- 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
Justice (Lonpicman, Wikimedia Commons)Speeding driver who could have walked home jailed for six years for killing cyclist Anita Szucs
The driver who hit and killed cyclist Anita Szucs in Enfield on February 6 last year has been jailed for six years. Ugur Unlu pleaded guilty to causing death by dangerous driving, death by no insurance and a second count of dangerous driving relating to when he left the scene following the collision.
Szucs was riding home along Bounces Road at around 1.45am – having finished a late shift at a warehouse in Edmonton – when she was hit by a white automatic Mercedes Smart car driven by Unlu.
Metro reports that he had been doing more than 50mph in a 20mph zone and while attempting to overtake another car, hit Szucs head-on.
Judge Rebecca Poulet QC said: “Within 26 seconds of where the car was parked, you were travelling at at least 50mph and could be as much as 55mph along Bounces Road with a 20mph limit.
“The reason you achieved that speed – and you must have put your foot flat on the floor to achieve it so quickly – was to overtake a car in front of you.”
The Old Bailey heard that Szucs landed face down in the road and suffered ‘terrible’ injuries before later dying in hospital.
Despite a completely shattered windscreen, Unlu drove on for two miles at speeds of up to 55mph before dumping the car.
Unlu had borrowed the car from his friend Huseyin Kaygisiz.
Poulet said: “You could have walked home from where the car was parked nearby. However, your friend Mr Kaygisiz lent you his car to drive when you urged him to do so. He then sat in the passenger seat.
“The car had highly tinted windows to the extent that it should not in fact be out on the open road, so there was only five per cent of the window that was not tinted.
“In addition, the car was not insured for you to use and that is a fact that I believe was known to both of you.”
Unlu's lawyer said his client 'had no idea' that the tinted windows of the car he was driving meant that it was unroadworthy.
“Perhaps that explains why he did not see Ms Szucks,” he said. “Thereafter he was shocked, scared, frightened and he acted like a coward, as he says.”
Poulet jailed Unlu for six years, disqualified him from driving for four years and ordered him to take an extended driving test on release.
She spared Kaygisiz jail, handing him a suspended prison sentence of 24 weeks and ordering 150 hours of unpaid work.
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.
Latest Comments
- Spangly Shiny 1 hour 31 min ago
Bullseye!
- chrisonabike 2 hours 23 min ago
Shurely "we have to build more housing! But developers won't build 'affordable housing'. And where can we find land anyway (lots of nimbys)?"...
- RoubaixCube 2 hours 31 min ago
Its an Garmin'less Garmin for a lot less Garmin money.
- Backladder 6 hours 57 min ago
Totally agree, it is confusing, do they mean it was three times as many as before or was it up by three times as many so actually 4 times as many?
- hawkinspeter 7 hours 4 min ago
I've noticed previously that it can take a couple of hours for the post to show up in the forum posts section, but if it's not appearing at all,...
- wtjs 7 hours 12 min ago
Unable to trust it... My solution to this problem began a few years ago- just get another one when they're cheap and light enough
- Dnnnnnn 22 hours 10 min ago
The CUK members' own stories about their travels in the mag make me wonder whether road.cc could built up a bank of readers' favourite routes? It...
- Hirsute 1 day 29 min ago
There is no way on that terrain the wheels would clog up.
- TempleOrion 1 day 1 hour ago
No. But do you think Trump is? 🤡💩🤣
- chrisonabike 1 day 2 hours ago
Was a stocking-filler type thing but always handy - reflective spoke straws. (They're not reflecting as I turned the flash off.)
Add new comment
23 comments
Maybe bring maximum and minimum sentences in for causing death by dangerous driving. Maximum of say 25 years and minimum of say 15 years. It is obvious that maximums are not being met so if there is a minimum set at a high rate at least it will be seen that some sort of justice has been done. I am sure that someone on here who is far more intellectual than me can give all the reasons why this is unethical and not possible.
Even with half half a sentence completed due to good behaviour and remorse, that is stil 7.5years.
Again what is the point of the government introducing a life sentence for cases like this when the maximum sentence is not being used (has it ever been used?) anyway. Doesn't make sense.
I've linked to this article before, but here it is again....
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/9636991/Third-of-drivers-who-ki...
Note particularly "No driver has been handed a 14-year term since Parliament lengthened the maximum sentence from 10 years in 2004. "
So, we have yet to discover what a driver has to do to get the maximum, because nobody's managed it yet (at least, as of the date of that article).
I love the lawyer suggesting the windows were an issue as some kind of defence despite the driver hitting 3 times the speed limit in less than 30 seconds and then leaving the scene when someone was dying!
I'm wondering when Briggs and his journalist enablers will begin their campaign to ban the sale of tinred windscreens.
Oh yeah, never, because road safety never was the point.
Don't understand why this was only 6 years. Max is 17 years isn't it? 12 years would have been more appropriate.
Still, the government review of road safety etc is highly likely to reduce the number of drivers killing and maiming, right?
I was knocked off by a driver on Sunday, who was wearing the darkest sunglasses I've ever seen. If there are rules about how much light the windscreen lets in, how about sunglasses?
Why not a Life Sentence?
Judges are required to follow the sentencing guidelines from the Sentencing Council. The Secret Barrister has written many good blog posts on the subject.
https://thesecretbarrister.com/?s=sentencing&submit=Search
These are the actual sentencing guidelines judges must follow:
https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/web_causing_deat...
Seems the current maximum is 14 years (see page 11). The various factors that are used to assess the seriousness of the offence are on pages 3-6.
Can't put it any better than BTBS. What would you have to do to attract the maximum sentence? Drive to the nearest bar to celebrate while wearing a "Hate cyclists, love killing" t-shirt?
I live near Enfield and can confirm that the white Mercedes is in the same league as the silver Prius and purple Qashqai when it comes to shit driving.
To my knowledge, the maximum sentence has never been applied in the UK, even in the most heinous of cases.
Flabbergasted by the lenient sentence. The judge has done a disservice to society.
lots of aggravating factors and not even half the maximum tariff and this POS will be out in 3 years
I hope someone slits his throat whilst asleep in prison and save society from another oxygen waster.
And we are been told laws need to be sorted out for dangerous cycling yet motoring laws offer next to fuck all protection for people on bikes/foot or indeed in motorvehicles.
He should be jailed for life. 6 years is too short for murder
Its not murder if you didn’t mean to do it. Manslaughter I’ll grant you. Only some one incredibly feckless could have compiled all these aggravating factors.
This should be a lifetime ban in my opinion however, as it is not, the criminals name should be put on some sort of database for insurers to be flagged so that appropriate terms and conditions are applied. Also a database for the testing authorities so that a rigorous test is undertaken taking into consideration his past driving ban and conviction. He MUST prove that he is worthy of the privilege to drive on our roads and he MUST have that privilege made as difficult as possible to achieve. A dangerous drivers register much like a sexual register maybe? As I said, I think this should just be a lifetime ban and (while I think of it) the charges brought against him should/could have been manslaughter.
I sympathise with your feelings of anger and frustration and we are all saddened by yet another needless death. But to be of any worth the law must be enforceable. If you make it really, really hard to achieve a licence there is a section of society that simply won't bother and will drive illegally. If we don't expend huge amounts of time and resources on the problem they won't be caught and for many reasons this is not a positive outcome.
It's a compromise but it has to be.
I am aware that these people are likely to offend if it is made too difficult to get behind a wheel again. No empathy, conscience or morality, hence my call for a dangerous drivers register. Make it hard as hell and of caught driving without insurance agin (as this bloke was) , double the sentence.
Or alternatively (as you suggest) let's not do anything. Do't forget he was driving illegally in the first place!
It's probably technically feasible to restrict motor vehicles to being driven by obly people registered on a central database. Sure, it would cost lots to imp!ement, but a government so committed to road safety can surely make it happen.
Oh, they're too busy fixing the killer cyclist problem.
How did this vehicle get through an MOT?
Tinted windows aren't checked on the MOT currently.
From:
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/fil...
Maybe the Government could order 18,000 of these:
http://turnkey-instruments.com/road.php?id=17
And sell them at cost to the garages. The Police currently use them.
Apart from being drunk I'm not sure how this offence could have been much worse.
Killed somebody.
Unroadworthy car.
Nearly triple the speed limit.
Leaving the scene of the accident when victim critically injured.
Uninsured.
WTF do you actually have to do to get a lifetime driving ban?
It's a good question.
Once again evidence that driving is seen as a right rather than a privilege.