Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

"Where is the effort being put into dangerous driving which kills, maims and destroys lives?": All the reaction to government plan to introduce death by dangerous cycling law

New legislation to be included in the Transport Bill which will begin its passage through Parliament later this year

Late on Friday, images emerged online of the Daily Mail's Saturday front page, informed by an editorial published inside by Transport Secretary Grant Shapps, reporting that 'reckless cyclists face jail crackdown'.

While the majority of the national newspapers focused on recession, bleak Bank of England forecasts and the reaction of the two candidates to be the next PM, the Daily Mail broke the news that the government hopes to introduce a causing death by dangerous cycling law that would see bike riders found guilty of the offence face the same punishment as drivers convicted of causing death by dangerous driving, an offence which carries a maximum penalty of life imprisonment.

> Government to crack down on "reckless" riders with causing death by dangerous cycling law

Shapps told the Mail the current legislation which means cyclists involved in crashes in which a pedestrian is killed or injured can face prosecution under the Offences Against the Person Act 1861 for causing bodily harm through wanton or furious driving, and carries a maximum penalty of two years' imprisonment, is "archaic" and "a legal relic of the horse-drawn era".

The minister for transport described the alternative, charging a cyclist involved in such a case with manslaughter, "draconian" and concluded while his government has been a "consistent supporter of the cyclist" it is necessary for a "cycling equivalent of death by dangerous driving to close a gap in the law and impress on cyclists the real harm they can cause when speed is combined with lack of care".

Killer cyclists

By Saturday, the rest of the national newspapers and broadcast media outlets had shared the news, the Metro headlining its story: 'Killer cyclists could face life behind bars in legal loophole crackdown', while The Telegraph reported: 'New death by dangerous cycling law could punish killer riders'.

Conservative MP for Devizes in Wiltshire, Danny Kruger, hailed the news, thanking Shapps and saying he is "glad the campaigning by one of my constituents, and many others around the country tragically bereaved by dangerous cycling, has been heard".

Nick Freeman, the lawyer nicknamed 'Mr Loophole' for obtaining not guilty verdicts for celebrities charged with motoring offences, welcomed the "tinkering" of legislation, but added it "doesn't go nearly far enough" and "needs other changes such as compulsory ID".

"Where is the effort being put into dangerous driving which kills, maims and destroys lives?"

Following Shapps' announcement the Independent heard from Dr Ashok Sinha, Chief Executive of the London Cycling Campaign, who said while it is "fine to change the [cycling] sentencing regime", there are questions to be asked about the much greater number of driving-related deaths.

"The greatest number of deaths and serious injuries to pedestrians and cyclists are caused by cars. We routinely see every single day law breaking by motorists – running red lights, turning corners at speed without any attention to pedestrians crossing," he said.

"It's fine to change the [cycling] sentencing regime. But where is the commensurate effort being put into dangerous driving which kills, maims and destroys lives, routinely? I would like to see action taken to address that."

The newspaper also heard from Professor Chris Oliver, a retired surgeon, who stressed it is "very rare for a pedestrian to be killed by a cyclist".

"In 2015, two pedestrians were killed and 96 seriously injured after being in a collision with a bicycle. These accidents created a huge amount of interest in the media," Professor Oliver explained.

"To put those deaths in context, every year in the last decade, about 100 cyclists are killed and more than 3,000 seriously injured on UK roads. By far, the majority is by car-driving motorists.

"There does need to be some proportionate tightening of the law for cyclists accidentally killing pedestrians. Everyone should obey the Highway Code."

In Shapps' editorial he referenced the case of Kim Briggs, a 44-year-old wife and mother who was killed after being hit by a cyclist in 2016.

Briggs' husband Matthew has campaigned for new legislation and told the Today programme: "It's never been about the degree of punishment… it's been about the complication, the chaos and the hurt and the confusion that comes along with the fact that there are no (specific) laws which apply to cyclists.

"It is rare, but it keeps happening. And it needs to be sorted. It is a very simple clarification, a tidying up of the law."

What do you think? Does the law need 'tidying up'? Is enough being done to combat dangerous driving on Britain's roads? Let us know in the comments, by email to info [at] road.cc or on Facebook.

Dan is the road.cc news editor and joined in 2020 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 has been at road.cc for four years and mainly writes news and tech articles as well as the occasional feature. He has hopefully kept you entertained on the live blog too.

Never fast enough to take things on the bike too seriously, when he's not working you'll find him exploring the south of England by two wheels at a leisurely weekend pace, or enjoying his favourite Scottish roads when visiting family. Sometimes he'll even load up the bags and ride up the whole way, he's a bit strange like that.

Add new comment

41 comments

Avatar
swldxer replied to IanMK | 2 years ago
2 likes

KERB.

Avatar
peted76 replied to swldxer | 2 years ago
2 likes
swldxer wrote:

KERB.

Curb your pedantry.

Avatar
chrisonabike replied to peted76 | 2 years ago
0 likes

This always setts him on edge.  It's a red flag...

Avatar
Hirsute | 2 years ago
7 likes

We need to get some excuses lined up.

HoarseMann wrote:

Sweat was in your eyes!

Difficult to argue against that; I can't be the only one who gets a bit sweaty when cycling furiously.

 

Avatar
the little onion | 2 years ago
3 likes

Given that CPS guidelines are that drivers should not be charged with crimes against the person (assault, GBH, etc) even if there is evidence that they deliberately harmed someone, eg road rage, currently the rules are HARSHER on cyclists. The harshest theoretical punishment against a driver is 14 years jail for death by dangerous driving. Cyclists can, and have ie Charlie alliston, been charged with manslaughter which has maximum sentence of life in jail

Avatar
GMBasix replied to the little onion | 2 years ago
0 likes
the little onion wrote:

...CPS guidelines are that drivers should not be charged with crimes against the person (assault, GBH, etc) even if there is evidence that they deliberately harmed someone, eg road rage...

Not disputing, but have you got a reference for this?

Avatar
the little onion replied to GMBasix | 2 years ago
0 likes

Will dig it out. Came from inspector Chris, who occasionally posts here

Avatar
lonpfrb replied to the little onion | 2 years ago
1 like
the little onion wrote:

Will dig it out. Came from inspector Chris, who occasionally posts here

Now that Death by Dangerous has changed from up to 14 years to up to Life, government would claim to have increased the consequences.

I'm skeptical since CPS still prefer Careless Driving so that Dangerous Driving rarely gets used..

Avatar
Tom_77 replied to the little onion | 2 years ago
3 likes

CPS Guidelines - https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/road-traffic-charging

"Gross negligence manslaughter should not be charged unless there is something to set the case apart from those cases where a statutory offence such as causing death by dangerous driving or causing death by careless driving could be proved"

Drivers who kill are sometimes charged with murder, although I think this is quite rare:

https://metro.co.uk/2021/12/25/driver-charged-with-murder-after-delibera...

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leicestershire-60381563

 

Avatar
a4th replied to the little onion | 2 years ago
1 like

The thing is that Charlie Aliston was incredibly stupid and was lucky enough to have a very good lawyer. If a car driver killed a pedestrian after boasting on social media that they had deliberately made their car unsafe to go on the road even the CPS wouldn't be dumb enough to mess up the manslaughter prosecution.

Avatar
Rendel Harris replied to a4th | 2 years ago
8 likes
a4th wrote:

The thing is that Charlie Aliston was incredibly stupid and was lucky enough to have a very good lawyer.

I entirely agree that he was very stupid and from everything I've read he was an odious little tosser to boot. However, I would dispute the fact that he was lucky or that he had a good lawyer, this article from a cycling QC makes interesting reading. The defence failed to challenge some pretty dubious assertions from the police and prosecution, e.g., that it's possible on a normal bike to come to a complete stop within 3m at 18 mph. They also didn't challenge assertions such as that the rider's lack of helmet showed that he was reckless…

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/bike-blog/2017/aug/23/motorist-w...

Pages

Latest Comments