- 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
- Tubeless valves
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
news
Statue of Justice, Old Bailey (licensed CC BY 2.0 on Flickr by Ronnie Macdonald).jpgHit-and-run driver jailed for killing cyclist gets driving ban shortened after Court of Appeal decision
A motorist jailed for killing a cyclist in a hit-and-run crash will have his driving ban start from the date he was sentenced rather than the date of his eventual release from prison following a Court of Appeal decision.
Luke Paul Headech, aged 26, was jailed for a total of seven years at Lewes Crown Court in May last year after being convicted of offences including causing the death by dangerous driving of cyclist Jamie Murray, 23, on 1 January 2015.
He was also banned from driving for five years, starting on the day of his release from prison.
Inspector Phil Duffy of the Surrey and Sussex Roads Policing Unit said at the time that he welcomed the sentence, including the driving ban, pointing out that it would not begin “until he leaves prison and he will also have to take an extended retest if he wants to drive again.”
That turns out not to be the case, however, with the Court of Appeal this week ruling that the ban should start from the date Headech was sentenced, meaning that part if not all of it will elapse while he is in prison.
Judge Sir John Saunders, one of the three judges sitting on the appeal, said: “We reduce the length of disqualification to run from the date of sentence.”
He explained that the court had to allow the appeal since a change in the law that provides that where a custodial sentence is imposed, any driving ban commences on the day of release, was passed into law after the date of the fatal crash in this case.
The Hastings Observer says that the appeal was lodged by a senior judge after the question had been raised as to when the ban should start.
Road safety campaigners had campaigned for the law to be changed for a number of years, but it was only on 13 April 2015 – four and a half months after Mr Murray was killed – that the new provisions took effect.
The law had already been revised by the time Headech was sentenced last year, but the Court of Appeal decision means that it only applies where a driving ban is imposed alongside a custodial sentence relating to an offence taking place on or after the date the change took effect.
Lewes Crown Court heard last year that Mr Murray sustained fatal injuries after being thrown 50 metres along the Grand Parade in St Leonards, East Sussex, in the early hours of New Year’s Day 2015.
> Motorist sentenced to seven years in jail for fatal cyclist hit-and-run
Headech failed to stop but was tracked down two hours later by police. He claimed his car had been stolen, which resulted in the arrest of an innocent man who was later released.
He admitted causing Mr Murray’s death by dangerous driving, but contested the charge of causing death by careless driving while under the influence of alcohol, saying he had had a drink between the fatal crash and being breathalysed, a claim Judge Guy Anthony rejected.
He also pleaded guilty to failure to stop and conspiracy to pervert the course of justice.
Simon joined road.cc as news editor in 2009 and is now the site’s community editor, acting as a link between the team producing the content and our readers. A law and languages graduate, published translator and former retail analyst, he has reported on issues as diverse as cycling-related court cases, anti-doping investigations, the latest developments in the bike industry and the sport’s biggest races. Now back in London full-time after 15 years living in Oxford and Cambridge, he loves cycling along the Thames but misses having his former riding buddy, Elodie the miniature schnauzer, in the basket in front of him.
Latest Comments
- Gbjbanjs 2 hours 52 min ago
Glad to see so many with similar values to my own. BC completely misreading and continuing to ignore members.
- festina 5 hours 27 min ago
I kinda like the look.
- Velo-drone 6 hours 5 min ago
I don't think it is peculiarly Dutch even. I've travelled all over Europe for work, and I'd say that the popularity of this style of bike is much...
- hawkinspeter 6 hours 9 min ago
They most certainly do "separate like that"....
- nick h. 8 hours 52 min ago
Read it again. You seem to have missed what this is all about.
- Secret_squirrel 11 hours 54 min ago
Thanks Neil!
- slc 12 hours 37 sec ago
All arguments I am hopeful to see validated, especially (a) and (b) combined....
- hawkinspeter 12 hours 34 min ago
Well, on Lundy the only predators are the humans, and they're far more likely to buy some farmed non-Soay lamb from the pub than try to chase a...
- mdavidford 12 hours 34 min ago
"Just a little bit off the sides"
- mdavidford 12 hours 36 min ago
Given that one of the Oxfordshire councillors took the time to drop into the comments section of the previous article on this story to deny, at...
Add new comment
22 comments
As others have pointed out, the issue is that the criminal law is not allowed to be retrospective. If you take it to extremes, you can imagine a totalitarian state criminalising something that was legal and fine to do at the time. Or slightly less extreme but possibly as sinister in practice, would be to massively increase the penalty for a previously minor crime and apply that change retrospectively to crimes already committed.
Obviously the issues here are clearer and most people would I think see it as fair to apply the change - after all, it's applying the same punishment, but just making it have actual effect. But the general rule, to avoid wider abuse by the state against individuals, is that criminal changes can't be retrospective.
Not that this will ever happen, but for a long time I've thought that issues like this could disappear (or at least be less of a problem), if the privilege of driving was treated as a privilege to be dealt with by civil law, rather than as a right to be taken away by the criminal law.
It's obviously not an absolute right - you have to pass a test and show competence to be able to get a license. I would change the system so that if it can be shown to the civil standard of proof (balance of probailities) that you have broken rules relating to that license, then you have conditions on it or lose it. Criminal penalties such as prison time could still be governed by the criminal law, and would still need to be proved beyond all reasonable doubt.
However, we all know that driving is both seen and treated as a right. Not just by most of the public, but by the judicial system and government as well. Even when someone has been convicted to the criminal standard, far too many keep their license. So I'm not holding my breath that any of this will change.
Roll on mandatory autonomous vehicles.
Surely an appeal is just that, and can be turned down on the judges decision, so this is the judges deciding that the original decision was unfair, regardless of some technicality.
Well they probably assumed that rejecting the appeal would easily and successfully be appealed to a higher court, so why waste further time and money?
That and cyclists don't matter.
You have to ask. Why was it previously that the ban started on the day of sentencing? There is no point in a driving ban applying while you are in jail, totally futile. Not being allowed to drive while in prison isn't much of a punitive measure.
You appear to suggest that being in Prison is a punitive measure.
Fair point, well made
I'm not sure I understand. Was the previous version of the law that the driving ban started on release? If so, WHY has it changed to when the sentence starts? You could serve your ban whilst banged up, when you can't drive anyway?! What the fuck?
no the law was that the ban started at sentancing, it has changed to starting after release, but the change came into law after the offence so doesn't apply in this case.
Never let someone who has killed on the roads ever drive again.
All we can hope is he gets arse-stretched enough that he's in no state to sit a driving seat in a hurry.
Are you seriously condoning rape?
Initially he was, but on appeal the judge just ruled it a misunderstood cuddle in the shower.
Struggle snuggle?
Classy of the judge taking the initiative on this.
Forget any notion you may have that the practice of law has anything to do with justice, fairness or concern for the victim.
This is a technical stupidity of sentencing guidelines that has since been rectified, but cannot be applied to crimes commited before the date of the change. If you think about it this is fair in principal even if it makes one want wretch in this particular case.
I have a quesion which won't be relavent to this case since the appeal has been upheld but I am interested for later cases.
Assuming a driver gets X years jail and Y years ban to start when they are released, It is normal that they will get early release, and I understand that is when the ban starts bt what about the period prior to release when non dangerous prisoners have day release and weekend release etc.
Are they still licenced in this period or are they banned, and if banned do the indivdual day come off the total ban because if not that is open to another crappy appeal
Make the driving ban 15 years...or won't someone think of the children!!!!! Life ban?!?!?
A driving ban WHILE he's in priso seems a waste in any situation I can think of, as from what I recall, you are not allowed to take your car with you into the prison.
Yes, 7 years - the 9 months was for the perverting the course of justice, so that's amended to reflect total 7 year sentence, thanks for pointing it out.
Absolute farce. Killing somebody, trying to hide the fact he was the driver, claiming his car had been stolen. 9 months. 9 months?
Edit. 7 years in prison, thanks pjm
http://road.cc/content/news/188645-man-sentenced-seven-years-over-fatal-...
Isn't it seven years in jail, not nine months?
Well if you can review the driving ban, then review the woefully inadequate prison sentence, keep him locked up for another 5 years.