Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

Back to news
news
Casualty
Collision
Crime & Legal
Jail for driver who had been on night out and killed cyclist as he rushed to work the next dayJustice (Lonpicman, Wikimedia Commons)

Jail for driver who had been on night out and killed cyclist as he rushed to work the next day

Victim’s wife was expecting their second child at the time
by Alex Bowden
Tue, Oct 03, 2017 12:45
17

A Warwickshire driver who killed a cyclist after hitting him head-on while rushing to work in February last year has been jailed for four-and-a-half years. George Hacker overslept after going out drinking the night before, staying up for three whiskies and a line of cocaine after he got home.

The Stratford Observer reports that Hacker was due in work at 8am but didn’t leave home until 9.45am.

Driving along the B4452 Ufton Road near Harbury, just after 10am, he drifted onto the opposite side of the road and hit 35-year-old Simon Worthington who was training for a triathlon.

Worthington, whose wife was expecting their second child at the time, died at the scene.

Hacker was on his phone via Bluetooth and later said he had been distracted by seeing a vehicle in a field which seemed to have been in an accident.

Coventry Crown Court heard that Hacker continued on the wrong side of the road for another 70 to 80 yards. A woman driving in the opposite direction feared he would hit her too.

Hacker was arrested and was found to have been in possession of a small amount of cocaine.

He admitted causing Worthington's death by dangerous driving.

As well as the four-and-a-half year sentence, Deputy Judge Richard Griffith-Jones also gave him a concurrent three-month sentence for possessing cocaine and banned him from driving for six years and three months.

cyclist fatality
George Hacker
Simon Worthington
Alex Bowden

Alex has written for more cricket publications than the rest of the road.cc team combined. Despite the apparent evidence of this picture, he doesn't especially like cake.

Add new comment

17 comments

Avatar
FatBoyW | 271 posts | 5 years ago
1 like

I'm just glad to see he got jail, compare and contrast with Gail Purcell...

 

Avatar
kitsunegari replied to FatBoyW | 365 posts | 5 years ago
2 likes

FatBoyW wrote:

I'm just glad to see he got jail, compare and contrast with Gail Purcell...

 

Or the killer Dr Helen Measures.

Avatar
50kcommute | 125 posts | 5 years ago
1 like

I was expecting to see a hundred previous convictions and an orchestrated media campaign against the driver in order to get a jail conviction .... Still not enough justice for the severity of the crime and still hardly enough of a deterrent - throw the book at these kind of feckwits who willfully recklessly and knowingly take the lives of others into their hands.

Avatar
alansmurphy | 2606 posts | 5 years ago
2 likes

50% for pleading guilty is bollocks too, caught in the act, no denial opportunity surely...

Avatar
FluffyKittenofT... replied to alansmurphy | 2975 posts | 5 years ago
1 like
alansmurphy wrote:

50% for pleading guilty is bollocks too, caught in the act, no denial opportunity surely...

Wish they'd reconsider that. It's very close to the awful US practice of plea bargaining - replacing justice with a game of chicken, where the obviously guilty get a nice way to 'game' the system, while the possibly innocent get punished for not giving in to threats.

Avatar
BehindTheBikesheds | 3285 posts | 5 years ago
5 likes

I feel sorry for the wife and children, having a killer for a dad/husband, they are fortunate however that they will still have him around in a couple of years, his victims family has no such benefit.

They are deprived of the life of someone in the prime of their life, deprived because a selfish piece of shite made deliberate choices, he chose to be on his phone, he chose to be a drug user, he is fully accountable for his driving standard, one that he chooses to drive at, all deliberate choices. he absolutely got off very, very lightly (as do most motorists), this should have being a manslughter case, not DD.

The sentence is an insult to the family of Simon Worthington and yet again shows you what a shower of shit our so called justice system is.

Avatar
beezus fufoon replied to BehindTheBikesheds | 949 posts | 5 years ago
1 like

BehindTheBikesheds wrote:

I feel sorry for the wife and children, having a killer for a dad/husband, they are fortunate however that they will still have him around in a couple of years, his victims family has no such benefit.

They are deprived of the life of someone in the prime of their life, deprived because a selfish piece of shite made deliberate choices, he chose to be on his phone, he chose to be a drug user, he is fully accountable for his driving standard, one that he chooses to drive at, all deliberate choices. he absolutely got off very, very lightly (as do most motorists), this should have being a manslughter case, not DD.

The sentence is an insult to the family of Simon Worthington and yet again shows you what a shower of shit our so called justice system is.

nice of you to invent a family for the guilty bloke 

Avatar
BehindTheBikesheds replied to beezus fufoon | 3285 posts | 5 years ago
1 like

beezus fufoon wrote:

BehindTheBikesheds wrote:

I feel sorry for the wife and children, having a killer for a dad/husband, they are fortunate however that they will still have him around in a couple of years, his victims family has no such benefit.

They are deprived of the life of someone in the prime of their life, deprived because a selfish piece of shite made deliberate choices, he chose to be on his phone, he chose to be a drug user, he is fully accountable for his driving standard, one that he chooses to drive at, all deliberate choices. he absolutely got off very, very lightly (as do most motorists), this should have being a manslughter case, not DD.

The sentence is an insult to the family of Simon Worthington and yet again shows you what a shower of shit our so called justice system is.

nice of you to invent a family for the guilty bloke 

My mistake, I thought it was the guilty party who had wife and kids, he still has/had a GF he was living with.

Avatar
kitsunegari | 365 posts | 5 years ago
6 likes

Call me a soppy old git but the sentence about his wife expecting their second child made me well up.

Oh, and on the sentencing:

http://www.cps.gov.uk/news/fact_sheets/dangerous_driving/ wrote:

Sentencing. A person convicted of causing death by dangerous driving is liable toimprisonment for a term not exceeding fourteen years. Disqualification for a minimum of two years is obligatory on conviction. Endorsement is obligatory on conviction.

Given the nature of the crime here, it's hard to work out how he only got four and a half years. Mind you, there doesn't seem to be any evidence that he had alcohol or cocaine still in his system, so if he was under the legal limit he couldn't have years added for driving whilst under the influence.

Avatar
ClubSmed | 771 posts | 5 years ago
3 likes

Well that’s a version of “whisky and coke” that I was not expecting

Avatar
oldstrath | 970 posts | 5 years ago
10 likes

Never mind  a 15 year suspension. What do you have to do to be told you will never drive again? And how big a cult do you need to be ever to want to drive again after doing this?  

Notice he was on his phone. One day our legal system will learn that hands free does not equal safe and ban the damn things properly, and enforceably.

Avatar
StraelGuy | 1723 posts | 5 years ago
8 likes

...and why on earth to people get to server sentences concurrently?! Unless they are consecutive, what the hell's the point?!

Avatar
zanf | 1036 posts | 5 years ago
12 likes

FFS... this is a clear case where there are absolutely no mitigating circumstances so the maximum sentence for all charges the guy has been convicted of should apply.

There is no reason either as to why this guy should ever be licenced to drive again.

Avatar
kil0ran replied to zanf | 2910 posts | 5 years ago
2 likes

zanf wrote:

FFS... this is a clear case where there are absolutely no mitigating circumstances so the maximum sentence for all charges the guy has been convicted of should apply.

There is no reason either as to why this guy should ever be licenced to drive again.

He pleaded guilty which usually yields a 50% discount (hey, kill one, get one free) but not clear what else reduced his sentence as on that basis it should have been 6 or 7 years.

We need life bans as a deterrent, plus a technical means of enforcing that.

Avatar
the little onion | 979 posts | 5 years ago
12 likes

RIP

 

This is a 'full house' of bad driving - rushing, on a phone, drifting into the opposite lane, driving after a drink and drug bender. Yet the driver has his license suspended for just over six years. What do you have to do to get a 10 or 15 year suspension? 

 

I recall seeing a study of punishments for driving offences published by, I think, Roadpeace. For the study period, which was several years, there were no license suspensions of more than 10 years,

Avatar
FluffyKittenofT... replied to the little onion | 2975 posts | 5 years ago
2 likes
the little onion wrote:

RIP

 

This is a 'full house' of bad driving - rushing, on a phone, drifting into the opposite lane, driving after a drink and drug bender. Yet the driver has his license suspended for just over six years. What do you have to do to get a 10 or 15 year suspension? 

 

I recall seeing a study of punishments for driving offences published by, I think, Roadpeace. For the study period, which was several years, there were no license suspensions of more than 10 years,

I posted this link on an earlier thread . Unless things have changed dramatically in the last 5 years, it seems its essentially _impossible_ to get the maximum sentence. Never happens.

(Maybe if someone drives into the Queen while doing 100mph in a 30mph zone, on the wrong side of the road while off their heads on smack, driving while disqualified, with no insurance, while shouting 'allahu akbar', and then denying all charges, they might get somewhere close to 14 years?)

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/9636991/Third-of-drivers-who-ki...

Avatar
HowardR replied to FluffyKittenofTindalos | 267 posts | 5 years ago
0 likes

FluffyKittenofTindalos wrote:
the little onion wrote:

RIP

 

This is a 'full house' of bad driving - rushing, on a phone, drifting into the opposite lane, driving after a drink and drug bender. Yet the driver has his license suspended for just over six years. What do you have to do to get a 10 or 15 year suspension? 

 

I recall seeing a study of punishments for driving offences published by, I think, Roadpeace. For the study period, which was several years, there were no license suspensions of more than 10 years,

I posted this link on an earlier thread . Unless things have changed dramatically in the last 5 years, it seems its essentially _impossible_ to get the maximum sentence. Never happens. (Maybe if someone drives into the Queen while doing 100mph in a 30mph zone, on the wrong side of the road while off their heads on smack, driving while disqualified, with no insurance, while shouting 'allahu akbar', and then denying all charges, they might get somewhere close to 14 years?) http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/9636991/Third-of-drivers-who-ki...

 

I think that the "while shouting 'alluhu akabar'" bit is enough to get the offender convincingly shot.......

 

 

Latest Comments