ON your bike, OFF the roads

Last year, Katie Hart, 19, was making the 15-minute drive to her boyfriend's house. She'd only driven around 2,000ft on the Southbound A1 before crashing into the rear of Gareth Rhys-Evans, who was on a bicycle.

Major Rhys-Evans was catapulted across the road, and died almost instantly. CF wrote about this last year, but the case has only just come to trial.

Earlier this week,a jury took five and a half hours to return a unanimous verdict, finding Katie Hart guilty of causing death by dangerous driving. She faces between 2 and 5 years in prison.

Judge Nicholas Coleman was very clear on this, and told Hart:

"You face a prison sentence. The only question is how long."

A moment of carelessness, and two families' lives are ruined.

But hang on a minute. When Ms Hart struck the unfortunate Major, he was - wait for it - in the middle of a 'time trial'. Yup. A race. A game, played on bicycles. On the dual-carriageway, 70 miles per hour, A1. On a Bank Holiday.

Yes, Katie was careless, and foolish, but isn't it pretty fucking careless and absolutely the height of foolishness to hold a cycle race on the A1, for Christ's sake?

And take a look at the picture. That's the late Major, on his carbon fibre toy. Notice that he's wearing black, on a bicycle that's also largely black.

Of course Ms. Nash should have been more attentive, and should have seen him, but how easy is it to spot a bloke, dressed all in black, on a black bike, in a place where you wouldn't fucking expect them to be?  8:30 on a Bank Holiday morning on a major road, for fucks sake.

In an age where elf 'n' safety rules, and conkers are banned, how the fuck do grown men get to hold a bike race on a road that's only a couple of roundabouts away from being a fully fledged motorway?

That's something for Katie to think about for the next five years.

.
Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

22 comments:

Furor Teutonicus said...

Fucking twats on pushbikes deserve everyting they get.

Dip shits every one of them.

Anonymous said...

Not just hard to see, but what about the speed differential between a car and a bicycle?

I suppose this is one way of thinning them out.

John R said...

Appeal, immediately.

This was obviously a jury composed of a flock of brainless "the car is evil" sheeple created by the constant propaganda from NuLieBore's Safety Elf.

John East said...

This country is becomming more and more sinister. The woman should have been punished for her crime. A moments inattention = £60 fine.

......and if a cyclist in a poncy black lycra outfit riding a £3000 status symbol dies, reduced to a £30 fine.

John East said...

And on a broader theme, it's always struck me as ironic that in our increasingly godless society we pander in such a cynical way to the sanctity of human life.

We are ruled by evil men and women who show no regrets at killing 100,000 Iraqis and sacrificing half a dozen members of our armed forces per month for no clear strategic reason, and yet enact such perverse legislation to persecute those who cause accidents.

Jill said...

Blimey, that's a conundrum one. I dunno whose side I fall on, actually.

Have you ever been stuck behind one of those blasted pony and trap races on a major road/motorway? Now that WOULD make you furious!

Jill said...

PS: That John East has a point.

Jill said...

... but it's a million Iraqis. If we report the horrors of Rwanda, Somalia and Haiti using one model, then it's a model perfectly good enough for Iraq.

MalcolmCog said...

Riding my bike on a busy dual-carriageway isn't something I would like to do, I have long opposed organising time trials on main roads. These events are very popular because riders can be aided by the slipstream of passing vehicles. I seem to remember hearing that 6 or so riders are killed competing in these sort of events every year. Having said that if the woman was driving without paying attention to the road its maybe lucky for her she hit something soft; a cyclist, rather than something hard such as a lorry. Furor - good to see the beliefs or your forefathers still exist in the Fatherland.

Anonymous said...

There was also the recent case where a cyclist was killed on being struck by a car after THE CYCLIST ran a red light.The driver of the car was also convicted and jailed if memory serves.

richard said...

I'm not sure about this one. Fair trial by jury? Yep. Any evidence of bad driving or illegality from the cyclist? Nope.
But, apart from that, imagine being a passenger on a plane...
"ladies and gentlemen, there are some hot-air balloons ahead. They've been cleared by Air Traffic, and I'm obliged by the laws of the air to make allowances. But they're having a competition in MY SKY and they're slow, black expensive toys. we're faster, so whatever happens next is their own fault."

Jess The Dog said...

There is little in the way of common sense regarding cycling.

I like cycling (usually cycle to the railway station every day, and take kids cycling on the back of the bike) but I need to drive and walk as well.

Cyclists are banned from cycling on footpaths by a 19th century law which pre-dates the motor car! Sorry cops, but no way I would take my chance on certain roads so deserted pavement it is!

Despite my sympathy for two-wheeled transport, I do get angry. Yesterday, I was driving along a 40mph trunk road, behind a cyclist who reckoned it was his divine right to prevent cars from passing. I revved as I went past, in the hope a lungful of carbon monoxide would make him splutter!

Same as the idiots who cycle two abreast, the idiots who duck through red lights (which I never do) at pedestrian crossings....usually head-to-toe in lycra.

The law needs rewritten, allow pavement cycling, reclassify some roads.

Furor Teutonicus said...

Anonymous said...

There was also the recent case where a cyclist was killed on being struck by a car after THE CYCLIST ran a red light.The driver of the car was also convicted and jailed if memory serves.


BEWARE. If nor already in place, Europe plans to use the system whereby the smaller vehicle has prescedence over a larger vehicle, REGARDLESS of fault.

"Autobahn Poker" it is refered to here.

A bike trumps a car, and a car trumps a delivery truck, kind of thing.

Furor Teutonicus said...

MalcolmCog said...

Furor - good to see the beliefs or your forefathers still exist in the Fatherland.


It is well grounded.

I am a motorbike rider, bothe proffessionaly and privately. Here ALL bike riders are referd to as "Bikers". So any shit that is caused by PUSH bike riders, WE get it in the neck as well.

The only good thing is, that if a push bike rider commits an offence, he gets points on his driving licence, IF he has one, and if not, when he gets one, the points are added at the time he gets it.

Anonymous said...

I agree that the A1 is a damn fool place to hold a time trial and Bank Holiday Weekend is asking for trouble. However, "less than 2000 feet" is under a third of a mile and she should reasonably be expected to be paying at least vague attention to the road. I'm not the greatest driver on earth but I try to pay attention at least to things likely to be in my line of travel and expect (usually correctly I regret) that they are bloody fools and will do their damndest to kill me, or at least drive/walk/cycle through my vehicle. (Either a nice red one or my mud spattered 4x4 Landy of Doom, laden with veg from the field).

Anonymous said...

My memory is not what it used to be, but a third of a mile was once 1760 feet, wasn't it?

David said...

The thing that makes my piss boil is that the sentence is determined by whether you kill the person or not.

You get a grade-A cunt like Ashley Cole doing 110mph in a 50mph area and he gets a slap on the wrist. You get a case like this, where the cyclist shouldn't have been anywhere near the A1, and you get five years in the nick.

Everything is arse-about-tit in this country. Cole should be in the slammer- five years for driving like a cunt and five years for being a cunt- and this woman should be getting the slap on the wrist.

It should depend entirely on how bad your driving is, not how badly you hit someone.

Anonymous said...

David, are you thick or something? What the cyclist was doing was perhaps ill-advised, but not illegal.

She hit him and killed him.

Not really the same sort of thing is it, you twat....

David said...

Anon, you misunderstand me.

I do not think that the penalties for bad driving should be dependent on whether you kill someone or not. If you are driving badly enough for it to be considered "dangerous" you should be punished regardless of whether you are lucky enough to avoid killing people.

And IMHO driving at 110mph in a 50mph zone is far worse than hitting someone on a dual carriageway who shouldn't have been there in the first place. Whether it is legal or not for him to ride on a dual carriageway, you have to be a special kind of stupid to ride a pushbike on a road that (to quote CF) is "two roundabouts short of being a motorway". And is actually in the process of being upgraded to motorway as we speak.

The whole thing is arse-over-tit.

Furor Teutonicus said...

David. There is nothing in your argument that can be disputed.

Bloody well said!

Furor Teutonicus said...

David. There is nothing in your argument that can be disputed.

Bloody well said!

David said...

And now it looks like you can be convicted of death by dangerous driving simply by being in the car with a dangerous driver:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/lincolnshire/8494422.stm

Seriously, what the fuck?

Actually, when you read the "£20,000 costs" it all makes perfect sense...