Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

Delivery driver did not have a licence when he killed 89-year-old cyclist — jailed for 13 months

Omar Camara-Taborda hit and killed Kenneth Turner in a collision at a Cambridge roundabout in March 2020, before giving detectives a fraudulent Portuguese driving licence

A delivery driver who did not have a driving licence when he hit and killed an 89-year-old cyclist in Cambridge has been jailed for 13 months.

Omar Camara-Taborda was nearing the end of his shift on 25 March 2020, when he collided with Kenneth Turner at a roundabout.

The 33-year-old delivery driver told police officers that he held a full Portuguese driving licence which was at home, but the next day gave detectives a fraudulent licence.

Omar Camara-Taborda (Cambridgeshire Police)

Upon investigation, it was determined that Camara-Taborda held a provisional UK licence and had lied when getting insurance and had failed to disclose a previous motoring conviction.

The courier told officers he had failed to see the cyclist, but later replied 'no comment' under police interview.

Turner was taken to hospital for treatment but died of his injuries the following day, while Camara-Taborda was found guilty of causing death by careless driving, as well as possessing a false identity document with intent and fraud.

He was sentenced at Peterborough Crown Court on Thursday, receiving a 13-month jail sentence and a 30-month driving ban. Upon the driving ban passing, Camara-Taborda will have to take an extended test.

"It’s incredibly sad when we have to attend incidents where drivers have made a mistake resulting in tragedy," Detective Sergeant Mark Dollard said. "It is vital that people drive in a safe, considerate way to prevent awful instances like this in future.

"We attend these kinds of incidents far too often and many are completely avoidable."

Dan joined road.cc in 2020, and spent most of his first year (hopefully) keeping you entertained on the live blog. At the start of 2022 he took on the role of news editor. Before joining road.cc, Dan wrote about various sports, including football and boxing for the Daily Express, and covered the weird and wonderful world of non-league football for The Non-League Paper. Part of the generation inspired by the 2012 Olympics, Dan has been 'enjoying' life on two wheels ever since and spends his weekends making bonk-induced trips to the petrol stations of the south of England.

Add new comment

26 comments

Avatar
Jimmy Ray Will | 1 year ago
5 likes

As already mentioned, the issue here is that this man was treated like a licenced motorist. He was not licenced, so that seems wholly inappropriate to me.

What other situation would someone operating potentially lethal machinery in a public space, without the required licence, be treated so leniently should that illegal operation end in death? 

Avatar
TriTaxMan | 1 year ago
5 likes

It will come as no surprise to anyone that the Daily Heil coverage of this incident makes a point about the fact that the cyclist wasn't wearing a helmet.

And it boils my piss that the Daily Heil will merrily run headlines like "How can you only get two years for killing a man? NHS worker Peter McCombie, 72, was killed in a hit and run by an illegal immigrant who fled the scene - but a law means his assailant was given a paltry jail sentence" in relation to a cyclist killing a pedestrian.

Yet when it comes to a motorist killing a cyclist... their headline when they reported this case was "Yodel van delivery driver who hit and killed 89-year-old cyclist and didn't even have a driving licence is jailed for 13 months"

Where was their outrage for the "paltry jail sentence" that the driver got for killing a man.

Avatar
chrisonabike replied to TriTaxMan | 1 year ago
3 likes

It's those forin crims, coming over here and taking work off making a bad name for our own jack-the-lads otherwise law abiding citizens.

Avatar
Jules59 | 1 year ago
1 like

When you are taught to drive these days, do  you get to experience emergency braking with ABS ?
I've heard that some drivers actually reduce braking pressure when they are "shocked" by the feeling of the ABS vibration and that is why emergency braking assist was added to maintain the braking force. Correct me if I'm wrong. 

Avatar
wtjs replied to Jules59 | 1 year ago
0 likes

I've heard that some drivers actually reduce braking pressure when they are "shocked" by the feeling of the ABS vibration and that is why emergency braking assist was added to maintain the braking force

The only way 'the ABS vibration' occurs is when the wheel skids, which means that the force on the pedal isn't relevant beyond it being sufficient to cause the micro-skids. You couldn't slow down any better by pressing harder! When I drove the trusty Astra on snowy backroads from Garstang to Burnley for work and the roads were empty, I enjoyed testing out the ABS and was amazed at how good it was.

Avatar
IanMSpencer replied to Jules59 | 1 year ago
1 like

Quite a few cars have brake assist. They detect when you've stamped on the brakes and apply maximum brake pressure for you as they found that people tend not to brake hard enough in an emergency. I remember some 20 years ago I had a car with it, and on arriving at speed at a stationary queue on the motorway, had the satisfying feeling of the car sinking down under heavy braking, to the point I had to release the brakes to maximise my stopping distance to avoid being rear-ended.

Avatar
brogs replied to Jules59 | 1 year ago
1 like

Some drivers do back off the brakes when they feel the ABS, feeling the tyres have lost grip and as they would have done without ABS, back off to restore it. EBA may fill the gap here, but the primary reason for EBA is that inexperienced drivers just don't hit the brakes hard enough in an emergency situation. If the electronics detect an emergency stop, they will supplement the braking force to the point of ABS activation, where the driver has failed to do so. I don't know what happened in this collision, but if you lack the requisite skills and attitudes to be behind the wheel, braking technology is not going to help the rest of us very much.

Avatar
NOtotheEU | 1 year ago
10 likes

"It’s incredibly sad when we have to attend incidents where drivers have made a mistake resulting in tragedy,"

It's good to know he drove without a licence by mistake, I'm sure the family of Kenneth Turner find it comforting to know he didn't do it on purpose!

Avatar
Flintshire Boy | 1 year ago
14 likes

.

How could he be employed as a courier without a valid licence?

.

Think his employer is also at fault.

.

Thirteen months for killing someone? Ab so lute for ken joke.

.

 

Avatar
nosferatu1001 replied to Flintshire Boy | 1 year ago
4 likes

And a 30 month ban. That's it. 
 

pretty sure the family should be suing the employer as well. As he was working they have liability here. 

Avatar
Grahamd replied to Flintshire Boy | 1 year ago
5 likes
Flintshire Boy wrote:

.

How could he be employed as a courier without a valid licence?

.

Think his employer is also at fault.

.

Thirteen months for killing someone? Ab so lute for ken joke.

.

 

Worse still. How can you be sure the sentence was all for killing someone given it also included?

"as well as possessing a false identity document with intent and fraud."

Avatar
OnYerBike | 1 year ago
19 likes

"It’s incredibly sad when we have to attend incidents where drivers have made a mistake resulting in tragedy," Detective Sergeant Mark Dollard said. "It is vital that people drive in a safe, considerate way to prevent awful instances like this in future."

How is that the take home message? "Drivers" have licences; he was a man illegally operating heavy machine on public roads and killed someone as a result. How about "Don't drive unless you have a licence" and maybe the courts should reinforce that message with appropriate sentencing. 

It seems evident that the attitude that driving is a right for everyone (regardless of having a correct licence) is endemic even amongst the police and judicary, and that "carelessly" killing someone only deserves a slap on the wrist.  

Avatar
brogs replied to OnYerBike | 1 year ago
1 like

A glib statement from the Police, no surprise there. Perhaps they don't need to point out it's also vital that drivers undertake at least the legally required competence test. I would say that 'professional' drivers should be held to a higher level of responsibility and that should include additional driver training commensurate with their increased exposure to other road users. In reality, additional training and testing should apply to all drivers but for some bizarre reason there is no appetite whatsoever for it, despite it being the most effective road safety intervention. Would a licence have prevented a death in this case? You'd hope it would have helped reduce the risk, but we experience a pathetic level of competence by licenced drivers too.

Avatar
EK Spinner | 1 year ago
25 likes

if he doesn't have a licence, why does he get the "priviliege" of facing driving charges rather than manslaughter.

Or at the very least it should automatically be "upped" to a dangerous driving charge.

 

 

It will also be interesting to hear what the consequences are for his employer

Avatar
hawkinspeter replied to EK Spinner | 1 year ago
18 likes
EK Spinner wrote:

if he doesn't have a licence, why does he get the "priviliege" of facing driving charges rather than manslaughter.

Or at the very least it should automatically be "upped" to a dangerous driving charge.

It will also be interesting to hear what the consequences are for his employer

I agree - that should definitely be manslaughter.

Also, what's with the "re-test" after his 30 month driving ban? He hasn't got a driving license, so it would surely be a full test. Mind you, I don't think he should ever be allowed to drive again.

Avatar
EK Spinner replied to hawkinspeter | 1 year ago
2 likes

TBF the retest is an "extended re-test" so presumably a bit harder than a normal driving test. 

Avatar
hawkinspeter replied to EK Spinner | 1 year ago
5 likes
EK Spinner wrote:

TBF the retest is an "extended re-test" so presumably a bit harder than a normal driving test. 

Is it though? Usually re-tests are of a lesser standard than the initial test.

I still think that if someone is guilty of causing death by driving, then they should never be allowed to hold a licence again, or in this case not at all. He's had a chance to demonstrate that he can drive safely and has failed in the worst possible manner. 

Avatar
John Stevenson replied to hawkinspeter | 1 year ago
7 likes

hawkinspeter wrote:

Is it though? Usually re-tests are of a lesser standard than the initial test.

According to this, the "extended practical test lasts at least 60 minutes", which isn't a great deal more than the 40 minutes of a regular test's practical component. I suppose it means there's a 50% higher chance the candidate will do something to fail, but that seems to me to make it far too easy.

Other sources suggest the extended test always includes dual-carriageway or high-speed A road driving, more 'manoeuvres' than usual and a compulsory emergency stop (not compulsory in the standard test, which explains a hell of a lot).

I still think that if someone is guilty of causing death by driving, then they should never be allowed to hold a licence again, or in this case not at all. He's had a chance to demonstrate that he can drive safely and has failed in the worst possible manner. 

Agreed. There should be one offence of causing death by driving, with a mandatory lifetime ban, enforced by an exploding ankle collar.

Avatar
mike the bike replied to John Stevenson | 1 year ago
3 likes
John Stevenson wrote:

Other sources suggest the extended test always includes dual-carriageway or high-speed A road driving, more 'manoeuvres' than usual and a compulsory emergency stop (not compulsory in the standard test, which explains a hell of a lot).

 

Unfortunately including compulsory dual-carriageway/higher speed driving is not realistic as there are many test centres without access to these types of road.

And the emergency stop hasn't been a compulsory feature of every test for about fifteen years, since the introduction of ABS made it almost impossible to fail.

Avatar
nosferatu1001 replied to hawkinspeter | 1 year ago
5 likes
hawkinspeter wrote:
EK Spinner wrote:

TBF the retest is an "extended re-test" so presumably a bit harder than a normal driving test. 

Is it though? Usually re-tests are of a lesser standard than the initial test.

I still think that if someone is guilty of causing death by driving, then they should never be allowed to hold a licence again, or in this case not at all. He's had a chance to demonstrate that he can drive safely and has failed in the worst possible manner. 

its a literally longer driving test than the standard, so it's not of a lower standard. But given the driver here never bothered, not sure why he'll bother again. I doubt this was his first week driving and he only got caught when he killed someone. 

Avatar
mdavidford replied to EK Spinner | 1 year ago
2 likes
EK Spinner wrote:

It will also be interesting to hear what the consequences are for his employer

I would guess he effectively was the employer. The 'company' he was working for is subject to an 'active proposal to strike off' - likely because the only employee is now behind bars.

Avatar
the little onion replied to mdavidford | 1 year ago
5 likes
mdavidford wrote:
EK Spinner wrote:

It will also be interesting to hear what the consequences are for his employer

I would guess he effectively was the employer. The 'company' he was working for is subject to an 'active proposal to strike off' - likely because the only employee is now behind bars.

 

Corporate manslaughter?

Avatar
jh2727 replied to mdavidford | 1 year ago
2 likes
mdavidford wrote:
EK Spinner wrote:

It will also be interesting to hear what the consequences are for his employer

I would guess he effectively was the employer. The 'company' he was working for is subject to an 'active proposal to strike off' - likely because the only employee is now behind bars.

Looks like the strike off is suspended - and it isn't their first one.

Avatar
brooksby replied to jh2727 | 1 year ago
0 likes
jh2727 wrote:
mdavidford wrote:
EK Spinner wrote:

It will also be interesting to hear what the consequences are for his employer

I would guess he effectively was the employer. The 'company' he was working for is subject to an 'active proposal to strike off' - likely because the only employee is now behind bars.

Looks like the strike off is suspended - and it isn't their first one.

They're clearly not very good at filing stuff on time.

Confirmation statement for February 2020 not filed until June 2020.

And they haven't filed accounts for any period later than February 2019...

Avatar
mdavidford replied to brooksby | 1 year ago
4 likes
brooksby wrote:

They're clearly not very good at filing stuff on time.

Confirmation statement for February 2020 not filed until June 2020.

And they haven't filed accounts for any period later than February 2019...

Probbly all filed in the same place as his driving lishense.

Avatar
andystow replied to mdavidford | 1 year ago
7 likes
mdavidford wrote:

Probbly all filed in the same place as his driving lishense.

LISHENCE!

Latest Comments