- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
news
Drug dealer jailed for 15 years for killing cyclist (Suffolk Police)15-year sentence for drug dealer who killed cyclist while speeding at 60mph in 30 zone
A drug dealer who hit and killed a cyclist as the "reckless and dangerous" driver sped through Ipswich at 60mph, double the speed limit, has been jailed for 15 years after being found guilty in court.
James Ashman denied causing death by dangerous driving but was convicted by a jury at Ipswich Crown Court, the drug dealer sentenced to 15 years in prison, 14 of those for the driving offence, with an additional year for a drug-dealing offence.
Following his sentencing, Suffolk Police released video footage of events before and after the fatal collision, Ashman seen speeding and narrowly avoiding a collision with a pedestrian before later fleeing the scene after a crash involving himself, two other vehicles being driven on Vernon Street and cyclist Benjamin Wright who died at the scene.
The collision happened shortly before 10pm on Thursday 12 October 2022, Ashman seen running from his vehicle afterwards. Police established he had hit Mr Wright, causing a secondary collision with the driver of a Volkswagen Golf, before Ashman also hit a Skoda being driven on the same road too.
CCTV analysis and a reconstruction using an Audi of the same model, year and body shape to that being driven by Ashman confirmed to investigators that he had been driving at around 60mph when the collision occurred, twice the 30mph speed limit.
The investigation also found that he was talking on the phone, using a handsfree device, at the time of the collision. He was seen running from the scene and went to a friend's house before later stopping a cyclist on Wherstead Road and paying £40 to take his bike, on which Ashman rode to a local shop and claimed his car had been stolen at knifepoint and asked for a lift to an address in Chelmondiston.
When police searched the address later that night they found him hiding in the garden behind a garden shed, where he was arrested.
The clothes he had been wearing that night were found in a plastic bag at the property, along with large quantities of cannabis and £5,000 in cash.
A year after the collision, Ashman was charged with causing death by dangerous driving last October, six months after he had been charged with failing to stop at the scene of a collision and failing to report a collision.
He admitted failing to stop but denied the other charges. Ashman was jailed for 12 months in prison at an earlier hearing after he and another man had pleaded guilty to being concerned in the supply of cannabis. A 14-year sentence for the death by dangerous driving offence will now run consecutively following Ashman's sentencing on Thursday.
Detective Inspector David McCormack, of the Serious Collision Investigation Unit, said: "Ashman's actions that evening were dangerous and reckless, and he showed absolutely no regard for the law or other road users – travelling at almost double the 30mph speed limit.
> Government considers inviting evidence for lifetime bans on dangerous drivers who kill
"It is clear that Ashman attempted to evade justice by leaving the scene of the collision, making up a false story of his car being stolen to persuade an innocent member of public to drive him to a friend's address, where he then hid from officers. He has then refused to acknowledge the severity of the charge against him.
"The family and friends of Benjamin Wright have been left truly devastated and I hope today's result will provide them with some closure. I also hope this sends a message to other motorists about the consequences of driving dangerously and at high speed."
Dan is the road.cc news editor and joined in 2020 having previously written about nearly every other sport under the sun for the Express, and the weird and wonderful world of non-league football for The Non-League Paper. Dan has been at road.cc for four years and mainly writes news and tech articles as well as the occasional feature. He has hopefully kept you entertained on the live blog too.
Never fast enough to take things on the bike too seriously, when he's not working you'll find him exploring the south of England by two wheels at a leisurely weekend pace, or enjoying his favourite Scottish roads when visiting family. Sometimes he'll even load up the bags and ride up the whole way, he's a bit strange like that.
Latest Comments
- Sam3 37 min 40 sec ago
The UCI weight MINIMUM limit is 6.8 kg: https://road.cc/buyers-guide/lightest-road-bikes...
- brooksby 2 hours 6 min ago
They haven't been seen for ages- did they get banned?
- eburtthebike 2 hours 12 min ago
They prefer their alternative facts to real ones. They believe something, therefore it must be true.
- Spangly Shiny 3 hours 23 min ago
Sorry, no idea what you are on about.
- ktache 3 hours 27 min ago
For double that you can' get a Pedro's vise whip Ii. Or half, the reportedly excellent decathlon thingy. And Sigma has the Silca for only £150.
- KDee 3 hours 33 min ago
I'm no detective, but the "NOAHFAST" decal vertically stickered on the headtube is a little bit of a clue.
- Spangly Shiny 3 hours 52 min ago
I remember my driving test examiner, straight after congratulating me for having passed the test said, "Don't be a twat and have that as your best...
- Bigfoz 6 hours 52 sec ago
Did they think it was a drive thru?
- Rendel Harris 6 hours 11 min ago
As a teacher's husband, I'm allowed to watch up to 50km out (unless it's a big mountain stage when I can only watch up to the start of the first HC...
Add new comment
16 comments
When harm and culpability are both maximum and a good many of the aggravating factors are present and there are no mitigating factors present, then the court is more likely go to near a maximum sentence. They could have gone up a little bit more, I think it was 4 years below the maximum they could have imposed.
https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/offences/crown-court/item/causing-d...
I finally get it, now. You need to be a drug dealer to get a decent sentence for killing a cyclist.
Well... as far as "decent sentence" goes - back when 8 years was a really substantial sentence*:
https://www.dudleynews.co.uk/news/11591769.drug-dealer-jailed-for-hit-an...
Similar in that it was hit and run, plead not guilty - in this case they were an uninsured learner driver also.
* Er... it still is for this kind of thing.
An 18 year driving ban? No way. That has to be a typo!
Edit: And I mean "no way" as in I suspect it's only 18 months sadly.
18 years will be correct but it's only that length because it starts from the day of sentencing so it's calculated to ensure that he will have to serve part of the ban after he leaves prison.
I know we've all discussed this before but I couldn't remember the answer: if someone gets 5 years in jail and a 3 year driving ban (for example), do they serve the 3 year ban after they have left jail?
(yes, I'm aware it should be obvious, but so much around the law seems not to be…)
Sentencing Act 2020, 166 - Extension of disqualification where custodial sentence also imposed
When someone goes to jail the driving ban is extended by half the length of the jail term to account for the time they would spend behind bars (when they wouldn't be driving anyway).
It's not entirely clear from the report if the 18 year ban is before after the extension, but AFAIK it's usually the length before the extension that is reported.
Surely most of the ban will be after he leaves prison.
Plenty of drivers like him in Ipswich sadly, and it's a really nasty road to ride on too as a cyclist, I doubt this sentence will make any difference to how other motorists behave in the town.
The guy in court said he felt driving at double the speed limit was merely careless after all.
What a refreshing change from "No sentence I can pass will ...etc."
This is so inconsistant. I assume a high sentence was because of the drug related crime (which few people do) instead of looking at a phone (which many people do). If he was on a phone it would have been 3 points and a £500 fine. Also, as above, with prisons too full why don't we ban people from driving for long period rather than giving them an artificially long sentence in prison?
Well - that's our legal system considering the degree of culpability, not just the consequences. In this case pretty much everything they could do as an aggravating factor was present: driver was speeding (by a large factor), had already nearly hit someone, then hit the cyclist, hit someone else, did everything they could to hide / minimise their role, including driving off, trying to set a false trail / establish an alibi, concealing evidence etc. Then finally pleading not guilty means zero discount. Plus they've previous and were committing other offenses at the time.
That will be seen as far worse than (a plea of) "I hold my hands up - I momentarily looked at my phone, I know I shouldn't do that, I am so so sorry" etc. even though the outcome for a victim may be the same.
That's just our system.
However you are quite correct there appear to be inconsistencies (albeit I think the guidance has changed over the piece) in that other criminal / drug / speeding drivers who have pled not guilty have received quite a wide variety of sentences.
Again though - is currently our system (I am not a judge...).
The problem with driving bans is that a) it's not like there is anything to stop you (e.g. a car which won't drive if you're banned) b) detection rates would appear to be very low c) the penalty for breaching appears to be inconsequential d) clearly substantial sections of society don't think this is a big deal (so are not likely to remonstrate / report).
And obviously if someone's already involved in "more serious" crime e.g. drug dealing - which might involve e.g. carrying or using weapons for which far greater sentences are involved than driving while banned - they're not really going to be too worried about the "illegal driving" part.
It's stated above that 14 years of the sentence was for the driving offence, whilst only one year is for the drug dealing offence.
14 years for causing death by dangerous driving does not seem particularly inflated - the highly excessive speed probably places this in "Culpability A", and then aggrevated by the victim being a vulnerable road user and failing to stop/attempting to hide. https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/offences/crown-court/item/causing-d...
It's also stated that he was making a phone call via a hands-free device (still potentially a distraction, but not in itself illegal).
Generally I'm in favour of less focus on prison and greater focus on rehabilitation, driving bans etc. but when someone has actually been killed as a result of dangerous driving, I think custodial sentences are appropriate. One of the purposes of the justice system is to punish offenders so that victims feel justice has been served, and as such I think it is appropriate that the severity of the sentence reflects the seriousness of the outcome (i.e. an innocent person has been killed).
I would like to see greater enforcement of "low level" driving offences and driving bans for offenders before they kill someone.
A 15 year sentence sounds like a result but he'll be out and about and a danger to the public again after serving 40%, i.e. 6 years. If a criminal's going to prison for 6 years, why can't he be sentenced to 6 years? I think it's just so the press can have their headline and the authorities can look as though they're acting tough on crime.
Because the early release after 6 years is conditional. If the entire sentence was 6 years then it wouldn't be.
If 14 years is the maximum sentence for causing death by dangerous driving and this is the first time I've heard that it is being applied, can it be a benchmark case for future incidents to apply the same?
And if frequent recurrence shows that the sentence isn't enough to deter the offence, maybe the number of years should be higher?