A cyclist who rode through a red light in east London and crashed into a pedestrian, causing fatal injuries, has been jailed for two years.
Peter McCombie, who had been on his way home from work as an administrator at the Royal London Hospital in Whitechapel, died from his injuries a week after the crash on Bow Road 3 July last year. He was aged 72.
The cyclist, Ermir Loka, aged 23, fled the scene of the crash in Bow but handed himself into police, who had made extensive appeals including releasing CCTV images, more than three weeks later on 28 July.
The Albanian national, who had entered the UK illegally, said he did not stop after the crash because he was worried about his immigration status coming to light.
He pleaded not guilty at Snaresbrook Crown Court to manslaughter and causing bodily harm through wanton and furious driving, being acquitted on the first charge but convicted on the second one.
CCTV footage shown at the trial revealed that he would have had 8 seconds to see the red traffic light and stop there, but he carried on riding through it, colliding with Mr McCombie.
At his trial in March, Loka, who had been getting by on around three hours’ sleep a night as he worked two jobs, denied that he had ridden through the red light on purpose, and said he had been unable to brake ahead of the crash.
In a statement released after Loka was sentenced, Mr McCombie’s family said: “Peter’s loss has been immeasurable and has left a gap in our lives that we will never be able to fill.
“He was a man who loved his family, who had time for his circle of valued friends, and worked hard for his colleagues. He was a complete gentleman and everyone that knew him has been united in grief at the manner in which he was taken from us.
“The shock of losing him so abruptly, so suddenly, so unnecessarily, is something that will haunt us for a very long time to come. Peter still had so much left to do and enjoy with us and we have been robbed of that by the actions of this selfish man, who cycled into him and then immediately got up and fled.
“He left Peter laying in a busy road, seriously injured, and thought only of himself at that time. That kind of cowardice is beyond contempt,” they continued. “The anger we feel towards him is beyond words. We cannot even bear to say his name.
“He denied his actions and put us through the trauma of a trial, where we saw exactly what happened and lived our grief again and again. His actions are unforgiveable. We are glad that the jury saw through his lies and that he has been convicted.”
Detective Sergeant Eddie Coleman of the Metropolitan Police Service said: “Peter McCombie was a fit and active man who had had continued to work well past his retirement age. He was much loved by his family and friends and well-liked by his colleagues.
“My sympathies remain with Peter’s family, who have been through so much and supported us so steadfastly throughout our investigation and this trial. I would like to thank them for their courage and bravery and hope they know we have done the best we could for them, and for Peter.
“It can only be said that Loka’s actions were reckless and dangerous and entirely avoidable. If Loka had only just slowed and stopped at the red traffic light, we would not be here today,” he added.
Loka was jailed for two years on Monday, the maximum sentence for the offence of which he was convicted, with the time he will spend in prison taking into account the period he has already spent on remand.

























74 thoughts on “Cyclist who killed London pedestrian jailed for two years”
Quote:
Is it possible to enter the UK illegally? What exactly makes a particular way of getting into the UK illegal?
Smuggled in. Posing as
Smuggled in. Posing as someone else. Not having a visa or work permit.
ChrisB200SX wrote:
Is it possible to enter the UK illegally? What exactly makes a particular way of getting into the UK illegal?
I suspect you already know, but want to play around and suggest we should have open borders.
Jenova20 wrote:
I ask a genuine question and you assume I know the answer for some bizarre reason you’ve made up in your head. Quite bizarre and entirely unhelpful.
ChrisB200SX wrote:
I said “i suspected” you knew the answer. Didn’t accuse you directly, and am happy to know you’re not advocating open borders.
ChrisB200SX wrote:
Is it possible to enter the UK illegally? What exactly makes a particular way of getting into the UK illegal?
1) arriving in a boat other than at a designated port of entry
2) arriving on a short stay visa with the intention to stay permanantly
3) arriving on a false passport
4) hiding in a vehicle to avoid detection by immigration officers
wycombewheeler wrote:
1. Is that actually illegal, or is not reporting to immigration authorities the illegal bit? So it’s illegal to land on a beach or sail up the Thames to Reading?
2. That seems like illegal overstay rather than entering the country illegally?
3. That makes sense.
4. Is that actually entering the country illegally or rather illegally evading proper immigration authorities?
I ask because I keep seeing the term on the news “illegally entered the UK” and such only for people seemingly more educated on the matter to then say that’s not a correct statement of the facts.
ChrisB200SX wrote:
Technically it all falls into entering the UK without authority, which classes as illegal entry.
So any method of arrival which evades or avoids immigration controls would qualify, as only the border forces can grant the authority.
While overstaying visas or coming on a tourist visa and then working would define a person as an illegal immigrant, there could be an argument that they had not entered the country illegally, although I believe it would still be the case if they had always intended to overstay/breach their visa conditions. AS there would be an element of deception at the bordr similar to using a false passport. Proving intent is harder, although if someone is caught working within a few days of arrival it seems quite clear they did not arrive as a tourist and then stuff happened.
A sad story all round.
A sad story all round.
However I can’t help but get the impression (maybe incorrrectly) that cyclists causing death seem to be held to different standards to drivers who do similar. Either that or the persons nationality and immigration status has ensured he gets a deserved jail sentence.
So a cyclist (Ermir Loka) has
The simple fact is that cyclists ARE judged to a stricter standard with harsher penalties. If there was a ‘dangerous/careless cycling’ offence similar to driving, instead of these offences which fall under the general heading of crimes against the person (covers everything from assault to murder), then the punishment would be much less
Obviously I’m perfectly OK with Loka being punished here. But compare and contrast with all the suspected sentences given to speeding drivers who kill pedestrians going through red lights (e.g. here or here). Why does killing a pedestrian whilst on a bike attract a far higher penalty than killing a pedestrian whilst driving a car?
I just know this will be all over the news, and that deeply misguided Mr Briggs will be rolled out for interviews.
the little onion wrote:
— the little onionYour “here or here” are the same heres.
Hear, hear!
Hear, hear!
the little onion wrote:
Bit confused how these two comments fit together. I thought Mr Briggs was basically campaigning for just that – specific cycling offences which mirror the driving ones?
quiff wrote:
He is, but I don’t think he has thought this through properly. I feel sorry for his loss, I really do, but he can get things very very very wrong.
Ok, I (mis)took your first
Ok, I (mis)took your first comment to be advocating for the introduction of similar careless / dangerous offences for cycling, hence my confusion.
Legin wrote:
Indeed we neever a review of road laws to bring cyclist to parity with drivers
1) introduction of death by careless/dangerous cycling
2) cyclists to be tried by juries containing predominantly made of of cyclists
3) removal of the misuse of manslaughter for cycling traffic offences (unless it is also to be used for drivers)
I agree with one / three and
I agree with one / three and was one of the few points I agreed with Kim Briggs husband over. The Manslaughter charge is used as there is nothing else that can be used against cyclists who cause the death of another. I suspect part of that oversight in the 1960 laws is the very few deaths attributed to cyclists, especially ones where the direct cause was poor cycling.
But how are we supposed to do 2. No one would be able to see the jury are there and the trial will be dismissed.
AlsoSomniloquism wrote:
It’s an interesting issue though that drivers are uniquely tried by a jury predominantly made up of drivers. Jurors who empathise more with the accused than the victim.
Meanwhile a jury of drivers radicalised against cyclists by the media will have the opposite prejudice and expect far higher standards from cyclists than they do of fellow drivers.
This would no bring parity, so if introducing death by careless cycling charge and allowing the jury to be predomantly drivers rather than cyclists equality with drivers would not be achieved.
I’m not convinced that anyone
I’m not convinced that anyone could (edit) really be “getting by” on three hours of sleep a night…
That said, its a sad story and must have been devastating for the family of Mr McCombie.
(edit) And I don’t mean to whatabout, but… Compare and contrast with certain other cases where the person left lying in the road had been riding a bike and the person who left the scene was driving a car…
brooksby wrote:
Depends for how long. The high placers of long cycling races like the RAAM average that for about a week.
andystow wrote:
Depends for how long. The high placers of long cycling races like the RAAM average that for about a week.— brooksby
<shudder>
andystow wrote:
Depends for how long. The high placers of long cycling races like the RAAM average that for about a week.— brooksby
and also a large proportion of the field on paris brest paris manage this for 3 nights
I’m surprised that he
I’m surprised that he received the maximum possible sentence.
I don’t have a problem with him getting a prison sentence as he didn’t use appropriate care on the road, but it doesn’t appear that he was drunk or on drugs. Is it due to fleeing the scene (which I’d agree should increase the penalty) or is it more that he’s an immigrant?
I’d like anyone complaining
I’d like anyone complaining about the length of sentence to find a case of a driver going straight through a red light and killing a pedestrian, then driving off getting less.
My thoughts are with Peter’s family, and am glad the perpetrator got an appropriate sentence.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-tayside-central-57086023
A teenage driver who killed a pedestrian as he walked across a road in Dundee has been jailed for 20 months.
He also admitted failing to stop after the incident, driving while not accompanied by a qualified driver, and without insurance.
Your agenda is utterly pathetic and transparent.
He didn’t drive straight
He didn’t drive straight through a red light.
What do you think would have been an appropriate sentence?
More abuse as usual
And the difference between
And the difference between stopping for a red light and stopping for a pedestrian already established in the road is what precisely?
Stating you have an agenda is a fact not abuse. Also, when you deliberately misrepresent people and repeat it when warned expect some grief. You also continue to misrepresent yourself. Why don’t you change your name back to what it was rather than lie about the reason for changing it ?
Most other forums you would have been perma banned by now.
hirsute wrote:
Exactly. Rule 0 for driving – do not kill anyone. It might be annoying if someone walks out in front of you, might even be dangerous, but it doesn’t give you the right to just drive over them.
TT danger wrote:
I don’t think anyone has complained about the length of this sentence – there have been some comments about the fact that dangerous motorists generally get much lesser sentences.
So let’s keep politics out of
So let’s keep politics out of this, it is utterly irrelevant, it doesn’t matter if he was Albanian, English, living here legally or illegally, let’s just look at it from the perspective of what it is.
A human life has been lost.
Someone’s Son, Brother, father or uncle.
If it was someone you loved who had died, would you be happy with a two year sentence?
We all ride bikes, we all have a duty of care for ourselves and others, we are not above the law, and human life is worth more than the length of time it takes to complete your A levels.
If it was someone you loved
If it was someone you loved who had died, would you be happy with a two year sentence?
Setting aside any criticism of the suspect ‘1-poster’, many of us would say that 2 years is a lot better than the suspended sentences handed out to the killers of cyclists. Joke sentences are not confined to the UK, or the killing of cyclists: I strongly recommend the 5 parts of the OJ Simpson documentary on Storyville, BBC iPlayer. It’s about 8 hours, but worth it!
This shows some of the injustices handed out in relation to offences against African Americans (is that the acceptable term these days?)- a female Korean shopkeeper fatally shot a young black girl in the back of the head for ‘not very much’ and received a suspended sentence with some community service- much as we hear about in the UK for killing cyclists, a segment of the population where blind hatred and threats and actual instances of bodily harm are accepted. Additional cycling interest: the District Attorney overseeing the OJ prosecution looks like Chris Froome- the DA is seen often in Episode 4 (in the interests of balance I should say that there may be a defence lawyer somewhere who looks like Chris Froome as well)
I think you are replying to
I think you are replying to the wrong person.
I was answering someone’s query.
I don’t have a disagreement
I don’t have a disagreement with the sentence, there are however many instances where killer drivers receive lighter sentences. However the big difference here (and the Charlie Alyson case) is that the rider was facing Manslaughter charges.
I know they haven’t been convicted of manslaughter but the stress and worry as well as defence preparation involved is significant, there is definetly an issue with the discrepancies in the legal system that intorduces very diffferent charges (and potentially sentences) based on the choice of transport chosen by the defendant. Especially f i mean the user of the less dangerous/harmful mode of transport faces the more serious charges
Agree with that, although I
Agree with that, although I assume the manslaughter charge was presumably due to a gap in legislation in cycling charges for serious offences?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-51221150
Driver who caused East Kilbride girl’s death gets community sentence.
I think the sentence is fair,
I think the sentence is fair, but since you emerged from under your bridge and asked:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cumbria-57173830 – suspended sentence
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-51221150 – community service
https://www.sthelensstar.co.uk/news/18703669.woman-sentenced-causing-death-pedestrian-careless-driving-linkway/ – not a hit-and-run, community service
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/breaking-lorry-driver-who-killed-14677843 – 1 year despite driver previously having served ‘life’ for murdering his wife and despite many aggravating factors
https://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/news/leicester-news/banned-driver-ran-over-blind-3956756 – Already banned driver ran over blind man on a pedestrian crossing, victim survived, 10 months
https://www.thecourier.co.uk/fp/news/local/dundee/1817335/dundee-woman-who-struck-boy-6-after-running-red-light-was-distracted-by-pet-dog/ – boy thankfully not killed, 9 pts
https://www.expressandstar.com/news/local-hubs/sandwell/2020/01/17/driver-acquitted-of-causing-death-of-six-year-old-girl/
None of the linked articles
None of the linked articles are equivalent to driving straight through an established red light without slowing, killing them, and then fleeing the scene. You’re seeing bias where there isn’t any.
TT danger wrote:
All but one of those articles refer to case where there is evidence that the accused drove through red light. The fact that Ermir Loka ‘fled the scene’ is irrelevant, as there is no legal requirement for a cyclist involved in a collision to remain on the scene or report the collision.
The fact that some of those red lights may not have been what you term ‘established’ is completely irrelevant – red does not mean “stop if it has been red for some period of time, as defined by TT Danger”, every single red light follows an ‘established’ amber light.
Also, leaving the scene is an
Also, leaving the scene is an extra charge in addition to the “Causing Death by….”. So that should not be relevant in the cases whether it happened or not.
TT danger wrote:
Drivelling hypocrisy, your thoughts are not with the victim’s family but with what way you can leverage a tragic event to assuage your pathetic desire to irritate and draw attention to yourself. You really do need to get a life – maybe you should take up cycling?
That’s a funny joke isn’t it,
That’s a funny joke isn’t it, coming from someone who spends their life “cycling” on an ebike (I.e. sitting on a saddle while a battery hauls their arse down the road)while screaming gendered profanities about women at random passers by!
And my thoughts are with the victim, just sticks in the throat a bit people making lame excuses about the sentence being harsh.
Ready for a ride when you are, of course I’ll be riding at more than 15.5mph so you’ll need to use your legs with me – first swears tho and I’m off.
If you bothered to read
If you bothered to read anything, you would know that Rendel has a variety of bikes including normal ones.
But then you like to misrepresent people just to shit stir eg your reference to ‘random people’.
Your one post there sums up your whole agenda here.
TT danger wrote:
Where shall I start with that? I was using an ebike because that’s my car replacement, using it to deliver provisions to parents and parents in law. I have already ridden 5400 kilometres in 2021 unpowered on my CF Ultegra Di2. So you can fuck off on that one.
If by “screaming gendered profanities about women at random passers by” you mean I called someone who came within 10cms of killing me a cunt, yes I did. And I couldn’t care less about your prissy comments about that, so you can fuck off on that one too.
You said you were leaving this site. You are almost universally despised and derided by the users of this site, so why don’t you just go?
Don’t want to leave – I’m a
Don’t want to leave – I’m a voice of the sane in a sea of insanity. You know, you could always just ignore what I write if you don’t agree with it.
TT danger wrote:
That falls pretty much within the clinical definition of a psychopath/sociopath (like your hero Trump, “the greatest President of all time” as you called him): the reason everyone disagrees with me is because I’m the only person who’s right and they’re all wrong. The sheer narcissism is breathtaking.
Thanks for the offer of a ride but even though cycling is one of the greatest pleasures in my life if it were a choice between riding with you or not riding I’d take the latter every time.
TT danger wrote:
Contrary to his own opinion
Nigel is not the Messiah….. he’s a very naughty boy!
Sniffer wrote:
More akin to the spokesperson for the People’s Front of Judea.
TT danger wrote:
The report in the Standard
The report in the Standard mentions another cyclist narrowly missed Mr McCombie,before Loka hit him, also jumping the red light, infact the cctv the Met have shared also shows that, and it may even have been a contributing factor imo. But was the other cyclist ever found,handed themselves in ?
All I’d hope people take away from such a tragic case such as this is it demonstrates cyclists are not above the law and will be prosecuted & punished to the full extent of the law.
My condolences and sympathies to the friends and family of Mr McCombie who have been affected & impacted by this.
Yep both cyclists were A
Yep both cyclists were A-Holes as shown by CCTV of the incident.
In no way is this a victim blame but the same CCTV seemed to show the pedestrian was crossing really far past the normal crossing area though? Just thought it was strange when watching it.
So sad and wrong. Well,
So sad and wrong. Well, London, we have the same problem here in the USA with illegals killing citizens. Ours is many times worse.
No. Just stop.
No. Just stop.
MLE wrote:
F**K off with your rancid far right american talking points
Blimey, so much hatred going
Blimey, so much hatred going on. Cancel culture going full steam, with so much outrage to go around.
bobbinogs wrote:
I love the way racists and racist-adjacents who get called out on their casual racism then scream cancel culture. Help I’m in the pale male and stale majority and my rights are being oppressed.
They don’t like it up ’em,
(Let’s do it more)
MLE wrote:
As a US citizen (UK import) who has never been killed by an illegal immigrant, you’re full of sh!t. Here’s some actual data, from Texas.
https://www.pnas.org/content/117/51/32340
I think you problem in the
I think your problem in the USA is more to do with the police killing people. And people killing people. And everyone and their gran being armed to the teeth…
(edited, now I’ve calmed down)
If we gloss over my own earlier comment, MLE: where does it say that Mr Loka killed Mr McCombie (in the sense of actually intending to kill him, which is how I think you’ve interpreted it)? Mr Loka broke traffic laws, by running a red light, and Mr McCombie did indeed die as a consequence of being hit by him. Not the same as an assault. Not even the same as ‘shooting someone who hasn’t gotten off your property darned quick enough’.
brooksby wrote:
Mr Loka wasn’t found guilty of manslaughter, so there’s probably not a provable link between the collision and Mr McCombie’s later death (though it would be reasonable to assume that it played some part).
Fair enough, peter – it just
Fair enough, peter – it just seemed like a reasonable conclusion. Somebody at least thought that injury/death was connected to being hit by Albanian.
It might well be reasonable,
It might well be reasonable, but it’s a matter of fact that Loka was found not guilty of manslaughter (reminds me of the Alliston case with regards to that verdict).
hawkinspeter wrote:
More likely because the jury do not accept manslaughter as appropriate for road traffic offences. Charlie Alliston was also found not guilty of manslaughter, there was no suggestion that Kim Briggs death was not directly caused by the collision.
Drivers are never charged with manslaughter when they kill people. Had Ermir Loka been driving when this happened he would likely have been convicted on causing death by careless driving, rather than death by dangerous driving. And in all likelyhood have recieved a lower sentance.
There is no justification for going through a red light and hitting a pedestrian, I think the sentance is quite appropriate, I just wish we would see the same for killer drivers.
wycombewheeler wrote:
I appreciate that defining the actual ’cause’ of death is very much a judgement call by those involved, but I recall that Kim Briggs unfortunate death was mainly attributed to her fall (i.e. hitting her head on the road or street furniture) as opposed to the collision itself. As her fall was obviously a result of the collision, it’s then necessary to figure out whether that type of head injury would be expected in a collision of that nature or whether it was a particularly unlucky fall.
As these aren’t easy questions to answer, I think we have to abide by the jury’s decision with the manslaughter charge and as such, I think it’s unfair to state that someone “killed” a person even though they very likely contributed to their death. It’s unlikely that a cyclist/pedestrian collision ends in a fatality (c.f. driver/pedestrian or driver/cyclist collisions that often result in fatalities), so I can understand why the jury found not guilty for the manslaughter charge.
hawkinspeter wrote:
But this are two very different questions
1) was there intent, or was it reasonably foreseable death would be the outcome (very unlikely for a cyclist/pedestrian collison to result in death)
2) was the incident directly responsible for the death
Your line about there not being a provable link between the collision and the death (although it played some part) suggests the the collision was almost coincidental when it was the primary cause.
I entirely agree with the juries decision on the manslaughter charge, I think it’s shocking the justice system will use this against cyclists in road collisions. The charge is entriely inappropriate. Other than in instances where vulnerable road users are deliberately hit.
wycombewheeler wrote:
Neither of us have seen the medical evidence so it would be rash for us to state that the collision was the primary cause (though that is what I would conclude with limited information). The jury were presented with (hopefully) professional medical opinions about the cause of death and concluded that it was not manslaughter (i.e. that he did not ‘kill’ him).
It is a weird situation
It is a weird situation though. Manslaughter charges have been upheld and also cleared over someone being scared because someone had a heart attack during a robbery and someone being punched once and hitting their head and dying. So a crime led to an incident that led to the death. That does tally with what happened here where knowingly going through a red light, caused a collision which caused injuries that led to a death. In all of the cases listed, intent to kill was not there.
Agreed – it’s very much down
Agreed – it’s very much down to the specifics of the situation and presumably the jury. There’s a distinction between “the accused killed the victim” and “the accused caused a collision which led to their death” (with this case being the latter).
Fack me, no one told me
Fack me, no one told me Socrapi had gone to the States….
Well he has just received a
Well he has just received a two week ban so will have time on his hands to travel.
Sniffer wrote:
A mate of mine is married to an American, it’s taking at least 15 months to clear the first hurdle of getting citizenship
Socrapi no doubt gets a confirmed application on the basis of there being a shortage of loony right views……
It will all depend if his Mum
It will all depend if his Mum lets him go.
Sniffer wrote:
I suspect she’ll be only too pleased….
My deepest sympathies and
My deepest sympathies and thoughts are withthe family and friends of Peter McCombie.
A sad story to read. The sad
A sad story to read. The sad bit is, no jail sentence is going to bring back Mr McCombie is it. The message is simple when out on the roads or cycle paths/paths we all have a duty of care for other people out there, and we all need to take responsibility for our prefered method of transport and follow the rules of the road. I cycle every single day in all weathers and see people who drive vehicles, ride cycles and even pedestrians who do not pay proper attention to their surrounds or to other users when out and about. I have had my share of near misses from vehicles, being car doored is common, and pedestrians walking out in front of me without looking Etc. We all make mistakes but I believe we must all be responsible and careful to other people, and learn from our mistakes in the hope to avoid devistating consequences. As someone else has commented on here, my thoughts are with the family and freinds of Mr McCrombie.
Because he fled the scene
Because he fled the scene knowing he had hit a person and they were obviously injured, a jail sentence is appropriate. If that were my relative lying in the road I’d want the perpetrator locked up for good. Now this should be a precedent for all hit and runs, if the perpetrator flees the scene they go to jail for a minimum of 2yrs. There has been many reports in road.cc where drivers have claimed they thought they hit an animal/bin bag/nothing and returned to the scene much later full of remorse (or rather their friends/partners persuaded them). No excuses – hit something, you stop, check what you’ve hit, wait for emergency services if its a living thing or an object that could be a danger to others. How many people have been left for dead in the road that would otherwise have lived if the c#nt that hit them had stopped to check.