Woman given 60hours community service for killing cyclist

slowbike

Near my neck of the woods ...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-37097783

Will Houghton, 20, of Buckinghamshire, died two days after he was knocked off his bike in Wickham on 28 January.

Jeanette Smith, 69, who pleaded guilty to causing death by careless driving, was sentenced by Portsmouth magistrates to complete 60 hours of community work.

Ok - I appreciate that she didn't kill the rider on purpose ... but FFS ... what do we have to do to make drivers pay attention to where they're going and who else is on the road?
Should we have power limiters to prevent cars from accelarating hard or driving too quickly? (but then - what is too quickly?!)
Should we have harsher penalties for those at fault of injury collisions - 60 hours community service + 12 month driving ban - for killing someone - albeit unintentional ...

Death by careless driving - or manslaughter ...
Ok - it's not as serious as killing someone in a fight - because during the fight you're intentionally causing harm, even if you don't intend to kill them - but killing someone is still serious and I think that the majority of drivers out there are forgetting that the nice comfortable cars they drive are capable of causing serious injury for more vulnerable road users - and it's about time they slowed down and drove with more consideration for everyone else.

pblakeney

One guy at work recently seriously asked how a motorbiker can be killed in town with a 30mph limit.
They have zero clue how much damage 2 tonne of steel at 30mph will do to a human being.

PS - Existing laws are adequate. They just need to be adhered to. Greatly upping punishment if necessary.

Michael-B

Very depressing. RIP to the lad.

ugo.santalucia

Is jail a better way to deal with it? Has jail ever redeemed anybody? Has jail ever been a serious deterrent for this type of crime?
I would argue 60 hours is a bit light, maybe 300 hours of community service would be a more adequate way to re-educate that driver... seeing she is probably retired, what a great opportunity to be useful to society

Garry H

ugo.santalucia wrote:

Is jail a better way to deal with it? Has jail ever redeemed anybody? Has jail ever been a serious deterrent for this type of crime?
I would argue 60 hours is a bit light, maybe 300 hours of community service would be a more adequate way to re-educate that driver... seeing she is probably retired, what a great opportunity to be useful to society

Agreed. Furthermore, she should be made to wear a t-shirt (or sandwich board) saying "I'm doing this because I killed someone".

slowbike

ugo.santalucia wrote:

Is jail a better way to deal with it? Has jail ever redeemed anybody? Has jail ever been a serious deterrent for this type of crime?

For some it may well do - there is no 1 right answer.

ugo.santalucia wrote:

I would argue 60 hours is a bit light, maybe 300 hours of community service would be a more adequate way to re-educate that driver... seeing she is probably retired, what a great opportunity to be useful to society

The whole problem is that sentencing and punishments are all reactionary to an event that has already occured - this needs turning on it's head - drivers need educating in better road craft BEFORE they go and injure or kill someone.
Just on Sunday there were two cases of bad driving that I encountered - I only rode 8 miles and that was all on minor roads. Ok - there was one nice lady who let me cross the road before she turned into it - may have delayed her another 30 seconds - and there were a few other drivers who passed me sensibly - as I'd expect given that I was towing a kiddie trailer ...
That's just my riding which has been significantly limited recently.

I don't think anyone really thinks that injuring or killing a cyclist is reasonable behaviour for a driver - but they're all so often impatient to get past you no matter what - it seems they don't look past the next obstruction - and cyclists are considered obstructions (even when we're not).

Unfortunately you can't prosecute accidents waiting to happen - but we could introduce a financial penalty for drivers who haven't taken an awareness course - just have it as a tax on the insurance - £0 if you've passed the course in the last 4 years ...

Use your mobile phone whilst driving? - ban for 2 years for first offence - no if's or buts.

Any driving ban requires a re-test.

Sound a bit draconion? Yes - it is - but until people realise that there are other people out there and they need to drive with due care a consideration for others - and that driving is NOT a right then we need suitable deterrants...
or driverless cars ...

slowbike

PBlakeney wrote:

One guy at work recently seriously asked how a motorbiker can be killed in town with a 30mph limit.
They have zero clue how much damage 2 tonne of steel at 30mph will do to a human being.

PS - Existing laws are adequate. They just need to be adhered to. Greatly upping punishment if necessary.

Says to me that there's no sense of action/consequence/risk - IMHO we tend to overdo the health and safety to save people from having to think for themselves - 30mph is "safe" because that's what the limit is - doesn't matter that it's a busy street with kids running about ...

is Adequate enough? where's the consequence for killing someone? Why are we even having to consider that? Where's the sense of community - being nice to everyone even if it costs you 30 seconds...

pblakeney

Slowbike wrote:

PBlakeney wrote:

One guy at work recently seriously asked how a motorbiker can be killed in town with a 30mph limit.
They have zero clue how much damage 2 tonne of steel at 30mph will do to a human being.

PS - Existing laws are adequate. They just need to be adhered to. Greatly upping punishment if necessary.

Says to me that there's no sense of action/consequence/risk - IMHO we tend to overdo the health and safety to save people from having to think for themselves - 30mph is "safe" because that's what the limit is - doesn't matter that it's a busy street with kids running about ...

is Adequate enough? where's the consequence for killing someone? Why are we even having to consider that? Where's the sense of community - being nice to everyone even if it costs you 30 seconds...

Adequate is enough. Someone has to be doing something wrong for an accident to occur. The problem is the apparent lack of consequence awareness. Either to victims or negligible punishment for lack of attention.

rpherts

drivers need educating in better road craft BEFORE they go and injure or kill someone.

You can educate all you like, most of it will pass in one ear and out the other. Just as you can wear all the hi-viz clothing you like, but if they aren't looking, they won't see you.

Unless people fear the consequences of their actions, they won't change their behaviour.

ugo.santalucia

rpherts wrote:

Unless people fear the consequences of their actions, they won't change their behaviour.

Fear doesn't work, look at Brexit! It's education that is (was) lacking...

craigus89

ugo.santalucia wrote:

rpherts wrote:

Unless people fear the consequences of their actions, they won't change their behaviour.

Fear doesn't work, look at Brexit! It's education that is (was) lacking...

Precisely this.

The following is all conjecture, but I'd bet that that woman didn't have a clue what the likely punishment would be for killing someone because of careless driving before she got in the car that day. In fact if you polled a bunch of 69 year old people off the street as to what they thought the punishment would be for this, I doubt many would not think they'd go to jail for a certain amount of time. Tougher sentencing wouldn't make an ounce of difference.

trek_dan

Need to start handing out lifetime driving bans - that would be a deterrent. 6 months to 2 years ban when someone has clearly demonstrated they don't have the mental capacity or spacial awareness to drive a car safely and within the law is ludicrous. 2 year bans for things like drink driving and £80 'slap on the wrist' you currently get for driving whilst using a phone simply inst enough to be a deterrent. Maximum number of points on licence before receiving a driving ban needs to be halved to 6 from 12. Driving a car on publicly owned roads isn't a right.

slowbike

rpherts wrote:

drivers need educating in better road craft BEFORE they go and injure or kill someone.

You can educate all you like, most of it will pass in one ear and out the other. Just as you can wear all the hi-viz clothing you like, but if they aren't looking, they won't see you.

Unless people fear the consequences of their actions, they won't change their behaviour.

hmm - unfortuantely I think you have a very good point re education.

Comfortable cars with all the driving assist gizmos seems to have led people into a false sense of security - not for themselves but for everyone else - they'll be fine - mostly ... although there was that tragety on the A34 where a family were killed in a major pile up - no cyclists invovled - I can have a good stab at what caused the crash - at least one person was driving too fast and too close - may not have even been directly involved in the crash.

slowbike

Craigus89 wrote:

ugo.santalucia wrote:

rpherts wrote:

Unless people fear the consequences of their actions, they won't change their behaviour.

Fear doesn't work, look at Brexit! It's education that is (was) lacking...

Precisely this.

The following is all conjecture, but I'd bet that that woman didn't have a clue what the likely punishment would be for killing someone because of careless driving before she got in the car that day. In fact if you polled a bunch of 69 year old people off the street as to what they thought the punishment would be for this, I doubt many would not think they'd go to jail for a certain amount of time. Tougher sentencing wouldn't make an ounce of difference.

I'd bet the woman didn't even consider the fact that there might be a cyclist and what could go wrong if she hit him - I have no doubt that she never intended to kill him - why would she? But she was happy to drive her car in a careless manner regardless of the consequences to anyone else - she's not alone in that - she's just one of the minority where the careless driving results in serious injury or death of a 3rd party - at which point they consider changing their driving style (or not driving at all).

You could easily argue that the woman wouldn't benefit from a term in jail - she's already paying the personal price of her actions in remorse - so what will jail do? It's a good argument - generally everyone is sorry for their actions after the event - but don't think about it before - how do we (as a society) make "them" think more carefully about what they're doing?

Education has a part to play - I took my driving test over 20 years ago - I do consider myself a considerate driver albeit a quick one, but I'm sure an instructor could point out many floors in my skills - would I consider taking driving lessons? I never had a professional driving instructor - taught by Mum and Dad - there's no onus on me to take more lessons at any point - providing I don't get caught doing anything wrong - is that good enough? Most professions include an element of training - even our hobbies can include some instruction - but driving isn't - perhaps it should be.

I highlighted the news item because I'm a cyclist and I'm disturbed by the apparent injustice of the sentencing for killing a fellow cyclist - how many non-cyclists flick over the headlines or give it a quick scan and don't even think about the consequences? "It's just a cyclist - bit of a shame, but hasn't affected me - oh look, she got 60 hours community service - right time to get to the shops, why am I being held up, come on faster faster ... no you can't come out, it's my right of way ... " Perhaps they'd think a bit more if there were more punitive sentences?

I think that people genuinely don't see that it's a person that's been injured or killed - there's so much of this being published that we're becoming immune to it - terrorist attacks, plane crashes, train crashes, coach crashes - what's another death on the roads? It's almost as though it's become an everyday part of life ... until they're the one who drove their car and killed someone ...

StillGoing

ugo.santalucia wrote:

rpherts wrote:

Unless people fear the consequences of their actions, they won't change their behaviour.

Fear doesn't work, look at Brexit! It's education that is (was) lacking...

Brett is working fine for me and everyone that I know. Give it a rest eh. :roll:

lakesluddite

The harsh truth is that we all (if we are motorists) can get away with bad driving pretty much most of the time, and given the resources it would need to clamp down on every single careless/reckless/dangerous act of driving then it will remain that way. We get complacent behind the wheel, and this will lead inevitably to accidents - and in some rare cases to fatalities. As a society we tolerate the system that leads to this lack of care - there is no general will to embark on a sea change in the way we use the roads, and until we do then this will keep happening.
Would making the penalties for this type of thing harsher make a difference - maybe (it certainly wouldn't increase accidents), but what is really needed is a complete culture change in our society, which will take years of concerted effort, funding and most of all a buy-in from all road users.
The car is seen, to some extent, as a symbol of freedom - and people don't like having their freedoms curtailed, even if it is for the common good (and that works in most aspects of society)
All we can do is keep banging the road safety drum as loudly as we can, and get behind those who are fighting our (cyclists) corner, such as Chris Boardman. We might not get a revolution, but at least we might get an evolution.

veronese68

Drivers are safe and insulated from the outside world so don't consider the consequences of their actions. If people had to drive whilst strapped to the front of their car they'd be a lot more considerate. Alternativey, replacing the air bag with a sharp spike might help focus the mind.
Slighlty confused how brexit is working fine, I didn't think it had happened yet. But I have been away for a couple of weeks.

First.Aspect

trek_dan wrote:

Need to start handing out lifetime driving bans - that would be a deterrent. 6 months to 2 years ban when someone has clearly demonstrated they don't have the mental capacity or spacial awareness to drive a car safely and within the law is ludicrous. 2 year bans for things like drink driving and £80 'slap on the wrist' you currently get for driving whilst using a phone simply inst enough to be a deterrent. Maximum number of points on licence before receiving a driving ban needs to be halved to 6 from 12. Driving a car on publicly owned roads isn't a right.

I agree. Prison is there to protect society as well as for punishment. There's no benefit to putting an otherwise law abiding person in there, but society CAN be protected by ensuring that she's not on the road.

I would also argue that most people would indeed regard a driving ban and being effectively uninsurable thereafter as being a strong deterrent. Most people could almost immediately put into context just how inconvenient that would be in their everyday lives.

I think prison is so abstract, and so associated with "criminals" (rather than merely fatally negligent people), that it is just seen as something that applies to "other people".

Its a bit similar to this - most of us know that most motorists regard the slightly abstract "deterrent" of actually killing someone pales into insignificance with the very real consequences of having to take your car in to have a dent repaired.

First.Aspect

Another measure we need, to "hard wire" people's thinking, is presumed civil liability. I've had heated discussions with barristers about this, who argue that its not in the interests of justice. In my view, it would merely reflect how the duty of care is related to the amount of damage your vehicle could cause.

kingstongraham

Slowbike wrote:

I do consider myself a considerate driver albeit a quick one

Off topic, but what makes a "quick" driver?

darkhairedlord

KingstonGraham wrote:

Slowbike wrote:

I do consider myself a considerate driver albeit a quick one

Off topic, but what makes a "quick" driver?

certainly not a considerate one...

All drivers think they are considerate, right up until you're under their wheels.

slowbike

Veronese68 wrote:

Slighlty confused how brexit is working fine, I didn't think it had happened yet. But I have been away for a couple of weeks.

Ah - we were towed away but got lost and ended up where we started ...

Veronese68 wrote:

Drivers are safe and insulated from the outside world so don't consider the consequences of their actions. If people had to drive whilst strapped to the front of their car they'd be a lot more considerate. Alternativey, replacing the air bag with a sharp spike might help focus the mind.

Hah - wondered when the spike might get introduced....

Being slightly older - and therefore more knowledgable and generally better at everything than anyone younger than me - I came through the time when we did cycling proficency at primary school - we weren't allowed to ride to school (and keep bikes there) until we'd passed it - so the basics of road craft were learnt at that stage.
I then learnt basic car control in a Peugeot 104 - this was done off road when I was below the legal driving age - not quite sure how Mum put up with hours of forwards and back whilst I learnt clutch control - but she did...
By the time I got behind of the wheel of a car on the road I already knew how to drive - it was more a case of putting it all together in the seemingly high stress situation with other road users - I still remember my Dad getting me to stop the engine at a T-Junction - he got out and tore a strip off the driver who tailgated me up the road.
The cars I learnt to drive in were all low power with no power steering and by todays standard - poor braking ability. I eventually had a Mini and then bought my first car - a Peugeot 205 1.3GT (not the i version).

Since then I've had numerous cars - but the ones I enjoy driving have been the older ones where you feel every bump and have to handle the car around corners rather than the new ones that are more point and go ..
The MGB and MX5 are definately there in the list of cars I liked driving - you had to be more aware of what was going on around you (mx5 because the power to the back wheels would have you spinning if not careful).
Not that I'd like to take either of those cars on a long trip - the VW CC was good at that - very comfortable and easy to drive - and that's part of the issue - we're demanding cars that are easy to drive and reliable - ones where you can get away with braking later and later - or in the latest cars - ones that keep you in your lane and a measured distance/time from the car in front - with no thought required by the driver.

I'm sorry, but it's not good enough any more - with more and more cars on the road these "accidents" will only increase in number and whilst the manufacturers may be doing all they think they can do to reduce injury it will only add to the driver complacancy.
For me, driverless cars can't come soon enough - I'm sure there will still be accidents - all the time people are moving about there will be collisions and/or equipment failures - but it will, I hope, reduce the "must get in front" attitude because there will be no human driver.
But we need to do something before we get to that point - because the number of deaths is rediculous.

slowbike

darkhairedlord wrote:

KingstonGraham wrote:

Slowbike wrote:

I do consider myself a considerate driver albeit a quick one

Off topic, but what makes a "quick" driver?

certainly not a considerate one...

All drivers think they are considerate, right up until you're under their wheels.

Hah! I'm just not wanting to portray the image that I believe I'm better than the average driver.

What's a Quick driver? IMHO - one who makes progress, overtaking where safe but advantageos to do so.
Different to a Fast driver who tailgates anyone in front and overtakes whenever possible despite the fact that the net gain can be measured in seconds.

Had a fast driver overtake me last year when I was driving my campervan (PVC) - roared past me - to join the queue of cars just up the road ... net gain - nothing ... a completely pointless overtake probably based on the assumption that it was a campervan - and campervans are slow ...

StillGoing

Veronese68 wrote:

Drivers are safe and insulated from the outside world so don't consider the consequences of their actions. If people had to drive whilst strapped to the front of their car they'd be a lot more considerate. Alternativey, replacing the air bag with a sharp spike might help focus the mind.
Slighlty confused how brexit is working fine, I didn't think it had happened yet. But I have been away for a couple of weeks.

Individuals act in different ways. There are just as many dickheads on cycles as dickheads in cars.

The process of Brexit hasn't happened yet, but the knock on effect of the vote has begun. Hearing the silly whiners like yourself makes it all the better.

redbikejohn

Cycling on the road is far more dangerous than riding a motorcycle. Yes I do both and in the last two years commuting to work on both I've had several near death incidents on the bicycle. Cyclists on the road are seen to be a general nuisance or not seen need at all. Despite having two flashing lights at the rear I've nearly been taken out on the A40 several times. The last of which really shook me up as I'm sure the van's mirror passed over my head it was that close, mere inches from being killed. My wife and beat mate refuse to cycle on the road. However on every trip into work drivers will give me room or wave me out so I can cross the road, so its not everyone. The ones that don't care or don't even see you "cycle blind " are the ones that kill. Education is the answer but lifetime loss of license might also be an answer so that it sharpens the mind. Something needs to be done, if it wasn't for me needing the exercise I'd never cycle to work again as I now feel like it only a matter of time

slowbike

redbikejohn wrote:

Cycling on the road is far more dangerous than riding a motorcycle.

yup - I can see that - at least with a motorbike you've got the capability of travelling at the same speed as the rest of the traffic and accelarating out of trouble if you spot it. On a push bike you are subject to how much room you're given - or not ...

redbikejohn wrote:

Something needs to be done, if it wasn't for me needing the exercise I'd never cycle to work again as I now feel like it only a matter of time

Indeed - there are lots of people who think that cycling is too dangerous - and in a way they are right - but they shouldn't be right.

I accept that all road users need to help themselves - like lights, suitable clothing and helmets - but all road users need to have consideration for everyone else too...

redbikejohn

I am amazed when I see guys riding in dappled shade into bright sunny bits and back into shade again without having a bright flashy light on the rear. In a car with bright light hitting the windscreen it is hard to spot cyclists sometimes - if they don't have a light on.
I've found its worse on some roads. In my experience if you have a dual carriage way and it's busy the cars closest to you don't have the room to move over into the outside Lane but don't want to wait 30 seconds to get by so the squeeze past. OK if it's relatively slow but at 60 mph it's bloody scary . A40 from near Denham turning up towards the light at the top of the hill is well iffy ....

ForumNewbie

Many car drivers drive carelessly every day by passing far too close to cyclists.

To change things and make the roads safer for cyclists, I think the Highway Code needs to be publicised and enforced as regards cars, vans and lorries passing too close to cyclists. This Chris Boardman video is quite good:
https://www.theguardian.com/environment ... ould-watch

Many drivers here in the UK at least, are too impatient to wait until vehicles pass on the other side of the road, and will try to squeeze past too close, which is either careless or dangerous driving. Unfortunately only when this driving causes a death or serious injury, does the driver get called to account for their actions.

Without publicity and enforcement, most drivers probably don't even realise how close they are to causing serious accidents every day.

pblakeney

ForumNewbie wrote:

Without publicity and enforcement, most drivers probably don't even realise how close they are to causing serious accidents every day.

Ask them to stand at the edge of a train station platform whilst an express train passes through.
Then explain that is what it feels like. PS - Take primary when the road is too narrow to pass without crossing the line.

mamba80

First Aspect wrote:

trek_dan wrote:

Need to start handing out lifetime driving bans - that would be a deterrent. 6 months to 2 years ban when someone has clearly demonstrated they don't have the mental capacity or spacial awareness to drive a car safely and within the law is ludicrous. 2 year bans for things like drink driving and £80 'slap on the wrist' you currently get for driving whilst using a phone simply inst enough to be a deterrent. Maximum number of points on licence before receiving a driving ban needs to be halved to 6 from 12. Driving a car on publicly owned roads isn't a right.

I agree. Prison is there to protect society as well as for punishment. There's no benefit to putting an otherwise law abiding person in there, but society CAN be protected by ensuring that she's not on the road.

I would also argue that most people would indeed regard a driving ban and being effectively uninsurable thereafter as being a strong deterrent. Most people could almost immediately put into context just how inconvenient that would be in their everyday lives.

We dont know exactly what this woman did do we?

But until there are very harsh deterrent sentences and presumed fault to the driver if involved in an accident with cyclist/pedestrian, then this sort of thing will just continue.

if this woman had been given 10years, it would be on the front page of all the newspapers, they d be an in-depth analysis of the hows and whys and articles on how to safely overtake cyclists, instead this story barely makes the local rag.

i know deterrents work because when i had m/c's, the stories that did the rounds that guys went to prison for say doing 150mph, made all of us, very very careful as to what we did and where.

StillGoing

mamba80 wrote:

First Aspect wrote:

trek_dan wrote:

Need to start handing out lifetime driving bans - that would be a deterrent. 6 months to 2 years ban when someone has clearly demonstrated they don't have the mental capacity or spacial awareness to drive a car safely and within the law is ludicrous. 2 year bans for things like drink driving and £80 'slap on the wrist' you currently get for driving whilst using a phone simply inst enough to be a deterrent. Maximum number of points on licence before receiving a driving ban needs to be halved to 6 from 12. Driving a car on publicly owned roads isn't a right.

I agree. Prison is there to protect society as well as for punishment. There's no benefit to putting an otherwise law abiding person in there, but society CAN be protected by ensuring that she's not on the road.

I would also argue that most people would indeed regard a driving ban and being effectively uninsurable thereafter as being a strong deterrent. Most people could almost immediately put into context just how inconvenient that would be in their everyday lives.

We dont know exactly what this woman did do we?

But until there are very harsh deterrent sentences and presumed fault to the driver if involved in an accident with cyclist/pedestrian, then this sort of thing will just continue.

if this woman had been given 10years, it would be on the front page of all the newspapers, they d be an in-depth analysis of the hows and whys and articles on how to safely overtake cyclists, instead this story barely makes the local rag.

i know deterrents work because when i had m/c's, the stories that did the rounds that guys went to prison for say doing 150mph, made all of us, very very careful as to what we did and where.

Flies in the face of innocent until proven guilty.

Unless you were a witness to the RTC or have had access to the collision report by the Serious and Fatal Collision investigator, you have no idea how it happened, what the circumstances were, weather and road conditions or the part any other vehicles played. Deaths on the road are tragic, but will happen. Each one has to be treated on its own individual circumstances. She has been prosecuted and convicted in a court. Result. Sentencing guidelines are there to assist the courts and must give due regard to the individual and the victim. Is there anything to be gained by sending a 69 year old woman to prison? Possibly and possibly not. But, what is her state of health? Is she requiring frequent medication or medical care? Is imprisonment going to make her susceptible to self harm? Does she have dependents that rely on her for support? Does she have any previous convictions or a history of driving offences? Is the wider community going to suffer as a result of he removal from society? etc etc. All these factors and more will have been provided to the courts in pre-sentencing reports produced by the Probation Service. An informed view then allows the court to sentence as they feel appropriate. If it is over-duly lenient, the prosecution can lodge an appeal. As one hasn't been forthcoming, they must feel it is acceptable.