A driver who was using a hand-held mobile phone and had ignored one-way signs when he ran over and killed a cyclist who had been warning motorists about a new road layout on one of London’s Quitways has been jailed for eight years.
IT worker Antonio Marchesini, aged 51, was dragged along the ground together with his bike after he was struck by a Mercedes driven by 38-year-old Reuben Richardson on 3 June last year in Rolt Street, Deptford, south-east London.
The London Evening Standard reports that Mr Marchesini had been carrying out a safety patrol on Quietway 1 at the corner of Rolt Street and Childers Street in Deptford, where the road layout had been changed.
Deanna Heer, prosecuting, said: “Concerned there might be an accident, he was warning incoming drivers about the change to a one-way system. Witnesses saw the silver Mercedes driven erratically, with one calling he was acting like a ‘bloody idiot’”.
However, Frida Hussain, speaking in Richardson’s defence, said he “simply did not see the victim”.
Richardson drove off afterwards and abandoned the vehicle, but police traced the vehicle to his former partner.
She confirmed that he had been driving the vehicle, and records from his mobile phone provider also showed that he had been on his mobile phone at the time of the collision.
Richardson, who had no driving licence or insurance at the time of the fatal crash, was jailed on Monday at Woolwich Crown Court after pleading guilty to causing death by dangerous driving.
He pleaded guilty to causing death by dangerous driving and was jailed on Monday for eight years.
Judge Nicholas Heathcote Williams QC told him: “Your driving was appalling. You deliberately drove dangerously in a way that caused death. You showed complete disregard to the danger caused to others.”
Richardson’s previous convictions included one for a cash-in-transit robbery, which the judge said displayed his “readiness to endanger others.”
23 thoughts on “Driver who killed cyclist on London Quietway jailed for eight years”
A reasonable sentence for
A reasonable sentence for killing a cyclist, even if the list of aggravating factors might have indicated something higher. Not sure what the maximum sentence could be in a case this serious with this many offences committed at once.
Maximum is 14 years so given
Maximum is 14 years so given there’s a discount for pleading guilty this is a pretty strict sentence.
He’ll be out in 4 years and
He’ll be out in 4 years and allowed to drive again. A few years ago the government promised a review of all motoring offences. Needless to say it never happened, just some nonsense about a new law against cycling dangerously to placate Daily Mail readers. In the meantime, the death toll for cyclists continues to mount, unnoticed by, and of no concern to our useless government.
alchemilla wrote:
His driving licence was revoked as part of the sentance, this has to be the first time I have actually seen this applied
ClubSmed wrote:
His driving licence was revoked as part of the sentance, this has to be the first time I have actually seen this applied— alchemilla
mmm, although not having a license at the time didn’t stop him from driving and killing someone 🙁
Bobbinogs wrote:
…and sending someone to prison doesn’t prevent them from re-offending when they get out.
If you get 8 years for
If you get 8 years for killing someone while driving the wrong way, while on the phone, while having no driving licence or insurance and then doing a runner and abandoning the car to try and evade justice, what exactly do you have to do to get the full tariff of 14 years?
8 years, out in 4 is ridiculously lenient. Should be at least 20 years, the guy killed another human being because he didn’t give a toss about anyone else except himself.
MTB Refugee wrote:
Not plead guilty but be found guilty by trial.
MTB Refugee wrote:
The whole system is designed to reduce the sentence as much as possible. It’s also so complicated it’s not very different from looking into a crystal ball. Everyone knows sentencing is a mess in the UK, judges included. Parliament needs to sort it out.
MTB Refugee wrote:
Exactly. “ oh we must have stiffer sentences, they cry “. 14 years has never been handed down, ever.
Also, I recently found out that a reduction in sentence for someone who pleads guilty is not automatic. In a recent case, a judge refused to make any allowance, due to the gravity of the case. I wish I could remember where I read that?
The word scum is often over
The word scum is often over-used these days but is the only word that comes to mind when reading about the behaviour of Reuben Richardson, both on the night in question, and his previous criminal history. I doubt the four years and parole will do much to rehabilitate him into society. It would probably be more practical to mandate all dealerships of high-powered cars to refuse to sell them to anyone with a criminal record or any kind of motoring offence, because the majority of these type of people are about 30-40 years too late to be educated into being a half decent human being.
Quote:
Only if the parole board agree which is not a given with his previous record. A lifetime ban, while a good idea, is unlikely to deter this individual.
I still don’t understand how
I still don’t understand how “did not see” is any kind of defence. To my mind it is an admission that you shouldn’t be driving and should lead to a complete driving ban. There’s a reason that blind people aren’t allowed to get a driving license.
hawkinspeter wrote:
Yes. Nevertheless, there was that case in London where the woman drove into the cyclist. Her defence was that she never saw him. This was followed by a civil prosecution, where still, no guilt could be attributed to the driver. Madness!
“Did not see” is a euphamism
“Did not see” is a euphamism for “did not look”
Do you mean killer drive gail
Do you mean killer driver gail purcell?
Killer driver Gail Purcell,
Killer driver Gail Purcell, let the internet never forget! Not to be confused with killer driver Dr Helen Measures
the little onion wrote:
If I was ever in a position to meet either of those two indiviuals, for whom no punishment was given for taking the lives of cyclists.. I’m genuinly unsure of how I’d act. I’ve read so much about those two cases over the years and it never fails to upset me. I’m not sure if I should direct my anger to the actual criminals who directly killed those cyclists or rage at the system which let not just the victim and their families down but every single cyclist on British roads down.
the little onion wrote:
Killer driver Gail Purcell “I thought I’d hit a sack of potatoes; no, I don’t know where the potatoes might have come from – maybe they fell from the sky. It could happen.”
Killer driver Dr Helen Measures “It’s not my fault if she falls off her bike and I run over her; yes, I know she only fell off because I was driving at her on the wrong side of the road on a blind bend, but its still not my fault. I go to church and do work for charity, so it can’t be.”
(Disclaimer – those might not be entirely accurate quotes).
I cycle past this point every
I cycle past this point every day. Very soon after this incident a white bicycle was fixed to the sign post at this junction in memory of Mr. Marchesini and flowers and a message had been attached. I stopped to read the message and was passed by a scaffolding van and a black Audi (being driven at speed) both of which were being driven the wrong way down this one way street. It would seem that it was not just Mr. Richardson who couldn’t care less about the safety of cyclists.
What’s this driver got to
What’s this driver got to smile about?
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/newslondon/porsche-driver-broke-lawyers-skull-as-she-crashed-into-hire-bike-in-chelsea/ar-AAIdrQf?ocid=spartanntp
“It came out of nowhere”, she
“It came out of nowhere”, she couldn’t even say that “He..”
I do find it odd that motorists believe that we can dematerailise at will and for some reason choose to rematerialise in front of them. Surely if I had super powers and could defy the laws of physics I might chose to teleport to my destination, like getting home when it was raining really hard on Tuesday evening, or at the very least ignore a bit of gravity on the way up big hills, and perhaps add to it on the way down. Wheeee!
Or the ability to transform steel and aluminium into titanium, at will of course, I am aware of Midas’s foolish mythical wish.
I am also guessing there is a possibility of there might just be a further civil proceding, what with a lawyer being injured by a seemingly rich, innatentive driver, and already with a driving offence convicted.
I did wonder hypothetically,
I did wonder hypothetically, when this was first reported, whether if I were to rob a bank or something, or maybe let loose my armies of orcs to enslave the world (apologies for the nerdism), I could say “I go to church and do charity work” in mitigation. (Just at Christmas and Easter, and a very little bit of volunteering, but no need to tell them that …)
But I am suspicious that this only works for offences committed while driving. As St Chris of Boardman says, crime while driving isn’t regarded as “real” crime. It seems that anyone, even the killer driver Dr Helen Measures, could do it. But they’re “otherwise law abiding” (further apologies to the contributor from whom l ripped this off, can’t remember who it was) so no big deal.