someone through the use of a motor vehicle is not considered as bad as reckless driving, which has no intent but instead only an implied consequence for driving in a manner that could cause injury to others.
In the use of a motor vehicle this area of law is unique. Replace the car with any other object or weapon and it is the other way around – intent becomes murder, carelessness is manslaughter.
A deliberate act like that is
A deliberate act like that is worth jail time. It was clearly an assault using a car as a weapon.
This is how it should have been dealt with:
http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2012/feb/17/driver-jailed-bus-weapon-cyclist
Is this some sort of joke?
Is this some sort of joke? The CPS are incompetent the judge is hopeless, total idiot. Should be removed for their ill-informed remarks. Absolute joke of a sentence. The driver should be in jail for at least 3 years and 10 year driving ban for what they did. Their actions were clearly premeditated calculated to cause injury and damage. These sorts of cases bring the courts into disrepute. They don’t give a shit about the safety of cyclists.
I’m certainly no expert on
I’m certainly no expert on the law, but surely if the driver had got out of the car and assaulted the cyclist (or indeed anyone) with a knife or a club then it would have been treated as such and the punishment on conviction would be a criminal record, a fine and/or jail time or whatever one gets for attacking and injuring someone with a weapon.
However because he used a car, then it’s not assault and ABH, but a standard road traffic violation, with a punishment based on licence points and presumably no criminal record.
Is this correct?
Mungecrundle wrote:it’s not
Grazes, the injuries described in the article, would almost certainly not qualify as actual bodily harm.
Of course we all know how
Of course we all know how effective driving bans really are.
As the saying goes, if you want to get away with killing a cyclist use your car.
@oozaveared, isn’t there a
@oozaveared, isn’t there a provision for having knowledge of the consequence? That is, if I stand in the High Street with a shotgun, I have no intention of killing anyone, but it would be reasonable to assume that the firing of said gun into a crowd is very likely to kill someone, no?
Translated to cars, teh question is whether the driver is aware that running over a cyclist( or even anyone) has I high likelyhood of killing them, all things considered.
While I didn’t plan beforehand, I have made a decision to use the vehicle as a weapon, and I’m fully aware that death may result. Surely that can fall under the name of murder.
don simon wrote:@oozaveared,
Unless he was reversing at 30mph, I don’t think reversing into the victim is quite comparable to firing a shotgun into a crowd of people.
Translating to cars would mean driving a car at speed into a crowd on a high street. That would be a translation of your shotgun analogy.
Death may result from all manner of things, but an attempted murder charge requires death to be the intention. It’s very unlikely that simply reversing into someone would meet that requirement.
I struggle to see why it isn’t assault, sure, but you can’t just look at all these driving incidents and say “Death [i]may[/i] have resulted, therefore it’s attempted murder.”
don simon wrote:@oozaveared,
Simple answer is no. The charge is quite a simple one. Person A fully intended to kill person B.
Proving it, even if there are high levels of violence, is actually very hard. Why?Because let’s say someone sustainedly a beats of someone with a baseball bat. It may be possible that they might die from that. If they do it’s simple. It’s murder. If they don’t die then it becomes more difficult precisely because they don’t die. Now you have to prove “mens rea” for murder. That is you have to prove their state of mind. It’s far more tricky to prove that someone intended to murder another person but failed than it is to prove murder.
In any case it is entirely inappropriate here. Deliberately running someone over at 50mph could easily be charged as attempted murder and probably would be. Reversing at someone at a few mph even with intent to injure them gets nowhere near that level of intent for attempted murder.
However stupid reckless and aggressive the driver was, It’s also pretty obvious that the driver did not seriously intend to actually kill the cyclist. That’s why attempted murder is not appropriate as a charge.
The law is pretty clear and well defined on this stuff and you can’t just be hyperbolic and charge people with the most serious thing you can think of.
here are the guidelines:
http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/s_to_u/sentencing_manual/attempted_murder/
oozaveared wrote:don simon
Cheers for that, I wasn’t directly looking at using a car as a weapon, just looking at those cases where a non weapon is used as a weapon in general.
oozaveared wrote:don simon
Unless someone actually says ‘I plan to kill this person’ how on earth can you ever prove this?
In what way is this ‘clear’? Because he failed to kill the guy or because lawyers have magic powers of insight?
They were all of the things
They were all of the things that I was taking into consideration, Vonhelmet. 😉
People confusing manslaughter
People confusing manslaughter and murder.
Attempted murder requires:
Death was desired outcome
Premeditated (i.e. he set out to kill the victim)
Manslaughter requires:
Death was the outcome
It wasn’t premeditated (i.e. it was done in the heat of the moment)
Let’s say hypothetically the cyclist had died – it would be manslaughter, not murder.
The actions in this case fit into neither of the above definitions as it was neither premeditated, and the victim isn’t dead.
However, I would argue that there should be a common assault charge included, and prison time would be appropriate. It’s disgusting that this person has had such a light punishment for what is such a serious offence.
@danthomascyclist – I’m sorry
@danthomascyclist – I’m sorry but your definitions are incorrect. Manslaughter is when death results from an act where the perpetrator was reckless as to whether death would be caused, ie if during a fight you push someone on to a road, you may not have intended for them to be hit by an oncoming car and killed, but you did a reckless act which put them in a position where they are likely to be killed. Murder does encompass what we would colloquially call heat of the moment decisions, ie if during a fight scenario with a stranger you only just came across you became so enraged you picked up a nearby hosepipe and started bludgeoning someone to death. You may have not intended to kill anyone when you left the house that morning, and indeed never met the man before that you ended up killing, but because at some point you made a decision to kill, you are guilty of murder.
An attempted crime is when you intend to do something but the act is not completed, so the non complete act in both attempted murder or attempted manslaughter is the killing. Using the same examples above, attempted murder would be if you started bludgeoning the victim but he does not die, and attempted manslaughter would be if you pushed the victim onto a road, a car hit them but they survived.
rliu wrote:@danthomascyclist
I’m not sure I agree with all your definitions either. For one thing there’s definitely no such thing as attempted manslaughter, because you definitely can’t attempt to accidentally kill someone. I’m also not entirely convinced that pushing someone into the road in the course of a fight whereupon they happened to get hit by a car would land you with a manslaughter charge, but this is obviously getting into a much more nuanced area.
rliu wrote:@danthomascyclist
Errr …….. you don’t know what you are talking about. Attempted manslaughter ……………….. =)) No such offence exists. To be guilty of murder one has to have had intent to kill some one.
rliu wrote:@danthomascyclist
Please do your research before spreading incorrect information.
Here’s a hint:
There are varying degrees of manslaughter:
1) Voluntary Manslaughter.
2) Involuntary Manslaughter (which covers manslaughter by gross negligence and manslaughter by an unlawful and dangerous act).
What’s the time limit to
What’s the time limit to determine premeditated?
don simon wrote:What’s the
There’s not. It’s a grey area of law.
For example, if the motorist had gone home, calmed down, then found out where the cyclist lived, turned up in the night and killed him, that would be murder.
If he’d chased him in his car, calmed down a little, then spotted the cyclist and killed him, would that be manslaughter or murder?
It’s all very grey. Which is why you should always make sure
1) You’ve got a good lawyer.
or
2) You just stick to killing cyclists
That doesn’t sit
That doesn’t sit with…
…setting out to kill and heat of the moment. You can murder someone in the heat of the moment if you’re aware that your actions are going to kill, surely? Hence, driving at a pedestrian/cyclist aware that the action could lead to death can be considered as premeditated and therefore murder.
Awaits a lawyer to confirm.
don simon wrote:That doesn’t
…setting out to kill and heat of the moment. You can murder someone in the heat of the moment if you’re aware that your actions are going to kill, surely? Hence, driving at a pedestrian/cyclist aware that the action could lead to death can be considered as premeditated and therefore murder.
Awaits a lawyer to confirm.
No. That would be voluntary manslaughter. Loss of control reduces murder to voluntary manslaughter. Look at s.54 of the Coroners and Justice Bill.
Please do your research before suggesting misinformation. Some of the misinformation in this thread is making me cringe.
Just carrying a knife in the
Just carrying a knife in the car, or a baseball bat is an offence as it denotes a prediction of a situation where you would use said weapons. Using the car to run people down in the absence of such weapons should be considered too.
MercuryOne wrote:Just
Don’t be ridiculous. How else are you supposed to get to a baseball game you’re playing in? Or bring a kitchen knife back from a shop? I don’t doubt that people have been killed with golf clubs. Do you suppose the police should arrest everyone carrying a bag of clubs?
Carrying something that can be used as a weapon is not the same as carrying a weapon.
Ironically, now he has been
Ironically, now he has been banned for a year he may turn out into a cyclist. I live just off Myton Road, I wonder if he will use the useless cycle path or brave the road?
Milkfloat wrote:Ironically,
No, he won’t turn into a cyclist. My money is on his just continuing to drive (without insurance and a licence). Or maybe on his appealing against the ban because he needs to drive for work, innit.
@vonhelmet – the Criminal
@vonhelmet – the Criminal Attempts Act 1981 governs the law on attempts and it doesn’t give an exhaustive list of what crimes can be attempted and what ones can’t. It simply states “if, with intent to commit an offence to which [the act applies], a person does an act which is more than merely preparatory to the commission of the offence, he is guilty of attempting to commit the offence”. In English law one can have ones charge reduced from murder to manslaughter due to diminished responsibility, usually a recognised mental illness. therefore theoretically someone can plot a murder while in the throes of a mental illness, be unsuccessful in the murder, be charged with attempted murder and have the charge reduced to attempted manslaughter due to diminished responsibility
I very much doubt that chain
I very much doubt that chain of events could occur, but feel free to dig up a case citation. Failing that, I’m sure it’ll make the news in due course.
Judge Sylvia de Bertodano
Judge Sylvia de Bertodano said: “This was an altercation with a cyclist. It matters not in the least whose fault it was.
Was this quote abridged or taken out of context because it makes no sense whatsoever for a judge not to be looking into matters and ascertaining who is to blame and punishing them appropriately.
It looks to me – reading the
It looks to me – reading the article – as if the judge decided that Mr Green’s banging on the car was an “aggravating factor” and that Mr Scarpellini would not have carried out his “dangerous driving” if he had not been goaded into it. Which is annoying as f**k, to be honest.
The article says that “the driver tried to overtake the cyclist at the point where the road narrowed due to the traffic island.”, which is dangerous in a lay sense if not in a legal sense (I fear it wouldn’t even count as ‘careless’ driving, under the law).
So, Mr Green is afraid he’s about to be knocked off, the adrenaline rushes and he lashes out with his hand.
Mr Scarpellini takes offence (1) that someone is criticising his driving and (2) that someone has touched his car, and also lashes out. Using a tonne of motorised metal, rather than his glove.
Yes, its an ‘altercation’, but in no way are the two actions proportionate/equivalent.
I don’t think we have enough
I don’t think we have enough information here. The mere fact a Con Dis was given suggests the defendant had no previous convictions or involvement in the criminal justice system. Which might then suggest that, however selfish and dangerous the overtake was, his lawyer could argue that what then happened was out of character and arose out of a provoking act from the cyclist. Then the speed and distance of the reverse become important. The slower the speed and shorter the distance then the less serious the offence, especially in the context of apparent provocation.
Also, we don’t know what mitigation was offered up by the drivers Lawyer. Mitigation can be very powerful especially when it is as it should be specific to the defendant and their personal circumstances. This took a long time to come to court. Perhaps the impact on the driver of the delays and loss of licence were significant. Perhaps the cyclist said something in his statement or through Cps suggesting a degree of culpability? or forgiveness? who knows Look at the guy who got a suspended sentence yesterday for keying a 100k car. The car owner didn’t want him to go inside.
….and if he’d done the same
….and if he’d done the same to a pedestrian? Put his car in reverse and then hit them. Surely that would be deemed worthy of a heavier sentence?
Longer ban, having to retest and do some cycle awareness training wouldnt go amiss TBH. Maybe some anger management as well.
Quote:Please do your research
The addition of question marks in my posts would indicate that I’m asking questions and using the forum as a research base. Therefore I am not suggesting misinformation. Your inability to read the question correctly, however, makes me wonder about the value of your answers.
Are you also liking your own posts? You are, aren’t you? :))
don simon wrote:Quote:Please
‘surely’ at the end of sentence is normally used as a reaffirmation, as one description has it “[s]urely is used to say that the speaker believes something in spite of reasons to believe the opposite” – which would make your ‘question’ rather less open than you’re trying to have the poster believe. It’s followed by ‘hence’, so the next bit is not a question either which makes your insistence you’re just on a quest for knowledge seem a tad disingenuous – which it may not be, but comes across like that to me at least especially considering the snide comments at the end.
fukawitribe wrote:’surely’ at
“Don’t call me Shirley!”.
Sorry, had to say it. C’mon, people, chill a little. B-) Now, shake hands and play nicely.
brooksby wrote:fukawitribe
They started it…
don simon wrote:Quote:Please
I don’t expect anyone to take my answers at face value. Which is why I put a source of my information (the publicly available Coroners and Justice Act 2009).
Given that I’ve answered your question correctly, accurately, and with a source, I’d suggest I’ve understood it.
Yes, I’m liking my own posts.
Quote:which it may not be,
1. It wasn’t a snide comment.
2. It was a direct comment in response to the boorish comment made by danthomascyclist regarding the giving suggestion of misinformation.
3. You have, indeed, misunderstood. The “surely” is looking for affirmation of my belief, but happy to be educated by a qualified source, that’ll be a lawyer. A question was asked earlier and thanked without the need for put downs from the responder to the question.
4. I also put that I would await the response to clarify from a lawyer, I’ll keep on waiting…
makes me cringe how anal some folks are on forums.
I am genuinely amused at liking your own posts too. 🙂
don simon wrote:I am
I have like my own posts once, on a ‘peoples choice’ vote on here when told to do so by road.cc. Please don’t let that spoil your omnipotent knowledge of voting habits.
fukawitribe wrote:don simon
Ouch!
Wasn’t directed at you Mr Sensitive, but if you like your own posts too, then yes, I’m laughing at you too. :))
don simon wrote:fukawitribe
Ouch!
Wasn’t directed at you Mr Sensitive, but if you like your own posts too, then yes, I’m laughing at you too. :))— don simon
My apologies – given it was in a reply to me alone I rather thought it was… surely ? 😉 Still, as others have suggested, I shall now chill.
I am a Lawyer
I am a Lawyer
Long reply lost.
Long reply lost.
My son got hit by some cars
My son got hit by some cars racing in Lincoln. My son parked his car, and then one of the racers then deliberately came back and rammed his parked car into a hedge causing a lot of damage.
The police classed the ramming as a road collision and took no action against the culprits .
They are still having unofficial and illegal races in the same area regularly, but never seen any police around.
Pathetic but true.
If you’re close enough to a
If you’re close enough to a bicycle for him to tap on your windows you’re already driving too close (unless they are passing you in a traffic queue). I get drivers attempting to pass before traffic islands quite often (we need more warning signs for motorists like this one – http://www.alamy.com/stock-photo-a-cyclist-passes-a-new-do-not-overtake-cyclists-road-sign-westminster-65327568.html)
Actually Wolfie Smith there was an incident in Coventry where a motorist used his vehicle to kill a cyclist that I think had broken a mirror.
I agree that the charges were light as attempted murder would be far more relevant but when it comes to cars we make so many exceptions as they are so vital to our lives today. Which is tragic when you think about it.