Safe Speed Forums

Item in today's Northern Echo relating to an accident in January 2005. My words: a father and son aged 58 and 22 were cycling in single file along the dual carriageway A689 from Hartlepool to Wolviston in the afternoon towards the sun which was low in the sky. It was a Sunday with blue sky and very clear air.
The paper's words: Teesside Crown Court heard that driver Jan Torka had been travelling about 50 mph in a 70 mph zone when his sight was impaired by a setting sun. He did not see 58 year-old Mr Sayers. The wing mirror of his Ford Transit van hit the cyclist who was knocked off his bike into the road where he was run over by two other vehicles. He suffered multiple injuries and died in hospital.

The prosecution said Mr Torka admitted he was travelling at 45 to 50 mph and that the sun was very low and intense.

The three drivers were originally charged with causing death by dangerous driving. Mr Torka pleaded guilty to the lesser charge of careless driving which was accepted by the court. He was fined £200 with £100 costs and awarded 6 penalty points. The Crown offered no evidence against the other two drivers involved.

A tragic accident just like the one between Abergele and Rhuddlan.

I don't understand the point of charging the other two drivers, dragging them into court and then offering no evidence of any wrongdoing against them.

They were evidently travelling too close to stop in a reasonable distance should ANYTHING happen, or see past the transit van. This made more evident that in the zone (although LEGALLY he could only do ) he was doing so the following cars were probably right up his back in an impatient "MOVE!!"). This is a prime example of 'expect the unexpected'. I can almost understand him being hit by the ONE following vehicle - but TWO following vehicles. [rant mode]Was it one on 'Britain's worst drivers' at the wheel with a "uh, what was that? Eh?"[/rant mode]

I would suggest from previous knowledge of this case that in the absence of skid marks the police had to rely on the evidence of the drivers and the son of the dead man, who was riding in front.

My experience of this road both on a bike and in a car is that 45-50 mph is unusually slow, except through Newton Bewley where the limit is , which was not where the accident took place.

The son and daughter of the victim have been on TV this lunchtime saying that the sentence was too lenient. They pointed out that you can get 6 points for speeding. The TV presenter introduced it as the case of the man knocked off his bike by a white van!

And very likely under the new legislation being put through for "Causing Death by Careless Driving" he would have been banged up for several years, which to my mind has nothing to do with justice and everything to do with vengeance.

If we accept the description of the incident, the punishment he received does not appear excessively lenient to me.

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed

The "revenge" factor....

I have broached on low sun abnd need for care. It can be a killer as this ragic case shows.

Possibly they were too close to each other which led to original charges.

However, in a low sun situation and a sheen on a damp wwinter road bouncing back at them - perhaps the case was thrown out because this was taken into account....

Very, very tragic - and really if you cannot see - pull over. Hands over eyes three times and screw them up. - then place both hands over eyes and then over each one three times in succession. - helps them recover and refocus. You can also do this to revitalise tired eyes ....

By the way - applies if riding bicycle as well!....

_________________
Take with a chuckle or a grain of salt
Drive without COAST and it's all your own fault!

A SMILE is a curve that sets everything straight (P Diller).

A Smiley Per post
FINES USfor our COAST!

Approach love and cooking with reckless abandon - but driving with a smile and a COAST calm mind.

Unfortunately, it's not always possible or safe to pull off the road - the road might be too narrow, or you're at increased risk of hitting something (or someone) at the side of the road as you pull off.
And if you stay substantially on the road then there's a huge risk that someone's not going to see you, and run into you.

I suppose, as with most other things, you do whatever you can and hope that you've made the right decision.

_________________
Only when ideology, prejudice and dogma are set aside does the truth emerge - Kepler

True - and in this case - you drive as if a very dense fog or driving rain -

S - L - L- O - W - L- L- L Y -Y!

_________________
Take with a chuckle or a grain of salt
Drive without COAST and it's all your own fault!

A SMILE is a curve that sets everything straight (P Diller).

A Smiley Per post
FINES USfor our COAST!

Approach love and cooking with reckless abandon - but driving with a smile and a COAST calm mind.

Leaving Windermere first thing in the morning, you head east, up a hill, where the low sun shines over the road surface, directly into your eyes, AND under the sun visor.
Once clear of the summit, it's down into a hollow (Bannerigg) and up the other side to a repeat performance.

The first summit is just clear of the 30 limit, but the second is NSL, and the last place to pass as you go up the hill, for some distance.
Whilst I accept that to slow is the obvious choice of any sensible motorist, to do so is to invite being rear-ended by one of the small minority who persist in driving at or just below the posted limit, even when they cannot see clearly ahead.

There have been a handful of accidents on the lead UP towards the summit of the Bannerigg hill - usually single vehicle failing to see the bend, or leaving the road as they try to avoid a slower moving car which they only see at the last minute.
Two have left the road on the right hand bend at the summit in the last two years.
Luckily there is a cycle/footpath separated from the road, so cyclists are not common on this stretch of road, but again, I dont recall being asked what course of action I would take if confronted with such a situation, when I took my test.

In fact the only hazard perception QUESTIONS I was asked related to domestic animals in the road, and what should I do if a football crossed the road as I approached a side road!

I still feel that the test/examination is not a strict enough test of a drivers abilities, and cannot ensure that a driver is properly equiped for todays roads. It's no wonder that accidents like the white van striking the cyclist are all too common.

_________________
Time to take responsibility for our actions.. and don't be afraid of speaking out!