Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

Teenage driver who swerved into opposite lane to “scare” cyclists, hitting and killing one, cleared of murder – but sentenced to over a decade in young offenders’ institution and banned from driving for 12 years

The uninsured motorist was found guilty of manslaughter after striking the 19-year-old e-bike rider head-on and throwing him 30 metres down the road, before fleeing to Wales

An uninsured teenage motorist who swerved onto the wrong side of the road in a bid to “scare” a group of approaching cyclists, hitting one and leaving them with “catastrophic” fatal injuries, has been sentenced to over ten years in a young offenders’ institute and banned from driving for 12 and a half years for what the prosecutor described as an “exceptionally dangerous manoeuvre”.

Ryan Willicombe was driving his father’s van on Pierce’s Hill in Tilehurst, Berkshire, at around 6pm on August 4, 2022, as a group of four teenagers riding e-bikes approached in the opposite direction.

During a three-week trial, Reading Crown Court heard that Willicombe, who was 17 at the time, wanted to “scare” the group, one of whom he was in an apparent “dispute” with, by switching lanes and driving towards them, the Reading Chronicle reported.

In doing so, he struck one of the group with the van’s wing mirror, before hitting 19-year-old Sheldon Lewcock head-on, running over his bike and throwing him 30 metres through the air, causing “catastrophic” injuries. Mr Lewcock died five days later in hospital from his injuries.

Pierce's Hill, Tilehurst (Google Maps)

Pierce's Hill, Tilehurst (Google Maps)

During Thursday’s sentencing, Judge Heather Norton told Willicombe: “Deliberately and unlawfully, you drove the van onto the opposite side of the road and onto the path of the oncoming bikes.

“Sheldon Lewcock was unable to take any avoiding action and was hit by the passenger side of your van. The force of the impact caused him to be thrown from his bike. He suffered catastrophic injuries from which he died five days later. He was 19-years-old. You yourself were only 17.

“Whatever was going between you and others was not and cannot excuse or lessen the seriousness of your actions. What is clear is that the choice that you made that day has had catastrophic consequences for two families: Sheldon Lewcock’s and your own.”

> Cycling club repeatedly harassed by same driver frustrated over lack of police action, saying incidents are "intimidating and causing stress and alarm to members"

However, defending the driver, Paul Boden KC argued that Willicombe’s ADHD and “level of immaturity” meant that it was “not obvious for him at the time” that he risked causing serious injury by driving directly at the group of cyclists.

Following the collision, which involved what prosecutor Philip Evans described as “clearly an exceptionally dangerous manoeuvre”, Willicombe drove off before abandoning the clearly damaged van at a nearby Co-op and fleeing to his grandfather’s home in South Wales, where he was found by policing the next day “hiding in a cupboard”.

When questioned by his barrister, Willicombe said he thinks about the fatal collision “quite often” and that he feels “awful” about Mr Lewcock’s death.

“I think about his family and what they are going through. I think what I feel now is nothing compared with what they must feel,” he said.

However, when asked about gloating messages he sent to friends after the crash, which said that he hoped “Sheldon dies” or was “paralysed” in the crash, Willicombe claimed that he was “angry and upset. I didn’t really want him paralysed or dead”.

> Teenager arrested after hit-and-run motorist filmed ‘deliberately ramming’ cyclist

In a victim impact statement read to the court, Mr Lewcock’s mother Angela recalled the moment her son phoned her in the aftermath of the crash, saying: “The last face call I received from my beautiful boy Sheldon will haunt me for the rest of my life.

“It is every mother’s worst nightmare but to receive a call from your child who is covered in blood, calling out to you whilst you do not know where he is, is both harrowing and traumatic.

“Ryan does not think of me and my family and has not since he hit my son and left him for dead.”

In another statement delivered shortly before this week’s sentencing, Mrs Lewcock said the lengthy trial had “made me feel like my heart was being ripped out again”.

The court was also told that Mr Lewcock’s siblings have also been significantly impacted by his death, with some unable to attend school due to their grief.

Following an almost day-long deliberation, the jury acquitted Willicombe of murder and attempting to cause grievous bodily harm, but found him guilty of manslaughter.

The 19-year-old also admitted other charges of causing death by dangerous driving, along with possession of class A drugs, namely cocaine and heroin, with intent to supply.

Judge Norton told the court that Willicombe would be sentenced in accordance with his age at the time of the offence, which was 17, therefore sentencing him to 10 years and eight months in a young offenders’ institution.

Two years of this sentence relate to Willicombe’s unrelated drug offences, while he was also disqualified from driving for 12 and a half years.

> Driver who “tried to scare cyclist” but ended up running him over jailed for using car as “highly dangerous weapon”

While this latest sentencing in Berkshire includes the added context of an “unclear” and unrelated dispute between those involved, it isn’t the first time we’ve reported on motorists seriously injuring or killing cyclists while attempting to “scare” them on the roads.

Last June, we reported that 62-year-old Richard Caseby was left with life-changing injuries after a driver hit him during a road rage incident following a close pass in Blackheath, London.

After the near miss, Caseby, a former managing editor of the Sunday Times and he Sun, asked motorist Marios Georgiou at a set of traffic lights “to keep an eye open for cyclists as I’d had a narrow escape”, only for the driver to swear at him and tell him to “F*** off or I’ll f*** you”.

As they both set off again, the driver ran into Caseby, carrying him on his car bonnet until he hit a kerb, throwing the cyclist against a brick wall. The 62-year-old suffered serious fractures to his left leg and ankle, along with a damaged shoulder. A year on from the incident, he said he was still suffering permanent pain and forced to walk with a stick and a permanent limp, while also being diagnosed with PTSD.

Sentencing Georgiou to 18 months in a prison – which he claimed would “deter you or anyone else from behaving that way in the future” – the judge told the driver: “You used your car as the equivalent of a highly dangerous weapon, albeit you intended to scare him.”

Ryan joined road.cc in December 2021 and since then has kept the site’s readers and listeners informed and enthralled (well at least occasionally) on news, the live blog, and the road.cc Podcast. After boarding a wrong bus at the world championships and ruining a good pair of jeans at the cyclocross, he now serves as road.cc’s senior news writer. Before his foray into cycling journalism, he wallowed in the equally pitiless world of academia, where he wrote a book about Victorian politics and droned on about cycling and bikes to classes of bored students (while taking every chance he could get to talk about cycling in print or on the radio). He can be found riding his bike very slowly around the narrow, scenic country lanes of Co. Down.

Add new comment

12 comments

Avatar
mitsky | 5 min ago
1 like

So using a multi tonne vehicle as a weapon which will clearly seriously injure/kill leads to this pitifull sentence.

If it had been a hammer/knife or gun, I wonder what sentence it would have recieved.

Another case where I advocate the loss of libido and taste buds as the usual deterrents clearly mean nothing.

(And clearly "Sentencing Georgiou to 18 months in a prison – which he claimed would “deter you or anyone else from behaving that way in the future” – the judge..." this deterrent didn't work either.)

Avatar
chrisonabike | 55 min ago
1 like

Another data point - guilty of causing serious injury by driving dangerously, while unfit through drugs.  Driver hit another car while speeding (100+), on drugs, videod his own speed, didn't plead guilty (and continued to maintain he wasn't the driver).  Only difference is they didn't kill someone (chance - victim was permanently paralysed and the other passenger also injured).  Jailed for 3 years, banned from driving for 4 years.

Also a data point on the court system - this happened in 2021, proceedings now just finished.

Avatar
polainm | 1 hour ago
2 likes

Will be driving on the roads when 29 years old. Added to this, 10 years without any experience. The Law is a total joke when it comes to drivers murdering people. 

Avatar
brooksby | 1 hour ago
2 likes

Quote:

However, defending the driver, Paul Boden KC argued that Willicombe’s ADHD and “level of immaturity” meant that it was “not obvious for him at the time” that he risked causing serious injury by driving directly at the group of cyclists.

B0ll0cks! surprise

Avatar
OnYerBike | 1 hour ago
5 likes

For those calling out the lawyer's "defence", it is worth pointing out that he was charged with murder, and so his intentions and mindset are far more relevant than they would be in a typical "death by dangerous driving" case. 

Avatar
LookAhead | 2 hours ago
6 likes

Quote:

However, defending the driver, Paul Boden KC argued that Willicombe’s ADHD and “level of immaturity” meant that it was “not obvious for him at the time” that he risked causing serious injury by driving directly at the group of cyclists.

I was recently hit by a driver whose defense was that she was stressed due to having a bad day, got confused between drive and reverse, and further got confused between brake and accelerator. I.e., it wasn't intentional, don't blame me, nothing to see here.

Sorry, but that's not a defense, it's an admission that you are totally unsuited to be trusted with control over a 2,000kg killing machine and you ought to be treated accordingly.

Likewise, if it is not obvious to you that you risk causing serious injury by driving directly at a group of cyclists, your supposed lack of intent to harm means fuck all, and your lawyer should be sanctioned if he actually made the argument as portrayed in this article.

Avatar
RoubaixCube | 2 hours ago
12 likes

Quote:

However, defending the driver, Paul Boden KC argued that Willicombe’s ADHD and “level of immaturity” meant that it was “not obvious for him at the time” that he risked causing serious injury by driving directly at the group of cyclists.

This should be one of the reasons to have him PERMANENTLY BANNED from driving or banned for a significant lengthly period of time.

If he becomes a threat to the public every time he's behind the wheel of a motorised vehicle. He shouldnt be allowed to be in the driving seat of one.

Avatar
Jetmans Dad | 2 hours ago
11 likes

Quote:

However, defending the driver, Paul Boden KC argued that Willicombe’s ADHD and “level of immaturity” meant that it was “not obvious for him at the time” that he risked causing serious injury by driving directly at the group of cyclists.

If this is even partly true, how is he allowed to ever get a licence to drive a motor vehicle again?

Avatar
Sriracha replied to Jetmans Dad | 2 hours ago
5 likes

I never understand how these self-incriminating "mitigations" ever fly.

Avatar
EddyBerckx replied to Jetmans Dad | 1 hour ago
5 likes

...and in one foul swoop, this muppet of a lawyer adds to the misinformation about and discrimination of genuine ADHD sufferers.

They should be pulled to account when they come up with this crap, at least they should need to pull in some respected specialists in the field to back them up, which would prevent this kind of BS defense.

Avatar
ROOTminus1 replied to EddyBerckx | 1 hour ago
2 likes

A doctor would have their medical license revoked for such disinformation, the lawyer should be disbarred.

Avatar
Simon E replied to Jetmans Dad | 32 min ago
0 likes

Jetmans Dad wrote:

Quote:

However, defending the driver, Paul Boden KC argued that Willicombe’s ADHD and “level of immaturity” meant that it was “not obvious for him at the time” that he risked causing serious injury by driving directly at the group of cyclists.

If this is even partly true, how is he allowed to ever get a licence to drive a motor vehicle again?

If his supposed ADHD (or whatever the real reason) is that bad then he shouldn't have been allowed to drive a car in the first place.

It's also a very good reason for him to only ever walk or ride a bicycle*. Perhaps he'll then see what it's like to be a vulnerable road user.

* and maybe ride on public transport provided he can avoid resorting to violence or aggression.

Latest Comments