Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

Cyclist not guilty of causing pedestrian's death by "wanton or furious driving" after trial over "3mph" towpath collision

The son of the elderly pedestrian who died addressed renewed call for 'dangerous cycling' laws by suggesting legislation should be updated, but it's "crucial" that cyclists get more infrastructure and "a safe space to cycle" before any "punitive approach"...

A cyclist has been found not guilty of causing bodily harm by wanton or furious driving in relation to an incident which saw him collide with a pensioner as he cycled on a towpath, the 81-year-old woman falling to the ground and dying in hospital 12 days later.

As with the recent coroner's inquest into the death of an elderly pedestrian in a collision with a cyclist in Regent's Park, in London, the criminal trial at Oxford Crown Court was subject to national media attention, such as the coverage seen in The Telegraph, and has again prompted some to suggest the need for 'dangerous cycling' laws that were postponed due to the general election, but which Labour has said it would introduce once it formed a government.

Edward Bressan, a university lecturer, was found not guilty by a jury who heard evidence relating to the incident on 20 November 2022 on a towpath near Iffley Lock in Oxford. Polly Friedhoff "sustained serious injuries to her head, arms and ribs" and died in hospital 12 days later.

The court heard the cyclist had rung his bell to alert Mrs Friedhoff and her friend Ewa Huggins before attempting to overtake to their left as they were walking on the right-hand side. Mr Bressan had slowed down and estimated his speed was "probably 3mph" when there was an "unavoidable" collision as "both of us were moving and both of us were trying to take some kind of evasive action".

While the cyclist told the court he does not have a "vivid memory" of "which part of the body or which part of the bicycle made contact", there was a collision and Mrs Friedhoff fell to the ground.

During the trial, a defence witness called Nicholas Proudfoot, a professor in molecular biology at the University of Oxford, suggested the incident was less of a collision and more a case of Mrs Friedhoff having "lost her balance".

He contacted the police two days after witnessing it and told the 999 operator: "The media is going on about a cyclist smashing into an old lady but it's not what happened. My impression is not that the bike directly ran into her. She didn't put her hands out at all and unfortunately fell over. My impression is very much that the lady lost her balance.

"She just flipped right over, she didn't put out her hand out to stop herself at all, she just ended straight on the concrete path, the impact going unfortunately on her head. The cyclist was not a hit-and-run kind of guy. He was very concerned and very much involved and trying to care for her. I just want to protect the cyclist."

In court, the prosecution suggested Mr Proudfoot may be biased after he admitted that he would "definitely describe" himself as "pro-cyclist", something the professor denied, stating that his positive view of cycling is more "to do with the media and press" being "anti-cyclist" and attacking "a wonderful way to get around when it's done safely".

Prosecuting, Andrew Johnson had argued that "that Mr Bressan's driving of his bicycle was reckless and that in overtaking the ladies, he caused bodily harm to Mrs Friedhoff", but the jury reached a unanimous not guilty verdict yesterday.

The court also heard from Ms Huggins who said she saw her friend "basically flying" in front of her before "falling flat on the towpath".

"Yes, at an angle and with incredible force actually, I can still hear her scalp hit the ground," she said. "I can't remember any shouting or bell-ringing before it happened."

Mr Bressan concluded that he was "very upset" and apologised for the "very unfortunate accident".

"However, I do not believe I was cycling carelessly or dangerously," he said. "I was fully aware of my surroundings and gave adequate warning for the pedestrians to move out of the way. She moved into my line and made the accident unavoidable."

This morning, the Telegraph has published an interview with Mrs Friedhoff's sons, both of whom say they are cyclists and argue that while they believe the "laws for prosecuting cyclists need to be updated" this should only come if cyclists are given "a safe space to cycle" and "more infrastructure".

> "Dangerous cycling" law will be passed following election, Labour confirms

Andrew, who is reportedly part of the London Cycling Campaign, told the newspaper: "This punitive approach, I don't agree with unless you give them what they need which is a safe space to cycle — this is crucial and it has not happened, it happens piecemeal or chaotically.

"The laws for prosecuting cyclists need to be updated and that's very clear. It's tribal and this is the problem. My personal view is that if you want cyclists to take more responsibility, then you need to give them more infrastructure. You give them more of a place on the road, and more infrastructure, then with rights come more responsibilities."

Mrs Friedhoff's brother Mike added his belief that the law needs to be updated. "The fact is part of the reason the evidence wasn't strong enough is that we haven't got a relevant law of the 21st century. We're talking about an 1861 law about a horse cart," he said. "It's ridiculous and it's irresponsible of the government not to put this right."

The family added that they believe Mr Bressan is a "decent man" who had "made a mistake".

Dan is the road.cc news editor and has spent the past four years writing stories and features, as well as (hopefully) keeping you entertained on the live blog. Having previously written about nearly every other sport under the sun for the Express, and the weird and wonderful world of non-league football for the Non-League Paper, Dan joined road.cc in 2020. Come the weekend you'll find him labouring up a hill, probably with a mouth full of jelly babies, or making a bonk-induced trip to a south of England petrol station... in search of more jelly babies.

Add new comment

69 comments

Avatar
brooksby replied to qwerty360 | 3 months ago
1 like

People see what they want to see...

Avatar
Miller | 3 months ago
16 likes

WTF do these shitty right wing media outlets actually get from dumping on cyclists all the time: what is that actually about? What does it feel like to be a 'journalist' on those rags and having to type out lies and distortions every day? I just don't get it.

Avatar
wycombewheeler replied to Miller | 3 months ago
9 likes

lots of advertising revenue for oil companies and car companies

so be pro car always.

Avatar
Surreyrider replied to wycombewheeler | 3 months ago
0 likes

But it's ever diminishing revenue (which is circulation dependent) as their readers age and die and aren't replaced.

Avatar
Car Delenda Est replied to Miller | 3 months ago
5 likes

traditionalists vs progressivists culture wars have been selling since the sixties

Avatar
wycombewheeler | 3 months ago
18 likes

Quote:

In court, the prosecution suggested Mr Proudfoot may be biased after he admitted that he would "definitely describe" himself as "pro-cyclist",

Can you imagine expecting any witnesses in a dangerous driving case being expected to be anti car or are otherwise biased towards the defendant?

Avatar
chrisonabike replied to wycombewheeler | 3 months ago
6 likes

It's a difficult dance for the prosecution I imagine. Driving is the normal activity, cycling not. So the defence get to use the "oddball" / "chose to put themselves in this position" or even "risk taker" lines, and you've got to be wary of accidentally associating the good drivers of the jury or the judge with anything negative!

Avatar
Rendel Harris replied to wycombewheeler | 3 months ago
5 likes

wycombewheeler wrote:

Quote:

In court, the prosecution suggested Mr Proudfoot may be biased after he admitted that he would "definitely describe" himself as "pro-cyclist",

Can you imagine expecting any witnesses in a dangerous driving case being expected to be anti car or are otherwise biased towards the defendant?

Beat me to it. Actually an absolutely shocking and disgusting implication by the prosecution that the witness was effectively lying under oath about the accused's culpability because he was pro cycling. In general it wouldn't be a good idea for justice if this were the case, but one sometimes thinks it's a shame lawyers can't be sued for defamation for what they say in court when such outrageous accusations are made.

Avatar
Hirsute replied to wycombewheeler | 3 months ago
6 likes

Barristers will say anything

Came across this today

" I posted about this before, but last month I was a witness in court describing how a man that I did not know, and had never met, battered me at my front door. His defence solicitor Kieran Clegg said I brought it on myself three times in court- because I didn’t shut the door. Even when you get as far as court there is a sneering male defence solicitor right there to cheer their male client on that batters you. "

https://x.com/LauraFMcConnell/status/1811625609732243488

Pages

Latest Comments