Cyclist cleared of manslaughter.

I am of the opinion that the person least likely to cause maiming or death is more likely to be in the right than those who can cause more damage. That does not include those who by their actions are likely to act in a way that endangers others. So a pedestrian is least likely to cause harm or death but should obviously take care not to act in a way as to endanger other road users. A bicycle will cause less harm than a car. Would we allow cars without brakes on the road ? I don't think so. When I learned to drive I was told I was in charge of a killing machine and it was my responsibility to watch out for others. I still believe that is true today. We need to revise laws which state you must use the road if on a bicycle or in a car, not the pavement. You must obey the Highway Code. You cannot go through a red light if pedestrians are crossing etc. To me it is just plain common sense. Children are very unpredictable and it is every road user's responsibility to watch out for them.

The judge has ordered a pre-sentence report. That means she's considering a jail sentence.

He had his horrible skull tattoo done on his neck after the incident - and grew his hair over it for court. It seems that, having had his hair cut when the case ended, he's now happy to reveal the ugly thing.

But these days anyone on the road should be aware that pedestrians may be using their phones or perhaps wearing headphones and not concentrating 100% on what is happening. It's like being aware of children playing near the road. You have to expect the unexpected - and not be riding or driving with no brakes. Shouting warnings and swerving round pedestrians at speed doesn't cut it.

Isn't it sad that one of his lies ( there were others) that she was using her phone is believed still by some people on this thread and therefore feeds into the narrative of how culpable he was? It must be dreadful for her widower to see this particular lie repeated so often. As for his lack of remorse- I believe sentencing is to take place next month - no doubt his solicitor is busy finding him 'an how to sound remorseful course' as we speak. I rather thought the judge was too helpful in her comments about the complete lack of remorse shown - she shouldn't have given him any pointers/ hints as to how to behave when he returns for sentencing. My understanding is that the maximum is 2 years in prison - if he's coached well enough, who knows? All suspended?

And there lies the real problem: people get irritated because someone is going slower than they are. Drivers, cyclists, walkers. All the same, essentially. We are very intolerant, impatient animals.

Round here it's car and lorry drivers who chuck litter onto the verges.

I must say that most of the cyclists we encounter on the stretch of road I mentioned (which we have to use to visit the family) are fine - irritating but fine!! They cycle singly and there is an occasional opportunity to overtake safely. However, sometimes there are a bunch of them or two abreast who just think that they own the whole road.

Either, not wither...

What a very unpleasant young man this is. I pity anyone who has the misfortune to have anything to do with him wither now or in future. Nasty creature.

Having just been on a speed awareness course (!) we were told that cyclists are now being told to ride two abreast as it's safer for them. However I totally agree with all commentators who condemn that nasty little s...t.

Jalima what I read was that as he shouted at the lady to get out the way she stepped back but he had already started to swerve and so she kind of stepped into his swerved path if that makes sense He sounds absolutely awful and I hope he gets the full 2 years and is arrogant and mouthy inside jail and gets extra time nasty nasty piece of narcissistic work

Jalima I'm not sure but I think he might have swerved left at the last moment, but she may have backed up into him or just stopped herself trying to avoid him. Re your second post, the same thing happened to me recently - but more like 25/30 bikes! As you say, they ought to split up. But, of course, cyclists themselves have a lot to put up with as well. Our roads are simply not designed for the mixture of cars/bikes/lorries etc they now have to cater for.

That young man certainly hasn't done himself or the cycling community any favours. Absolutely Elrel

Driving along a busy but winding A road recently to visit family we were held up for a long way (miles) by about 12 cyclists riding two abreast and it was absolutely impossible to overtake them . Had they spaced themselves out at least we could have overtaken one at a time when it was safe to do so.

Why?

On no evidence at all apart from his appearance and utterly self-absorption and sense of self entitlement, could I suggest parents who never said no and bought him everything he ever wanted?
No, speculation is not helpful but one does wonder what he could have been couriering as he did not seem to have a job but plenty of money. I am only wondering btw.

I was also wondering why he had no bell or klaxon attached to his bicycle to alert people that he was heading towards them and was unable to swerve. Presumably she did not step out into moving traffic ie cars and lorries so why did he not swerve out of the way? Perhaps someone else knows the answer.

I do remember walking along in Finland and being unaware when I first arrived that cyclists had right of way on the combined cycle path/pavement - luckily a cyclist coming along at about 30mph rang his very loud bell and I was alerted and able to get out of the way.

Whistles or bells are no good if someone is deaf, either.

I don't know if this is just a rural problem where I live but cyclists also leave so much litter behind. They just chuck disposable drinks bottles and cans any old where, it looks awful rolling around in the road or stuck in the verges.

Suzied, the law certainly struggles with regulating cyclists, but exactly what practical changes we need to the law is the question. In terms of the example you give, I'm sure what the cyclist was illegal.

I was in a busy part of London recently when a Lycra clad cyclist, no helmet, with a whistle round his neck, went hurtling round a roundabout and up a busy street he was blowing his whistle to tell everyone to get out of his way, and narrowly missed a group of pedestrians on a zebra crossing ( he had no intention of stopping). I was pleased to see a police officer stop him and give him a talking to. He gave the watching pedestrians the finger salute. Complete arrogant scumbag. Definitely a change in the law needed.

I hope this case will make them think, Sue, but sadly I suspect most will dismiss it because he was using a specialist bike.

I've been knocked down by a cyclist (in a railway station, where he absolutely should not have been cycling!) at full pelt. I was sent flying, he hit me with such force.

Luckily I didn't hit my head but I can imagine that if I had, it would have caused a lot of damage. My poor 6yo daughter was distraught at her mummy lying flat on the ground, covered in blood. It took weeks for my injuries to heal and left permanent scars.

I'm very nervous of cyclists now and wonder if they really understand how much damage they can do.

Anya I don't think he did succeed in shifting blame. He was found clearly to be the cause of the accident.

He certainly tried to,shift the blame in a vey public and blameworthy manner Fitzy or are you saying he didn't succeed?

Cyclists - I'm told there is some kind of an app whereby cyclists and runners can test their speed as they go. I was also told that can result in such inconsiderate and dangerous behaviour to others that it is no longer available in some areas.
That young man certainly hasn't done himself or the cycling community any favours. I hope Kim Briggs' husband succeeds in his campaign.

I don't think he shifted the blame at all; and the verdict made it clear he was guilty of negligence. Just not sufficiently negligent to count as manslaughter. His tattoo is clearly irrelevant and the comparison with removing car brakes is beyond ridiculous. The problem, if there is one, is that unlike the position with cars, there is no offence sitting in between manslaughter and less serious traffic offences caused by cyclists. Causing death by dangerous driving was introduced specifically because manslaughter involves proving such a high degree of reckless behaviour that convictions were very rare.

Yes, he *falsely tried to throw the blame not her by claiming, on social media, that she was on her mobile phone.

He is arrogant liar and I hope he gets the maximum 2 year custodial sentence that being found guilty of 'wanton and furious driving' .