Safe Speed Forums

If his behaviour was the more reckless - and it would have to be - if the injuries inflicted were the same as the car driver's - then justice will demand stiff penalty if a court can prove this was the case. The victims will certainly want this .. even though there was an outcry over the low sentences handed down to cyclists who had caused the deaths of two pedestrians in unrelated incidents in 2008. I gather these families are currently lobbying for a change in the law from the cycling mags.

To me - it's a case of fair play to all. If the cyclist kills or inflicts a similar injury to a car driver when drunk or otherwise - the speed or whatever is irrelevant. The accident was caused by that person's carelessnes/negligence/lack of due care/consideration and that person has to be held to account. If the court proves the person to be guilty as charged - then the careless act has to be punished if we are to deter others. It should not really matter if the person was driving or cycling if fairly low impact speed caused the fatality and the cause was drunk/drugged/fatigue or sheer carelessness.

Drivers who kill at high speeds will face much more serious charges regardless.. but you are talking of similar injuries caused by low speed drunks and I am looking at this particular scenario as cyclist would have to the more recklessly dangerous of the two if causing identical injury to the car driver - even allowing for crumple/impact zones which are only partly behind the 30 mph claims.

I do not see why someone who causes SI to another on bicycle should think they receive lesser sentence than another. Law should apply equally if the person has been proven to have caused a serius injury

_________________
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.

But that appears to be wilful assault, ABH, a completely different story.

Had somebody used their car to assult "Ted" and caused the same injuries owuld you not expect the car driver to receive a more substantial punishment?

Er, not necessarily. A simple low speed collision would do in either case if the victim falls over.



You don't think it's a more serious offence to get in a car drunk than it is to get on a cycle drunk?

Remember you asked this when the drunk cyclist suddenly swerves into the path of a car causing it to take avoiding action and have a fatal accident.

Don't say you should drive as if all cyclists are drunks. I already drive as if they are brain dead or listening to iPods.

It's about time all road users took responsibility for their own actions - including cyclists and pedestrians.

_________________
Malcolm W.
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not represent the views of Safespeed.

It still does not matter. If the person fell over and hit his head with tragic outcome as a result of being hit by some twit in a car or on a bicycle - then they have still been hit and killed. That person will still be held acountable for this and a court should sentence accordingly. At a low speed .. a court would be examining the level of incompetence, lack of duty of care, how reasonablly foreseeable.. etc. Someone causing such injury should not receive a lower fine or lower jail term just because they happen to be riding a bicycle if causing significant injury at the same low speed. They have the same legal obligation not to cause serious injury to another.







I have not said such I would be able to arrest anyone who chooses to sleep in their car with their keys in easy reach as this could imply "intent to drive whilst drunk". A motorcyclist faces the same penalties as the car driver too.

Given the dangers of being completely inebriated though - it would be just as dangerous to ride a pedal bicycle whilst drunk. I assume that you would not think of riding your bicycle when drunk as it still impairs judgement as regards judging speed.. distance.. reaction and proaction just as it does for the car driver.

In short .. I think both are equally SERIOUS offences.

_________________
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.

No. Because the injuries would be the same und the low life who cause them would be the same nasty low life scum who would deserve his jail term

If a person use his car to assault Ted or me .. I would expect that person to be done for manslaughter if they deliberately use as weapon. Likewise a cyclist who use his bicycle in that way as the person would be similar violent thug - nicht?

_________________
Nicht ganz im Lot!
Ich setze mich immer wieder in die Nesseln! Der Mad Doc ist mein Mann! Und ich benutzte seinen PC!

UND OUR SMILEYS? Smile ... und the the world smiles with you.
Smiley guy seen when you read
Fine me for Safe Speed
(& other good causes..)

Greatest love & Greatest Achievements Require Greatest Risk
But if you lose the driving plan - don't lose the COAST lesson.
Me?
Je ne regrette rien!

Exactly. I do not drink und then drive.. nor do I ride bike.


At moment .. I am laid up with complications after childbirth still. They tell me not to drive or ride my bikes und ist pergatory..

I think you would be very unwise to ride when drunk because judgement und control of bicycle would be impaired. Also the cyclist .. like the drunk driver .. would take silly chances.. fail to anticipate hazard till too late.. be slow to react etc. Also on a modern bike - you can get some speeds up.

Weepy .. please tell me you do not drink und ride.

_________________
Nicht ganz im Lot!
Ich setze mich immer wieder in die Nesseln! Der Mad Doc ist mein Mann! Und ich benutzte seinen PC!

UND OUR SMILEYS? Smile ... und the the world smiles with you.
Smiley guy seen when you read
Fine me for Safe Speed
(& other good causes..)

Greatest love & Greatest Achievements Require Greatest Risk
But if you lose the driving plan - don't lose the COAST lesson.
Me?
Je ne regrette rien!

there is a sliding scale which relates alcohol level to length of ban and level of sentence ie fine, community penalty or custody. Type of vehicle, and the use to which it was being put are potential aggravating factors and subject to individual sentencing decisions by the court, rather than just taking the sentence from the scale. Aggravating factors are connected with harm, either actual or potential.

All other things being equal I would expect a taxi driver with passengers to receive a more severe sentence than a private car driver. In the same vein I would expect a driver convicted of driving an LGV or a bus to get a more severe sentence than a private car driver if only because of the potential for harm caused by a drunk with 32 tons of metal to play with.

Standard of driving comes into the equation too. It is not necessary for the driving to have been sub standard for an offence to be committed, alcohol over the limit is sufficient. So a private car driver who (to quote a real life case) decided to take a short cut home via a pedestrian area at pub chucking out time could expect a higher sentence than a taxi driver with the same alcohol level who did not show sub standard driving.

_________________
I am not a lawyer and can't give legal advice. I do have experience of the day to day working of courts and use that knowledge to help where possible. I do not represent any official body and post as an individual.

OK .. the wretch who rode past me that day was not drunk. Stupid and completely ignorantly inconsiderate. but not drunk.

But back to drink.

Way back in June 2004 . I described very graphically and clinically what happens to your body when you drink way too much, I do not want to write such an essay again. I can suggest trawling through the archives. I think I was replying to Peter's thread on the Mellanby effect.

This is where the body begins to return to norm after secreting most of the booze and why police will want to get the confirmation of abuse asap on the second/third tests at the police station as these are the crux of the prosecution's case. I know this from previous work in my immediate post junior days.

Anyway .. back to the nub. You can be arrested as a driver on suspicion of being drunk in charge of a car just by having keys on person near or inside the car in the passenger seat. You are showing intent to drive and I know IG has said the same and also stated this same idea of "intent" applies to "handling a switched off mobile phone" based on known case law to date. as published by the press and other stories.

This relates to the title of this thread

Cycling? I would not even think of riding if feeling fatigued or after drinking more than I should. I do not drink . but do enjoy an "apperitif" before my Sunday Roast . which can be a dry martini/sherry or a small neat single malt whisky. We usually have a glass of wine with the meal and if we do not intend to drive .. for over 24 hours .. maybe an after dinner liqueur...if a "family fest" I would not drive or ride my bike after such meals.

Ok so I set down bluntly that I do not nor would ever consider taking to the road on bike or in car if unfit to do so. I know plenty out there do not do so .. and they are the fools who lose licences.. face jail or die for a really senseless reason.
#
But weepy ..you are asking whether or not a cyclist should receive a lesser sentence should he or she kill or catalyse a tragedy for an innocent. I have to say NO. They should and must face the full consequences of what they caused -just as the car driver.. the lorry driver or whoever else. Of course a court will take into account all of the situation .. but they still have to sentence according to the proven damage done by the person in the dock.

I do not think the choice of transport cuts much ice to a court if the person causing the carnage is proven to be an inconsiderate .. whether mens rea or just in pure human stupidity of the moment. If a person decides to drive or ride when impaired . then they are responsible for any havoc they cause and will have to answer.

I see not one reason why not .. nor any reason for a lesser sentence for identical inuries caused by bike v car to an innocent if the person happened to by cycling when he or she caused it. The person causing has to pay the price for his or her proven stupidity.

_________________
If you want to get to heaven - you have to raise a little hell!

Smilies are contagious
They are just like the flu
We use our smilies on YOU today
Now Good Causes are smiling too!

KEEP SMILING
It makes folk wonder just what you REALLY got up to last night!

Smily to penny.. penny to pound
safespeed prospers-smiles all round! !
But the real message? SMILE.. GO ON ! DO IT! and the world will smile with you!
Enjoy life! You only have the one bite at it.

Hiya fisherman

My two sisters will hit the Bench next year

They have explained this to me and Vrenchen slowly in words of one syllable

But weepej is asking whether or not a cyclist who injures faces a lesser sentence than a very slow moving driver who inflicts an identical injury.

We have to date the persons who kill their own toddlers in their own driveways at very low speeds and face more trauma than we can ever manage to contemplate. Justice has to look at such mitigation when deciding the outcome ? Surely? It's perhaps another issue. ..

Yes I know the degree of danger plays its part as does IG and my wife.

But weepy is talking of like injury at low speeds .. and if the driver is at 3 -5 mph and causes a tragic KSI versus the cyclist at say 15-20 mph causing an identical injury based on kinetic force and weights .. then we have to address this fairly with justice in mind.

_________________
If you want to get to heaven - you have to raise a little hell!

Smilies are contagious
They are just like the flu
We use our smilies on YOU today
Now Good Causes are smiling too!

KEEP SMILING
It makes folk wonder just what you REALLY got up to last night!

Smily to penny.. penny to pound
safespeed prospers-smiles all round! !
But the real message? SMILE.. GO ON ! DO IT! and the world will smile with you!
Enjoy life! You only have the one bite at it.

Er, no.

I'm talking about the same injuries, the driver could be doing 35mph, and the cyclist 5mph.



...and also take aggrevating factors into account, one of which is the size and type of the vehicle.

Anyway, it's clear now from fisherman's post the type of vehicle is a aggrevating factor, which is what I've been saying all along, and it's right IMO that it is.

I.e. somebody on a cycle who hits somebody whilst drunk would get less of a sentence that a car driver in the exact same situation (and somebody driving an HGV would get more, and somebody on foot/pedal scooter would get less).


So when Peter E wrote:



Yes, I'd suspect so too (in fact I 'd say I expect so) and damn right!

But per that advert .. the ped would be dead at 35 mph A cyclist could kill at 5 mph if the person was very vulnerable and fell awkwardly. This would be rare. A cyclist has killed at 20 25 mph though in two cases last year. Cyclist at 5 mph would be remarkably unlucky. I think my yob was 15 mph when he pushed past and pushed me. He was not drunk . or I hope not. I had not time to find out as he hit from behind and kicked me so hard that I simply lost my balance when copped off guard. Nasty arrogant and he would be the same in a car /. GRRRRRRRRRRRR!



No .. you were suggesting like with like. If you are hit by a drunk in a huge vehicle .. like a lorry .. that would be taken into account'

Iff hit by a car at speed when drunk.. likewise.

If hit .. with tragic outcome in a pub car park as 5 mph . .you still face outcome.

If hit by a drunken cyclist at a speed which would know a person off balance with equal tragic outcome . then that person must also face the full wrath of the law if convicted.


If that person who shoved me had caused me to pierce artery and bleed to death within minutes .. I would want that person to pay for depriving me of my life. I know if I make any mistake professionally . I will be hanged out to dried dead meat in the public domain. If I make mistake when driving . I would also have to pay similar hard penance. If legal beagle can plead some mitigation . you grasp it to reduce the sentence,




No. All circumstances should be taken into account. That would be correct and deliver real justice.

I am not saying anyone should get away with anything.. nor my wife nor IG ... who is draconian in his real life but tries to be understanding on here as his brief is to build back the trust.

But if a person hits on a bike at 20 mph and injurs v car driver at 10 mph . I know who would the more dangerous out there all the same.

Riding a bicycle does not maketh a decent caring person any more than passing a driving test maketh a good caring driver for life.

You might as well acquit Pc D on that basis.

_________________
If you want to get to heaven - you have to raise a little hell!

Smilies are contagious
They are just like the flu
We use our smilies on YOU today
Now Good Causes are smiling too!

KEEP SMILING
It makes folk wonder just what you REALLY got up to last night!

Smily to penny.. penny to pound
safespeed prospers-smiles all round! !
But the real message? SMILE.. GO ON ! DO IT! and the world will smile with you!
Enjoy life! You only have the one bite at it.

It is just one aggravating factor which would have to be considered alongside any others as well the mitigating factors.


So much depends on how the CPS decide to charge the offence. An incident where injuries are caused with a car could be charged in a variety of ways. Assuming injuries at the level of GBH :-

DWDC in which case custody is not available however bad any injuries may be. Harm being caused to somebody is listed as “factor indicating greater degree of harm”. The main factors in deciding sentence are, as might be expected from a motoring offence, the standard of driving.

Dangerous driving in which case a custodial sentence is possible with a maximum of 6 months in the magistrates courts and 2 years if dealt with by Crown Court. Otherwise as for DWDC.

GBH in which case a custodial sentence is possible with a maximum of 6 months in the magistrates courts and 5 years if dealt with by Crown Court. There is a strong expectation that almost all GBH cases would go to Crown Court. There would be nothing to stop the car being considered as a weapon which would move the sentence upwards from whatever is considered appropriate for the level of injuries. In practice I suspect deliberate use of a car to inflict injury might well be charged as attempted murder.

I am unable to comment on where bicycles might come into this. I have discussed this with a Legal Adviser and her view was that most offences involving cycling in a dangerous or careless manner only exist as part of a Town Clauses Act or Police Clauses Act. As I understand it, that means they are more or less local bylaws. In any event I was unable to find anybody who had dealt with a case of Assault by bicycle, although I was able to find a number of people who knew of injuries caused in that way. For some reason, such events don't sem to end up in court, except on very occasions.

_________________
I am not a lawyer and can't give legal advice. I do have experience of the day to day working of courts and use that knowledge to help where possible. I do not represent any official body and post as an individual.

Subject to individual CPS and area served.

Back to ping>SAC lotto in way too many case lores then.


I happen to think the law and such offers should be stadard uniform practice. meetin set guidelline Thye don't and it's wrong

_________________
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.

Going back to an earlier point, few things I would like cleared up please.

Firstly, I've often cycled somewhere (usually when playing football) and gone for a few pints after and walk the bike home. Since you can be done for cycling drunk and from what I've read earlier you can be done for intent to drive drunk, could the cops confiscate my bike by me drunkingly walking it home. Easy to argue I could jump on it at an time.

Secondly, last summer one of my friends and meself went to a town bout an hour drive away to try a different club, I had a nice few drinks he didn't. He got a girl and I was very tired around 2ish so I left and went back to the car. He gave me a spare key at the start of the night in case I needed to grab something from the car. So I was sitting in the passenger seat, with the key in the ignition for the radio. could I of been done for that and by extension not being insured on that car?

When I was much, much younger I have slept drunk in a public car park, an unadopted track at the side of my house(got locked out) and a farmers field/campsite so I suppose I could have been arrested in either of those cases although I had no intention of driving anywhere.

_________________
My views do not represent Safespeed but those of a driver who has driven for 39 yrs, in all conditions, at all times of the day & night on every type of road and covered well over a million miles, so knows a bit about what makes for safety on the road,what is really dangerous and needs to be observed when driving and quite frankly, the speedo is way down on my list of things to observe to negotiate Britain's roads safely, but I don't expect some fool who sits behind a desk all day to appreciate that.