Cyclist cleared of manslaughter.

He was obviously trying to shift the blame onto poor Mrs Briggs and considering the verdict, it worked.

FWIW according to the DM (not a source I would usually quote, but still..)

"The former courier and scaffolder also said she had been on her phone - but it was proved in court she wasn't."

So if I remove the brakes from my car then hit a pedestrian crossing the road (because I am unable to brake/stop) should I not guilty of manslaughter?

I would like to see it go to appeal too loopyloo but doubt it will be.

I have read quite a lot of unpleasant things about this man recently and for the judge to comment that he has shown no remorse only adds fuel to the fact that he should go to jail for the full 2 years (it seems this is the maximum sentence).

It seems he had bragged on social media about being in a movie in which the main character drives recklessly through London traffic only narrowly missing pedestrians. Then he denied it.

Perhaps growing his hair to hide the skull tattoo on his neck , (complete with blood tears, which is said to represent killing someone) from the jury did him a favour although he seemed rather hasty to have his hair cut to "show it off" as soon as the jury retired. He has recently said that he blames Mrs Briggs for the crash and she was lucky (????) not to have killed him or damage his "fixie" bike.
Unbelievable.

To be found guilty of manslaughter the negligent act needs to be truly gross - "reprehensible" as stated in one case. While his attitude after the event was truly awful, the jury, who heard all the evidence about the accident itself, clearly didn't take the view that his negligence was sufficiently bad to meet this legal test. Exactly why, I've no idea - but as I said, they heard the evidence and we didn't.

In any space shared with pedestrians, cyclists simply shouldn't be going so fast that they can't overtake pedestrians easily or give warning that they are behind.

Towpaths are towpaths but our cities need cycle lanes that are separate from pedestrians and motor vehicles. Yes, I know that's a big demand but we should be working on it bit by bit.

--

Too easy to blame the parents, monica. Speculation is not helpful.

On the general issue of cyclists and pedestrians, one problem is that cars can be heard approaching but cyclists generally cannot, and even if they have bells they tend not to use them. So on, say a towpath, a pedestrian may step sideways to e.g. avoid a puddle, completely unaware that he/she is moving in front of a fast moving bicycle.

As I understand it the victim was NOT using a mobile phone when she was hit. It was what the cyclist claimed but was shown to be untrue.

I am curious about his background. He claimed to be working as a cycle courier, but all three companies he said he worked for either said he didn't work for them or he worked with them for a very short time, 1 day and 1 week respectively. Yet he was impeccably fashionably dressed and groomed throughout the trial, all the right designer labels and he had a £450 bike. Where did this money come from?

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?

As a cyclist myself we are much more likely to be in danger on the roads but like most other posters I abhor his arrogance and hope they throw the book at him and he gets a jail sentence I think the using her phone was a red herring He should not have been on the road with that bike he should not have been riding recklessly and blimey for a bike to kill a pedestrian it's majoring rare so he was really going at some speed and with no brakes could only shout, I read as he shouted she stepped back but he had swerved inwards to try and avoid her so hit her anyway But his words on social media was inexcusable and unforgivable

Perhaps this case should be taken to the Court of Appeal.

Yes if a motorist was driving with deliberately illegal brakes and shouted that at a pedestrian he would have been found guilty of manslaughter.
I hope the law is changed.

I heard on the radio , not sure if accurate, that cctv showed he lied about her being on the phone. I hope they throw the book at him. Some of his tweets reported sound very unpleasant, more upset about his bike than the victim.

PS the inclusion of remorse in court (or not) worries me as any barrister worth their salt would have advised him to tone down his expression, turn on the waterworks and look suitably contrite.
His behaviour at the time of the accident is much more pertinent.

I fail to understand how anybody riding or driving an illegal vehicle which results in a death, can be found not guilty of manslaughter.
Regardless of whether she stepped out without paying attention, she might have stood a chance if he had been cycling more responsibly.
However, it is also incumbent on us to be alert as pedestrians, not stepping into the road while checking a phone - it could just as easily have been a car or bus or juggernaut.
Doesn't make him less guilty though.

Baggs I have often thought that when people show 'no remorse' it may be because they need to shut out what they have done in order to cope.

I also hope he gets the longest sentence allowed. His idiotic arrogance has resulted in the death of a much loved woman.

A couple of weeks ago, I was walking along the footpath through a park in Buxton and narrowly missed being knocked down by a young man on a bike. He was at least 20 so not a kid and only missed me by inches as he swerved off the path to avoid me. I think the only reason he swerved was in order to keep his speed up as he was racing round the park and I suppose he was timing himself!

I'm horrified that he is not being charged with manslaughter.

Two small children lost their mum to someone who was driving with an illegal vehicle.

Obviously , I don't understand the nuances of the law but the thing that stuck with me was one of things he said on social media '

^'It is a pretty serious incident so I won't bother saying oh she deserved it, it's her fault. Yes it is her fault but no she did not deserve it.

'Hopefully, it is a lesson learned on her behalf, it shouldn't have happened like it did but what more can I say.'^

A lesson learned on her behalf???????? She died !

A custodial sentence is the own right outcome to this sad sad event.

If he had time to yell at the woman twice, he had time to stop before he hit her had he had brakes. His being on that bike on the road was criminal behaviour.

And it's his sort of behaviour that gives the vast majority of law-abiding cyclists the bad name

Couldn't agree more Baggs

Just reading the trial report on line he does seem like a nasty character.

Yes I believe she was mumofmadboys but had this been a car ploughing into her that was later found to have no brakes I feel sure the driver would be looking at a VERY long prison sentence indeed.

In court he admitted to twice yelling to Mrs Briggs before the collision "get the f--k outta my way" which in my opinion means had his bike had brakes he could have stopped.

And it's his sort of behaviour that gives the vast majority of law-abiding cyclists the bad name that has shown up repeatedly on Gransnet. Cyclists like that make me sick.

I wonder if his aggressive-seeming lack of remorse is his self-defence kicking in or whether he's just a hard nut.

is illegal

He was in charge of a vehicle that was illegal on the road and 'driving' it dangerously. Drivers have to make allowances for inattentive pedestrians (children, for instance). Like all careless and dangerous drivers I think he deserves a longer sentence than two years so I agree that the law needs to be reformed.

I think it should be mentioned that the lady crossing the road was looking at her mobile. So sad all round.