- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Tubeless valves
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
news
Justice (Lonpicman, Wikimedia Commons)Hit and run driver who killed cyclist spent a week trying to cover up crash
A driver who killed a cyclist spent a week trying to cover up the fatal crash – but has been spared jail by a judge.
Scott Walker, aged 43, died from “catastrophic” head injuries sustained when Ian McFarlane knocked him off his bike on the A917 Elie to St Monans Road in Fife on 8 July 2019, reports Courier.co.uk.
McFarlane, aged 76 and from Dundee, pleaded guilty last month at Dundee Sheriff Court to failure to stop and report the collision and to driving while uninsured, the only offences with which he was charged in connection with the fatal crash.
The court heard that the wing mirror of the car he was driving was found at the scene by police, who identified it as belonging to a Vauxhall Astra made between 2005 and 2009.
Extensive enquiries led officers to McFarlane’s estranged wife, in whose name the vehicle was registered. He had visited her immediately after the collision, but in the following days denied involvement in the crash.
Police discovered that he had visited two garages in the week after the incident to try and have the car’s damaged bodywork repaired and the wing mirror replaced.
When he was eventually tracked down by police, he claimed that he had intended to hand himself in the following day.
Sentencing McFarlane to 225 hours of unpaid work and banning him from driving for nine months, Sheriff Gregor Murray told him: "Extensive publicity was given to police efforts to trace you and your vehicle.
“You failed to contact the police. You implemented a scheme to prevent your identity being discovered. Only diligent police work enabled your identity to be revealed.
“The public requires to be protected from those who seek to interfere with the administration of justice. A custodial sentence would be wholly justified.
“The maximum period of imprisonment I can impose for the failure to stop is six months. That would not adequately reflect the gravity of the offence.
“I must take into account other factors. There is no suggestion the collision was as a result of the driving on your part.”
McFarlane expressed no remorse for his actions and failed to apologise to the victim's family.
After he was sentenced Mr Walker’s sister, Sharon Iddir, said: "We were let down in there. It's not what we were expecting and it's not what should have happened.
"He knew what he was doing. He has showed no remorse whatsoever," she added.
Simon joined road.cc as news editor in 2009 and is now the site’s community editor, acting as a link between the team producing the content and our readers. A law and languages graduate, published translator and former retail analyst, he has reported on issues as diverse as cycling-related court cases, anti-doping investigations, the latest developments in the bike industry and the sport’s biggest races. Now back in London full-time after 15 years living in Oxford and Cambridge, he loves cycling along the Thames but misses having his former riding buddy, Elodie the miniature schnauzer, in the basket in front of him.
Latest Comments
- chrisonabike 6 sec ago
Genuine question - what is the baseline? As in - what do transport secretaries get done on average in - say - 6 months? (Noting that the bigger...
- Saracen888 23 min ago
That's a great price. Just bear in mind Import duty and handling charges will be applied pre delivery.
- Paul J 24 min 44 sec ago
It's a standard technique. See my longer comment....
- rogerwb 48 min 20 sec ago
I came here after reading that, could not believe it.
- NotNigel 55 min 54 sec ago
My word, the comments don't get any better the further back in time the articles are.
- bikes 1 hour 8 min ago
It happens so often that people need to drive expecting it to happen. People walk / jog across the road without looking all the time, particularly...
- Griff500 1 hour 44 min ago
Yep, I appreciate your problem. I wouldn't buy a bike without at least sitting on the same frame configuration on a trainer in the shop, something...
- Secret_squirrel 2 hours 58 min ago
One less thing to clutter up your jersey pockets no? Though difficult to retrieve in a hurry...
- David9694 3 hours 51 min ago
was it one of these? https://www.autotrader.co.uk/car-details/202411246675771?
- lesterama 4 hours 8 min ago
Houchen is utterly corrupt and morally bankrupt, as readers of Private Eye know all too well.
Add new comment
58 comments
and there's the handshake from the judge for removing another pesky cyclist
Yes, it must have been 100% the cyclist's fault, which is why this danger to society left the vulnerable road user for dead, didn't report the collision, spent a week trying to cover his tracks and didn't hand himself in to police.
Where is the charge of perverting the course of justice ?
A bigger question was why did the defending solicitor insinuate that the cyclist would have been here today if he was wearing some polystyrene on his head after being struck by 1-2 tonne of metal at 30mph.
It doesn't count as ptcoj. Well, not enough to matter. I don't know Scot's law, but that would be true in England & Wales, anyway.
It's rare people get charged with ptcoj rather than whatever more serious offence they were trying to get out of. Usually it's idiots who've committed a crime to try and get out of speeding tickets.
Road traffic laws are very similar in Scotland as they are in England.
Failing to stop and / or report road crashes are effectively statutes analogous to the common law crime of attempting to pervert the course of justice.
A (very) quick internet search suggests the Sherrif is a f**king shambles most of the time
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/outrage-after-church-mi...
Jail for keeping ones children away from a killer and now litter picking for the killers.
Jesus Christ. She didn't even disobey the court order. The kids refused to interact with him. WTF???
That is one of the worst things I have ever read! How on earth is he allowed to carry on making judgements that have huge consequences on other people's lives?
“The maximum period of imprisonment I can impose for the failure to stop is six months. That would not adequately reflect the gravity of the offence."
Yet he isn't doing six months ??
Because the maximum is without anything mitigating. His "ill health" and, as Moist pointed out below, the assumption that he did nothing wrong in his driving (lack of proof/eye witnesses to accident). So because it was the cyclist fault he was either invisible or deliberately cycling directly out in front of cars coming behind him, some of that 6 months also has to be removed.
“I must take into account other factors. There is no suggestion the collision was as a result of the driving on your part.”
happened by magic did it? This is why we need presumed liability.
That wouldn't (I think ) make any difference in this case. Presumed liability is tort or civil law, based on balance of probability. The civil courts only award compensation.
This would be a criminal case to establish guilt, so PL wouldn't apply.
Shouldn't facking need it in this case anyway. The case to me is beyond reasonable doubt.....
But we could have PL for anyone who fails to stop, couldn't we, on the assumption that if it wasn't your fault you had no reason not to stop?
Again, PL in its purest sense isn't criminal law, and I'm in favour of it in civil cases regarding collisions. But this is a criminal case, and the acts of the culprit go far beyond screwing up on the road.
Make no mistake, in my view the execution of this case is a joke, and principles haven't been applied correctly - it's not the system that's the problem here it's the d1ckhead who was heading it up in this instance
Let's say (and for the avoidance of doubt I agree this would be a ridiculous position to hold) that the collision was entirely the cyclist's fault - why would that be any mitigation for the crime for which the driver was convicted?
Because the seriousness of failing to stop takes into account the offences being fled, rather than the consequences of the accident, presumably.
it shouldn't do it should take into account the condition of injured parties at the scene.
i.e. if someone is injured and unconscious and the only party able to call for medical assistance flees the scene, this should be treated more seriously than fleeing the scene when the victim is well cared for by others, regardless of who was at fault in the original crash.
Because this action can be a major contributing factor in the death of someone.
WTAF. Reading between the lines the judge wanted to throw the book at him but was restricted by the charges the Procurator Fiscal brought. Un-fucking-believable.
Unless theres more to this case than meets the eye the prosecution should be tried for misconduct in a public office, although I bet that doesnt cover wilful failures like here. Would love to know whose f*ck up meant more serious charges were not brought.
The killer quote in the judge's words seem to be “There is no suggestion the collision was as a result of the driving on your part.” Yet another driver taking up police time , and will be driving again by next spring if he chooses to and getting on with his life in the meantime.
I pointed out above, the wording the judge should have actually used was “There is no proof the collision was as a result of the driving on your part.”. The UK legal system does work on Innocent until proven guilty. He was proven to have left the scene and lied about it initially to people. Unfortunaltey we know a cyclist isn't really invisible or prone to swaying out in front of legally driven cars with drivers paying due care and attention. However without evidence from cameras, or eye witnesses which state the driver just plowed into the cyclist who did nothing wrong, the prosecution cannot prove he did.
The exact sentencing here is why Ryans Law is being asked for but they are asking for assumption of another crime (Death by Dangerous Driving) when they should be asking for leaving the scene to be seens as more covering up a crime and be given a lot more power of sentencing then 6 months, especially if deaths are involved.
Exactly.
If you're an amoral POS then leaving the scene of an accident is currently the perfectly logical thing to do.
Until the law is changed we'll see more and more of this sort of nonsense.
This is why I run a camera constantly.
Incredible.
But he wasn't charged with an offence relating to the standard of driving, so there was no chance to prove it (or not).
If he had been charged as such, Scotland has an additional 'not proven' verdict. That's basically: "Look, you know you did it. We know you did it. We can't actually prove it to the required standard, but everyone will know..."
In practice, 'not proven' usually means 'not guilty, but ethnic minority' these days. Hence the longstanding campaign to abolish it.
Any evidence of this being a racially preferred verdict. It's news to me.
(The last well known 'not proven' was Alex Salmond).
The petition will now be debated in parliament. Waiting 19 days so far. When (if) the debate is announced may be we all need to write to our MP's and give our opinions. Examples like this would be useful but if we could agree on what we would ask for it might help. As AlsoSomniloquism says, knowingly leaving an injured person by the side of a road without calling for and waiting for and ambulance should be the offence, punishable with a serious maximum sentence. Even if fault couldn't be proved the fact that a victim was left to die would be the crime.
"knowingly leaving an injured person by the side of a road without calling for and waiting for and ambulance should be the offence"
I'm pretty sure failing to render aid _is_ a crime in such circumstances, at least in E&W. But I tried googling it, and half an hour later was still reading unrelated Wikipedia pages...
Pages