A speeding driver who drove straight into a cyclist in Shrewsbury and then got out of the car, shouted swear words at him and accused him of being at fault, has been spared jail but disqualified from driving for 18 months.
The collision has left Edward Cooper with serious and life-changing injuries, rendering him unable to do activities like riding a bike or surf. He’s even facing difficulties playing with his daughter.
Cooper, a teacher at Shrewsbury College and an experienced cyclist, was cycling back home around 5:30PM in December last year. Tyler Maddox, 27, of Shrewsbury was driving his white Audi A3 on a road parallel to Sundorne Road when he hit Cooper.
Maddox had driven into Cooper as he travelled towards him, throwing the cyclist onto the bonnet, before he rolled underneath the bumper.
The prosecutor told the court that witnesses had described Maddox as going over the 30mph speed limit – with the Judge accepting that he was travelling at around 40mph. Maddox had slowed the vehicle as the collision took place but added that the bike was thrown three metres into the air.
He told the court that Maddox had then gotten out of the car and shouted “What the f*** are you playing at” to the stricken cyclist.
Police examinations of Maddox’s vehicle found its stopping distance could have been affected because its tyres were under inflated, one had insufficient tread depth, while the windscreen had a large sun strip, which officers were concerned would have limited the view, the Shropshire Star reports.
It’s not sure when, or if Cooper will be able to make a full recovery. As of now, he has only been able to return to work for six hours a week — an experience which he said leaves him drained. Besides, he is no longer able to surf or cycle, and has difficulties in playing with his young daughter.
The inability to work had also cost him thousands of pounds in wages, with Cooper saying that he was worried about his financial stability in the future as a result of his injury.
The mitigator for Maddox said that his client faced a momentary lapse in concentration, adding: “He has reflected on it and I will say from the outset he is genuinely remorseful for what happened.
“He is someone who in this situation unfortunately made an error of judgement that brings him before the court and he has to accept his part in that, and the implications for Mr Cooper.
“I would suggest he was somewhat immature in his actions on the day in question but I would suggest he has grown up since, quite significantly.”
The mitigator then urged the Judge to suspend the sentence, saying: “He is someone genuinely petrified at the prospect of going into custody.”
> Motorist banned for six months after leaving cyclist with multiple fractures and bruised lungs in “momentary lapse of concentration”
The Judge concluded that Maddox was driving “too fast for the conditions”, and that Cooper was riding his bike quite properly the other way along that road, and “was wearing proper reflective gear and that included a top, and had his lights on”.
“Your first reaction when that happened was to get out of your car and shout at him,” the judge said, adding that in the subsequent interviews with police and probation officers, Maddox was still claiming it was his [Cooper’s] fault.
The Judge concluded that the incident had not been deliberate and that Maddox “does not pose a danger to the public and has a realistic prospect of rehabilitation”.
He said: “I have reached the view, on balance, with all these factors, yours is a case I do not have to impose an immediate custodial sentence.”
Maddox was sentenced to four months in prison suspended for 18 months.
He will have to complete 10 rehabilitation requirement days, 150 hours of unpaid work, and pay £535 costs. He was also disqualified from driving for 18 months, backdated to include an interim disqualification on August 16.





















76 thoughts on “Speeding driver who screamed at cyclist after hitting and leaving him with life-changing injuries spared jail”
Yeah, but war on motorists,
Yeah, but war on motorists, innit?
Thank god the Tories are
Thank god the Tories are putting an end to it. I think I have PTSD from having to driver at 20mph sometimes and don’t get me started on having to try not to hurt or kill cyclists.
mctrials23 wrote:
Don’t get me started, I’m practiclly bankrupt from paying fuel duty and road tax!
We just seem to encourage a
We just seem to encourage a culture of shying away from accountability, and will continue to do so until a sentence that reflects the severity of not taking the use of potentially life-changing (even life-ending) equipment safely, seriously or responsibly.
Oh, but why should I serve jail time because of a moment of immaturity and a silly mistake? Because that silly mistake happened to be in a 1½-tonne item travelling at 40mph which you were in charge of. If you don’t like it, stand still whilst a galloping horse runs you down.
Maddox “does not pose a
Maddox “does not pose a danger to the public and has a realistic prospect of rehabilitation”.
So are cyclists not members of the public now?
Someone showing that level of callousness should never be allowed in control of a motor vehicle again. 18 months is a joke when they’ve been spared a prison sentence and their victim is facing life-changing injuries.
If he had genuinely shown
If he had genuinely shown remorse (he didn’t) then perhaps he should have been offered a suspended sentence in return for a lifetime ban.
Car Delenda Est wrote:
I agree, although I’d consider that a truly remorseful driver would hand in their license and would never want to drive again.
I’m okay with magistrates showing mercy and giving people second chances, but that shouldn’t include having a second chance to mutilate innocent people.
Maddox “does not pose a
Maddox “does not pose a danger to the public . . ” well, at least mainly until he re-starts driving again, that is, if he can afford the car insurance, assuming actually gets it.
Has he given in to the temptation to illegally use an e-scooter, rather than join the cycling maffia?
hawkinspeter wrote:
Perhaps they should be allowed to re-apply for a licence once their victim has fully recovered, if the victim dies then that would be never!
“Upon hearing that he was
“Upon hearing that he was actually at fault and that he would be treated more leniently if he pretends to give a shit about the victim, my client has instructed me to tell the court that he is very remorseful and you can’t imagine the pain he has suffered as a result of this momentary lapse in concentration where he didn’t maintain his car, broke the speed limit, didn’t pay attention to the road and then screamed at his badly injured victim.”
mctrials23 wrote:
A similar translation should be read out in court by the prosecution every time the defense tries this bullshit.
mctrials23 wrote:
Showing ‘remorse’ wilst being prosecuted is 100% meaningless. Why is this even allowable in court? It makes no sense to me.
Maddox’s Mitigator wrote:
Are you suggesting that his
Are you suggesting that his remorse isn’t genuine?
Quote:
Oh bollox he is
This sort of thing really is
This sort of thing really is sickening.
Some interesting comments on
Some interesting comments on their Facebook post about the article.
Screenshots of his now-private TikTok with a photo/video of his car parked for a photo in the road and the text “when they take your licence but not your keys”.
Another is a video of his car doing a burnout on the public road:
https://youtu.be/rLjHRFWONOo?si=x-KMA5-aiRuxqNsL&t=568
is this sort of thing not
is this sort of thing not technically ‘contempt of court’ and usually leads to any suspended sentences being immediately imposed?
.
Let’s hope so.
.
.
Let’s hope so.
.
Lots of remorse on display
Lots of remorse on display there…
This judge is an ankle (lower
This judge is an ankle (lower than a ‘see you next tuesday’).
The system need overhauling.
Young Tyler Maddox has proven he is not a responsible licence holder, taking into account the series of offences and his immediate reacton to the victim, he should never be allowed to ever hold a licence again.. or at the very least.. for a very long time. Please note Mr Judge a ‘very long time’ does not mean 18 months, a ‘very long time’ should involve at least a decade.
One of Sunak’s soldiers…
One of Sunak’s soldiers…
Muddy Ford wrote:
I still don’t understand why people voted for Sunak
Let’s just pray we’re not
Rendel Harris wrote:
HS2 TrainStopping
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WOJHz3pU7mI
hawkinspeter wrote:
They didn’t. The tory party voted for Truss. Tory MPs voted for Sunak, and given the choice, who can blame them?
eburtthebike wrote:
Better than Captain Crasharoonie Snoozefest, aka the Human Bollard
Which Tory MP is that then?
Which Tory MP is that then? Boris? Just asking being as the only discussion here is Tory MP’s and Party members and who they voted in to lead their party.
https://www.youtube.com/watch
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mr8r787iST0
You’re welcome.
And again, why comment on
And again, why comment on someone from a totally different party, when the discussion is on the Prime Minister being elected by their own Party and MP’s and not the British Public, who currently do not look like they will follow suit.
Well, let me explain. It’s
Well, let me explain. It’s quite simple, so I hope someone with your IQ should understand.
There were some comments on Sunak as current Prime Minister. I commented saying that it is better than Sir Softy.
Who, as we all know, goes by the name Keir Starmer.
If Left is for Losers, you
If Left is for Losers, you must be somewhat to the left of Karl Marx.
Hmmm, bringing IQ into it
Hmmm, bringing IQ into it when you don’t seem to understand that Keir Starmer was not a choice for the Tory Members who chose Truss, (and as you only know MP’s by derogatory comments Pork Markets) or, after she was dumped in record time, the Tory MP’s chose Sunak (Inaction Man) as it appears the membership could’t be trusted a second time. Neither were voted in by any member of the normal British Public to make large changes to the election manifesto which is now happening.
AlsoSomniloquism wrote:
It’s his new thing apparently, accusing people of having low IQs while at the same time whining bitterly about the alleged failures of RCC to stop people being allegedly abusive to him.
Rendel Harris wrote:
Rendel mate, leave me alone please. Your obsession with my apparent obsessions is strange.
Left_is_for_Losers wrote:
There have definitely been other people on here who were very vocally convinced that Rendel was following them around…
Left_is_for_Losers wrote:
Nige mate, leave us alone please.
Your contributions are worse than useless, and I mean that literally, they just clog up and distract every discussion you join. You can barely manage to write a single sentence without trolling / sealioning.
I’m unable to comprehend why you want to return to road.cc each time you’re banned for being a complete twat.
Simon E wrote:
Thanks for your valued frothing.
Now pop back to your cave.
P.S. if being a complete twat was criteria for banning then the comments section would be pretty empty.
AlsoSomniloquism wrote:
Don’t forget that Seven Bins Sunak is also going against Tory/government active travel policies without any kind of mandate.
Wait – Seven Bins Sunak? Is
Wait – Seven Bins Sunak? Is he trying to woo the rubbish-receptacle vote from Count Binface now?
chrisonatrike wrote:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-66878893
Glad to see he’s a friend of
Glad to see he’s a friend of those chucking away waste (“Great British waste, in a world-leading British landfill*”) as well as those putting out other pollution!
* May be subject to processing by migrants as we can’t get the staff at those wages. Some Great British waste may be shipped to our trusted overseas recycling partners.
There was no requirement for
There was no requirement for public to vote, because Mordant pulled out, leaving Rishi as the sole candidate. And the reason Penny pulled out was because it was clear Rishi was going to win anyway.
For someone who seems to
For someone who seems to accuse everyone else of a low IQ, you seem to be confusing Public Vote (ie everyone of voting age who can cast a vote at an election) with less then 100k or so who voted on one leader, and wasn’t given the chance on another (new PM put into power by 200 people). After you dimissed 17million as nothing previously, surely you can see that 100k voting on being wooed by the pretty pictures painted by the candidates is not “the will of the people”. Especially as both successive leaders have ignored the mandates the Party was elected on and decided to go their own direction.
Anyway, lets take it back to the original question put forward by eburt which you tried to hijack, the choice was Truss, Sunak or A N Other Tory MP (you can’t have Johnson as he resigned as PM and then resigned as an MP). So who would your better choice have been?
AlsoSomniloquism wrote:
I don’t think I am getting confused. By public, that meant the Conservative party members, who just about anyone can join. So you could have your say if you want.
And I don’t think, looking back through the thread that this question was put forward by eburt, but possibly you?
And if you want to know, Penny Mordaunt would have been my choice.
Just because a member of the
Just because a member of the public can join doesn’t make it a “Public” vote. And they also actually block “new” members from leadership elections so if I did want to join to register my vote for that, I couldn’t. And Sunak’s promotion shows that being a member doesn’t always mean you could vote anyway. (And Labour do the same I know, but very rarely in power and I thought the Blair/Brown deal was an awful abuse of power and at least should have been on the Manifesto.)
Up until recently I would have stated Mordaunt is one of the few ones who seemed decent. Probably because she wasn’t prepared to throw her family under the bus for culture war statements. However her recent speech shows she seems to have drunk the kool aid with the rest. I mean she asks people to “stand up and fight” for what they believe in, yet the Tories rally against trans people and JSO and others when they do just that. Maybe it is only what the Tories believe in that should allow them to “stand up and fight”? (Sorry I can’t say that phrase another 20 times.)
https://youtube.com/watch?v
https://youtube.com/watch?v=6FcA6NybeQY&si=WoLlo44ZbgDoHRr0
Michael Spicer
AlsoSomniloquism wrote:
Not all members of the public can join, they asked me if I was a Labour party member and when I said yes they tore up my application!
AlsoSomniloquism wrote:
— AlsoSomniloquismTo be fair, that speech was one of the highlights of the tory party conference, even if it got a bit repetitive. Funny thing was, she didn’t actually tell them who they should fight. Maybe she meant the tory party should fight the party that’s been in power for thirteen years and have literally screwed everything and everyone* for all of those years, whoever they are.
*Billionaire tory donors excluded.
“Stand up for your right
“Stand up for your right (wing)”?
Common modern protest song in both UK and US
Or is it the more “alternative” UK scene “You gotta fight for your right Tory Party?”
(I prefer more political axes myself in these descriptions and I think the very recent shifts are more like last-ditch efforts for populist appeal).
AlsoSomniloquism wrote:
The point is though that there was not a requirement or need to vote for Sunak. As Mordaunt pulled out there was no other option, and it was clear that he was going to win.
So one PM was elected by 100k
So one PM was elected by 100k people and the other was elected 200 and the common member of the public has no say for it until probably 24 months later. I seem to remember we shouldn’t be trusting institutions were people are put into leadership without a public vote. Johnson and Farage was quite adamant about that.
“The mitigator for Maddox
“The mitigator for Maddox said that his client faced a momentary lapse in concentration…….” Gosh, that’s all right then, never heard of that before.
“He has reflected on it and I will say from the outset he is genuinely remorseful for what happened.” Honestly he is. Very, very remorseful.
“The mitigator then urged the Judge to suspend the sentence, saying: “He is someone genuinely petrified at the prospect of going into custody.”” So don’t break the law multiple times, don’t hit and severely injure an innocent victim and don’t blame them for your gross incompetence.
I’m left wondering exactly who Tyler Maddox knows.
eburtthebike wrote:
Many years ago I was involved with firearms (target shooting, former international no less!), if you had a “momentary lapse in concentration” and shot someone you could bet you’d lose your gun licence for life as a first step let alone the further sanctions, why is it that a “momentary lapse” in the arguably much more dangerous pursuit of driving a ton of lethal metal on the road at high speed doesn’t incur the same?
This ” momentary lapse in
This ” momentary lapse in concentration” seems to have become the de facto line of defence these days. Absolutely ridiculous.
But it wasn’t a “monentary”
But it wasn’t a “monentary” lapse. The vision-restricting ornamentation across the windscreen, the under inflated tyres, the (presumably) illegally low tread depth, and indeed the ongoing affirmation to exceed the speed limit – none of these was momentary. By saying it was a momentary lapse is to deny all of the factors leading up to the collision. If the perpetrator is in denial why should he be excused time in prison, at least until he can accept the truth?
Yes I totally agree, but this
Yes I totally agree, but this line is put forward more and more as if to say forget everything else, it was merely a lapse in concentration. Could happen to anyone. And then they usually end up with a slap on the wrist.
I think that’s the problem.
I think that’s the problem. The judges are all motorists, and are thinking ‘there but for the grace of god go I’ so don’t impose a very tough sentence.
Yes, I keep reading it, too.
Yes, I keep reading it, too.
Almost as common as ‘exceptional hardship’.
alchemilla wrote:
Exceptional hardship = mild inconvenience
Aren’t life changing injuries
Aren’t life changing injuries and exceptional hardship? Paying for your crimes is justice.
Unless you are a motorist.
How, how, how can he not be
How, how, how can he not be jailed for such an appalling example of driving and uncaring attitude.
Didn’t you listen. He is very
Didn’t you listen. He is very very caring and remorseful. His lawyer said so and they are a very trustworthy bunch.
I’m confused as to how he hit
I’m confused as to how he hit him on the wrong side of the road and how this amounts to a lack of concentration.
Or did he turn out of a junction into him?
Just another example of the war on hard working motorists.
Read the previous post! There
Read the previous post! There is a difference between hard working motorists and scumbags who have no disregard for the law or anyone more vulnerable than themselves.
I can’t make sense of the
I can’t make sense of the description of the collision. Was he driving on the wrong side of the road and hit the cyclist head-on?
bikes wrote:
If it’s where I think it is (the only road I’d describe as parallel to Sundorne Road), it’s a relatively narrow strip in front of a row of houses. I’ve ridden along there a good number of times. [street view]
If that’s the location of the incident then there is absolutely no reason to drive along there except to access one of the houses. Doing 30 mph or more would be really dangerous. And people wonder why we campaign for a 20 mph limit in urban areas…
Chances are the arrogant Audi driver pulled out to go around one of the parked cars and refused to slow down for the oncoming cyclist. It would not be a “momentary lapse in concentration”, as claimed by the defence, it would be deliberate.
An 18 month driving ban for someone like Tyler Maddox is pathetic. It should be 5 years minimum and that fucker needs to learn to walk places. Or maybe ride a bike.
New Rule:
New Rule:
If anyone involved in a road collison is driving a White Audi A3 they are automatically culpable for the incident. This is due to most people who drive white Audi A3s as an accident waiting to happen.
Only exception to this rule is if the other vehicle involved is a Vauxhall Corsa with a body kit. In which case all around can rejoice that 2 of the gits have been taken off the streets.
Are airline pilots allowed to
Are airline pilots allowed to have momentary lapses in concentration?
Benthic wrote:
They only get one…
Benthic wrote:
Not so much allowed, as tolerated as long as it doesn’t actually kill anyone, and if you fully and freely confess, the idea being that they learn from their mistakes rather than hiding them.
Throw the book at him. Make
Throw the book at him. Make an example of him to make him and others learn!
Geordiepeddeler wrote:
I appreciate the sentiment, but longer prison sentences aren’t going to get us towards Vision Zero (more effective traffic policing would definitely be a good start). This case does sound like a prison sentence is appropriate though due to his behaviour towards his victim and it should definitely be a driving ban of at least ten years or so as a matter of public safety.
Benthic wrote:
No but we are all human beings, but his reaction after the incident are reprehensible
This in my opinion is a very
This in my opinion is a very strange decision bt tbe judge? It appears it could well be a case of dangerous driving? The driver of the cars reaction at the scene cannot be dismissed either, Yes it could have been shock but this seems a lenient sentence as the cyclist was not at fault in any way.
That he has life changing injuries too do not appear to have been taken into accont? I may well be wrong but the sentence was derisory
4 month suspended sentence and 150 hrs community work? Plus it should have been a 2 year ban for this individual offense if you read the circumstances in my personal opinion.
Not to mention the car was
Not to mention the car was not in a satisfactory condition. Was that a momentary lapse of judgement, or the fact he was still speeding after slowing down, or the fact that he is a typical young ignorant white Audi driver who has no respect for anything or anyone but himself? This is absolutely disgusting. It should be appealed.