A West Lothian motorist who hit and killed an oncoming cyclist while turning off an A-road has pleaded guilty to causing his death by careless driving. Barry McConnell said he had been “blinded by the sun” as he turned and had failed to see Gwyn Bailey because he was wearing black and riding in the shadow of a hedge.
The Daily Record reports that on February 27, 2019, McConnell turned right off the A89 and into Bailey, who was riding in the opposite direction.
The driver stopped and went to assist Bailey.
When police arrived, he told them: “The sun was low. I couldn’t see him.”
Paramedics carried out CPR but Bailey died at the scene.
Depute fiscal John Adams, a specialist prosecutor from the Crown Office’s road traffic fatalities investigation unit, said visibility had been good and that McConnell had a clear view of the road ahead for almost half a kilometre.
The driver had turned from a filter lane without stopping, cutting the corner as he did so.
Adams said that had McConnell driven to the end of the filter lane, the collision would not have occurred.
Richard Freeman, defending, said McConnell accepted visibility was fine and said that he had his sun visor down.
“He tells me he was looking extensively up the A89 for cars. The hedgerow and the shadow that cast encroached upon the path of the cyclist. He clearly didn’t see the cyclist.”
Freeman added: “As a matter of meteorological opinion, his view of the cyclist in question was obscured for the length of that hedgerow because of the shadow, because the cyclist was wearing black clothing, because the cyclist was in a crouched position – and this is no criticism of the cyclist – because the cyclist was in close proximity to the darkest part of the shadow.
“Unfortunately, as he’s turning, he’s turning into the sun, it blinds him and, very unfortunately, he hits the cyclist. The way this offence arose it’s almost like a perfect storm.”
As well as admitting causing Bailey’s death by careless driving, McConnell also admitted using a vehicle without an MoT and with tinted side windows that were almost twice as dark as legally permitted.
Sentencing was deferred until November 26 for background reports, however Sheriff Susan Craig imposed an immediate driving ban.
27 thoughts on “Corner-cutting motorist who turned into cyclist blamed low sun and cyclist’s dark clothing for fatal collision”
“……however Sheriff Susan
“……however Sheriff Susan Craig imposed an immediate driving ban.”
Some good news, but if we only get the dangerous drivers off the road after they kill someone, then not that good. Maybe if all the police were as good as the best with things like taking action against close passing drivers for instance, behaviour could be changed before the driver kills someone?
Maybe Boris could do something, what with his passion for cycling.
Uptick for ‘(driver)
Uptick for ‘(driver) behaviour could be changed’.
If he was blinded by the sun,
If he was blinded by the sun, what difference does it make what the cyclist was wearing ?
No mot, unroadworthy vehicle, wrong side of the road is more than careless.
So at what point did the
So at what point did the prosecutor point out that wearing yellow against a yellow background would actually be worse than wearing black? Far worse in fact? Or as other people have already said, it makes no fucking difference what colour you are wearing if you are blinded by the sun!!!
Should’ve gone down for dangerous driving and be in prison. A catalogue of offenses here followed by the predictable victim blaming.
Pleads guilty… Yet comes up
Pleads guilty… Yet comes up with a number of excuses to blame everyone but himself. Not sure this is showing remorse for killing someone through dangerous driving?!
That’s the defence lawyer’s
That’s the defence lawyer’s job m’lud.
As to the other stuff clearly he’s just twatting about like he’s Jackie Stewart and taking the racing line through corners. The corner at the end of my road is routinely cut by drivers, to the point that if I’m turning right I hang back 5 yards and stay central in the lane.
My deepest sympathies to the
My deepest sympathies to the family and friends of Gwyn Bailey. My thoughts are with Leanne and their daughter.
I find it odd that the driver managed to take account of the precise meteorological conditions, whilst not considering changing has driving to them, even to the precise positioning of the shadow of a hedge, and yet couldn’t see the cyclist.
And if the driver hadn’t seen the cyclist how did the driver know the cyclist was in the crouched position, whatever the hell that is?
Cutting the corner can be shockingly serious, done completely consciously, and the lack of MOT and with illegal windows. These are not momentary lapses of concentration.
And this detestable arse has been allowed to drive around for the past year and a half.
Blacked out side windows? See
Blacked out side windows? See them all the time (along with blacked out number plates). It’s a “look”. So it’s pretty damn easy to spot.
The police would say they haven’t the time to take these cars off the road, probably because they have to spend even more time dealing with the consequences of drivers who can not see out properly. And I suppose it’s easier to defend spending police time on top priority stuff like fatal road collisions than on trivia like removing code violations from the road.
But the sick irony is not lost on the bereaved.
There’s too many cars on the road anyway. Why not start with the illegal ones?
Sriracha wrote:
Until you highlighted it I hadn’t spotted the bit about the windows
“Unfortunately, as he’s turning, he’s turning into the sun, it blinds him and, very unfortunately, he hits the cyclist. The way this offence arose it’s almost like a perfect storm.”
The defence neglected to highlight that “unfortunately my client was driving an unroadworthy vehicle, the naature of its unroadworthiness being a key factor”
FFS this utter tool deliberately ensured that he could not see adequately out of his vehicle….
Another test case- driver is
Another test case- driver is as guilty as sin with lots of reverse-mitigation factors, and who is obviously lying. If he doesn’t get several years in the nick and a considerably longer driving ban, it will be further confirmaion that the law does not view killing cyclists as a real offence. I was hit by someone cutting a corner entering a supermarket site, while I was waiting to turn right leaving the site. I was lucky.
This driver hired “Mr
This driver hired “Mr Loophole” (or Mr A***hole, as I prefer to call him), expert in that sort of thing.
This driver hired “Mr
This driver hired “Mr Loophole” (or Mr A***hole, as I prefer to call him), expert in that sort of thing.
I failed to notice that the shyster lawyer had been hired- if there is to be justice, just hiring him should get you an extra year in the nick if you’re found guilty- which he is
Will this Mr Freeman (a
Will this Mr Freeman (a promising surname for a defence advocate) not be a barrister if speaking in court? Quite likely hired on the cab-rank basis, not for any particular talent at defending motoring cases.
The other Mr Freeman is obviously an arsehole, but I don’t much like the opprobrium heaped on lawyers who defend unpleasant defendants: it’s literally their job to do that, and it’s a pretty fundamental part of any justice system that even bad people get a fair opportunity to present their case.
Brauchsel wrote:
Not necessarily. In England it depends on the type of court – you don’t need a barrister in a magistrates’ court, for example, but I am not sure how Scotland’s system works.
The other Mr Freeman is obviously an arsehole, but I don’t much like the opprobrium heaped on lawyers who defend unpleasant defendants: it’s literally their job to do that, and it’s a pretty fundamental part of any justice system that even bad people get a fair opportunity to present their case. — Brauchsel
That’s true. The other Mr Freeman seems to relish the job he does in defending k**bhead drivers though.
Same surname but the
Same surname but the Loopholes first name only rhymes with Dick instead of being one.
An automatic centre punch can
An automatic centre punch can easily restore visibility to illegally tinted windows.
Carrying one of those
Carrying one of those emergency rescue tools with a window punch and a seatbelt cutter is more easily justified “But im just being a good and well prepared citizen, officer!”
The reason that the defence
The reason that the defence are flogging the ‘I just didn’t see him because of …’ is because this must be very close to dangerous or reckless driving (whatever they have in Scotland). As the prosecutor pointed out if the driver had taken the filter lane correctly he would have avoided the cyclist.
The defence have managed to argue that it was extremely unlikely that the driver could have seen the cyclist. Who was riding completely legally
zero_trooper wrote:
tinted windows will do that.
also cutting the corner restricting view of the road being turned into before starting to turn.
Sorry! I should have checked
Sorry! I should have checked whether it was the same shyster lawyer.
I’m confused, the cyclist is
I’m confused, the cyclist is allegedly in the shadow of the hedge, so close to the left side of the ride, so how much of the corner was the driver cutting? I guess he turned in early as there was an ocoming vehicle and he didn’t want to wait.
I believe he cut across early
I believe he cut across early from the filter lane and the cyclist was already on the A89 coming towards him. So if he had carried on straight up the filter and turned properly anmd slowly, the cyclist would have been passed but because he turned early, probably still at 30mph or so, he turned straight into him.
The bit I dodn’t understand is the sun in his eyes, ie straight ahead but the hedge shadow, indicating the sun would have been at the side.
“The way this offence arose
“The way this offence arose it’s almost like a perfect storm.”
Some of the links in that chain of events leading to the perfect storm were outside of McConnell’s control, the angle of the sun, the shadows, the fact of Gwyn Bailey being there at that time. However he is responsible for the illegal, unroadworthy condition of his vehicle, reportedly cutting the corner and failing to take account of the lighting conditions to observe properly, or indeed stop his car if he was unable to see. Presumably Mr Freeman doesn’t take hopeless cases and the trial will be fair, but even the fact of hiring that sack of shite lawyer indicates to me that McConnell is more interested in getting away with his crime than in accepting responsibility.
Apologies: wrong Mr Freeman. I withdraw my last comment.
Just how many of these blind
Just how many of these blind drivers do we have to endure?
“The sun was blinding me so I accelerated and cut the corner in my illegal vehicle” doesn’t sound like a great defence to me!
alansmurphy wrote:
Unfortunately, it only takes one…
So when a cyclist riding an
So when a cyclist riding an illegal bike hit a pedestrian and they unfortunately died, that cyclist got 18mths in prison and there were calls for new cycling laws to protect pedestrians. I expect the same should happen here. I also don’t believe he didnt see the cyclist, rather that he tried to beat the cyclist to the turn and completely misjudged the cyclists speed.
Counterintuitively, I would
Counterintuitively, I would have thought that against a low sun a cyclist clad in dark clothing would have been easier to see – than say roadworks yellow? But I’ll remember the excuse if I ever do collide into one of those thrice daily pedestrians that step out in front of me with his / her face staring at a mobile phone…