A speeding driver who struck a cyclist crossing the road while “unnecessarily” overtaking another motorist, leaving the woman with life-changing injuries before fleeing the scene and lying to police, has been sentenced to four years in prison and banned from driving for five years.
Sheeba Bukuru was overtaking a driver at speed on Fulbourn Road, Cambridge, at 6.20pm on 24 November last year, when he struck the female cyclist, leaving her with “horrendous” injuries from which she may never fully recover, police say.
The 32-year-old hit the cyclist, who was crossing the road at the time, while driving on the wrong side of a ‘keep left’ bollard, as he performed what police later described as a “dangerous, unnecessary” overtake.
Following the crash, as the victim lay on the ground bleeding and unconscious, Bukuru sped off.
The cyclist suffered a number of serious injuries in the collision, including a fractured skull, a bleed on the brain, pelvis, arm, leg, and rib fractures, a dislocated shoulder, and damaged lungs. She was rushed to Addenbrooke’s Hospital, where she would spend several months receiving treatment.
15 minutes after fleeing the scene, Bukuru phoned the police to report that his car had been stolen at knifepoint, claiming he was approached by a man who ordered him to get out of his car before driving off.
The motorist’s BMW was then discovered by officers abandoned on Limekiln Road, several streets away from where the crash took place.
The damage found on the car was deemed to be consistent with the impact of the collision, while members of the public who had witnessed the crash also came forward with more details.
Bukuru was arrested at 11.20pm later that evening, with officers finding the key for his apparently stolen BMW in his bag.
Last month, the 32-year-old pleaded guilty to causing serious injury by dangerous driving, failing to stop, and perverting the course of justice.
On Monday, at Cambridge Crown Court, he was jailed for four years and handed a five-year driving ban.
“Bukuru’s decision to perform a dangerous and unnecessary overtake directly resulted in the victim suffering horrendous injuries, from which she may never fully recover,” DC Fay Millen, from Cambridgeshire Constabulary’s Serious Collision Investigation Unit, said in a statement following the sentencing.
“Thanks to the actions of police, Bukuru was quickly located and arrested. He falsely told police his car had been stolen in a robbery and only when presented with the evidence, he admitted he was the driver and there had been no robbery.
“This investigation took significant policing resources to investigate, all because Bukuru didn’t want to admit to his actions.
“I hope this result gives the victim some sense of closure, however, I acknowledge no sentence will undo the injuries he needlessly caused her on that day.”
28 thoughts on “Speeding overtaking driver who left cyclist with life-changing injures in “horrendous” hit-and-run crash jailed for four years”
Three to 4 years in jail for
Three to 4 years in jail for a hit-and-run crime. A cyclist’s life is worth (a lot) less than the bicycle they ride.
MaxiMinimalist wrote:
Even if the bike is worth £2/50.
“I hope this result ( four
“I hope this result (four years in prison and banned from driving for five years) gives the victim some sense of closure, however, I acknowledge no sentence will undo the injuries he needlessly caused her on that day.”
Of course, that will make up for the cyclist suffering a fractured skull, a bleed on the brain, pelvis, arm, leg, and rib fractures, a dislocated shoulder, and damaged lungs and spending several months receiving treatment.
mitsky wrote:
Bit unfair on the copper, isn’t it? She specifically says she acknowledges that no sentence can make up for the injuries, and in any case she (the copper) isn’t responsible for the sentence.
Jail time is better than the
Jail time is better than the points the driver who left me with life-changing injuries got.
I get to spend the rest of my life walking with a stick, and getting arthritis… they get points.
For 5 years.
In fact, as the collision happened 7 years ago, their points have lapsed… so they no longer even have the financial penalties imposed by insurance companies for having CD points.
Chapeaux, justice system, chapfeckingeaux.
A realistic-ish prison
A realistic-ish prison sentence, but another paltry ban. As I’ve said before and will doubtless say again, if you injure someone with a car, you should be banned for twice as long as it takes them to fully recover, and if they don’t fully recover, you never drive again.
I wonder if it’s worth going on some of the petrolhead sites and pointing out that going the wrong way around a traffic island isn’t the victimless crime that they say it is.
eburtthebike wrote:
I think I can probably answer that one…
mdavidford wrote:
I presume they’d say that sometimes you have to put your foot down.
“I presume they’d say that
“I presume they’d say that sometimes you have to put your foot down”
Fully agree. I recall a conversation with a work petrol head when I mentioned the possibility of GPS controlled applied speed limit technology. He went of on a rant about the every day occurrence of hypothetical father’s rushing their wives in labour to hospital.
The irony of mother and child’s safety was lost on him.
The old ‘speed to get out of
The old ‘speed to get out of trouble’
How about not getting into trouble in the first place ?
But what about all those
But what about all those times when a factory chimney is about to fall on you / a terrorist appears in front of your car and threatens you * / your child goes into sudden cardiac arrest and when you dial 999 it says “your call is very important to us…”?
* Well… OK, a cyclist. But a terrorist cyclist!
And there is always the
And there is always the options of braking. It immediately removes energy from the system.
Safety wrote:
I don’t think the technology is there yet, there is a 50mph dual carriageway near my in-laws and an adjacent 20mph narrow street with houses on the far side, my car regularly claims the dual carriageway is 20mph and I often wonder if it would also claim that the urban street was 50mph.
I would love to know what
I would love to know what previous this guy had. I don’t believe that any of these incidents are one offs. I think he probably drove like a twat all the time. If the police were doing their job they would be pro actively getting these morons off the roads making them safer for everyone.
I had a driver overtake me this week on the approach to a traffic island and when they realised they couldn’t get in just went to the right of a keep left. No point in reporting it. However, this what points are for. To warn drivers that they can’t just continue to drive like that until they seriously injure someone.
IanMK wrote:
Sadly that’s almost a routine occurence now for me. I’ve just had a quick trawl through the saved ‘incidents’ I’ve recorded since I started using a camera on the bike late last year. I have 7 instances of drivers doing exactly this. And with no consequences, and the police appearing to say they’re ok with people doing it, then those 7 people will doubtless be doing the same again. And again. And again, until…
And that is the problem. It’s
And that is the problem. It’s very rarely a one-off, it’s a pattern of driving behaviour. And as it is never punished, others are encouraged to do it as well.
Did I say 7? After this
Did I say 7? After this afternoon it’s now 9. And those two were on the same traffic island, following one after the other. Not sure it makes any difference, but it was actually the motorcycle behind me that the two cars were overtaking, as the m/cycle started to pass me on the correct side of the island.
While it is appalling driving
While it is appalling driving, it could well have been the best outcome for you.
Cycling with my 3 year old in a front carrier, I had a female driver in a massive SUV “overtake” coming up to a traffic island, she swerved at the last minute to go left of the island, almost putting it sideways. I slammed the brakes on and we narrowly avoided the side of the SUV and the high kerbed pavement.
The female cyclist who’d just overtaken us gave her an absolute mouthful and we overtook the driver about 300m further on. It still makes me absolutely furious years later.
As CyclingMikey has said, the
As CyclingMikey has said, the Met police has decriminalised island hopping so it is not worth reporting anymore (unless a collision/KSI occurs).
When the Met were actioning them I had 3 cases on the same road:
One driver owned up and paid £100 fine and 3 points, the other went to court and got disqualified for 2 weeks in this double catch:
https://youtu.be/NaAGC38GDGY
This owner/driver did not own up to it and got 6 points plus £800+ in fines:
https://youtu.be/wjIB9hjpZ6E
I find this kind of thing
I find this kind of thing troubling – at best it’s an admission that large numbers of people have ditched safety-focussed rules, at worst it could be seen as an invite to others to treat them with less importance. Obviously “it’s fine if nobody’s there” but humans a) make mistakes and b) make assumptions / expect rules to be followed – see “cyclists crossing when the pedestrians have a green man”. So these things all erode safety, I’d say.
OTOH it’s another nod to the limitations of “police it better”. Police resources are finite and – given the vast number of people driving – they are going to be overwhelmed if even a small fraction of folks get in the habit of binning the rules. (One reason why “much fewer journeys being driven” will improve things).
However a bit of a steer from government could make a difference. (Certainly the race-to-the-bottom of “we are the party of drivers” / “no, our party is on the side of drivers” of the last election may not have helped.)
If they could a) find a bit more cash as well as b) giving a steer on dealing with “minor driving offences” maybe? No doubt “it’s a bit more complicated” (the judiciary usually have some strong views) but e.g. as suggested here it could be that reporting processess and punishments could be streamlined so it’s more “administrative sanction”. And so that “admin” then doesn’t require the work of “forensic specialists” or officers. The latter clearly feel that they don’t have the time, if not that this is simply a waste of their time.
chrisonabike wrote:
A good purge of egregious drivers and getting them off the road would free up significant reaources for other things (a version of the NY “broken window” scheme). If we also made the penalties for repeat offenders greater (eg 3 points and a NIP for first speeding offence, 4 for the second and court for the third with mandatory time on a bike on summary conviction). the recidivism rate would plummet.
Hamster wrote:
On the last point I feel you are overoptimistic given a) the number of people with lots of points already and b) the slim chance of detection.
Of course we should first remove the “but I have ferrets” kinds of hardship get-outs for “points mean prizes – of driving bans”.
But unless someone can find a force-multiplier for detection / enforcement * I suspect you could multiply the current cost of road policing by a fair factor and drivers would still have to be very unlucky to get nicked.
I don’t object to the experiment being tried … however also I wonder if others wouldn’t just arise in their place? Or rather – the more you look (or start looking…) the more you’ll find!
* Perhaps that could be a change in social attitude away from ‘but we have to drive” ? But to get there from here I think we need “really good alternatives to driving”. Which themselves need “taking space and convenience from drivers” and stuff like cycle infra / much more public transport…
4 years? Serves at most 2.
4 years? Serves at most 2. And a 5 year ban? What about a lifetime ban? For him it’s done and dusted in 5 years, she gets to live with it for the rest of hers. Hardly fair I think.
Useless tosser. Not only is
Useless tosser. Not only is he a joke driver with no basic decency,he also fakes the theft of his car but keeps the ignition key in a bag in his house.
Although he may pick up more bad habits in prison, he will not be recruited by Spectre when he is released.
Quote:
Spoken from the perspective that overtakes generally are necessary, of course.
Lawless car drivers.
Lawless car drivers.
Only 4 years? For all that.
Only 4 years? For all that.
This investigation took
This investigation took significant policing resources to investigate, all because Bukuru didn’t want to admit to his actions
Surprised they didn’t charge him with wasting police time as well as perverting the course of justice.