- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
news
Justice (Lonpicman, Wikimedia Commons)Lorry driver who killed London cyclist spared jail after victim's husband pleads for clemency
The lorry driver who hit and killed Claire Hitier-Abadie on February 19 last year has been given a community order of 160 hours’ unpaid work and disqualified from driving for 12 months after Hitier-Abadie’s husband asked that he be spared jail.
Alan Warwick, 61, of Rayleigh, Essex, admitted causing Hitier-Abadie’s death by careless driving at Southwark Crown Court last month. The cyclist was killed while riding a Boris Bike when Warwick, whose vehicle was involved in Crossrail works near Victoria Station, struck her during morning rush hour. Witnesses at the time reported seeing the bike crushed beneath the truck's wheels. The court that Hitier-Abadie had died instantly.
The London Evening Standard reports how Warwick was busy tidying his cab at the time of the collision and had failed to indicate left at the junction of Bressenden Place and Victoria Street.
Referring to a pre-sentence report, Prosecutor Ian Paton said: "She was visible and obvious, her coat was billowing behind her as she moved, she was bare-legged. She was manifestly visible. It seems he does now accept that he was tidying his cab and not focussing as he should have been on the surrounding conditions."
Warwick initially thought he had indicated to turn left, which would have activated an alarm announcing: "Caution, vehicle turning left." However, after seeing footage, he accepted that this was not the case.
His lorry was also equipped with external cameras which should have allowed him to see Hitier-Abadie approaching.
Paton said: "This was more than momentary inattention. It was a sustained period of inattention in circumstances that were ripe for the disaster that duly unfolded.
Ian Bridge, defending, said that after his client's plea hearing, he had hugged Mr Abadie and expressed his apologies as they both cried together.
Judge Testar said: "A period of inadvertence took away one life and ravaged many more. I am comforted in the conclusion that I have reached that a non-custodial sentence is the correct one, by my knowledge that it is the one that Mr Abadie wanted me to reach."
Alex has written for more cricket publications than the rest of the road.cc team combined. Despite the apparent evidence of this picture, he doesn't especially like cake.
Latest Comments
- Willie B 3 sec ago
NB, Culver Street West, to te left of your pic, is cycleable. Mike Polom of Colcheser Council has agreed to leave a gap in the cones so that...
- Simon E 2 min 38 sec ago
Thursday morning - an 8 car pile-up on the A55 near Holywell due to foggy conditions....
- OnYerBike 36 min 25 sec ago
Unfortunately I can't recommend the Magicshine Seemee DV - I have one and am currently in the process of trying to have it returned and refunded as...
- Steve K 2 hours 48 sec ago
Drive through steak house?...
- slc 2 hours 49 min ago
TBH the west (Barton Hill) part of the scheme looks like a much larger change than the east (Beaufort Rd) part. Some drivers living in the west...
- Rendel Harris 2 hours 25 min ago
If you bothered looking at the link you would see that it is not one of their reflective jackets, it is fluorescent with only a small number of...
- Owd Big 'Ead 9 hours 33 min ago
You need to get out of Derby then. Go somewhere else, because while not perfect, Derby is streets ahead of the vast majority of places I've lived...
- HoarseMann 11 hours 48 min ago
Driver injured after car flips onto its roof https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cy0g9rpp8x9o
- mark1a 12 hours 6 min ago
I don't think he wants to talk about it...
- Rendel Harris 12 hours 36 min ago
Ach, dinnae fret...
Add new comment
21 comments
Deterrents need to be really immediate and convincing to work. I studied law and a bit of criminology and unfortunately yes it's true, deterrents in general haven't worked well throughout our recent history and there has been a shift in policy away from using them because of that. We are talking about people who break the law of course and the nature of deterrents on them. If we didn't have any laws, there would be a lot more theft etc. Hate to be bleedingly obvious, but you never know when someone's going to take it there!.
Any way, even if you shock someone into realising their behaviour, ie. dangerous driving, speeding etc, is wrong for some reason, the effect soon wears off.
What we do know is that people behave differently when being filmed. Most will reign in their behaviour, but again, that's not guaranteed to keep you safe either. Some people will act up for the cameras and become even more aggressive.
That said, culturally, if you want changes, you need the complete package. Starting top down with actual legislation is a good place to start. It's sets the tone. But then you need to follow that up with a lot of campaigning, lots of road signs etc. A lot of work and money for a pretty temporary effect as warning signs have diminishing returns.
So you need to go further. And we all know exactly what we need, and it's not all to be riding along with GoPros and high vis gear. We need infrastructure.
For me at least, it's not about having one or the other. I want laws, I want infrastructure, I want road signs warning drivers to slow down, cyclists ahead etc I want everything. Because it's all relatively inexpensive to implement. So no point arguining one thing over the other.
Forgiveness is a huge thing and respect to the husband for being able to do that.
However...since when does a judge really pay attention to the wishes of those left behind except in this case when clemency was expressed by relatives?
Majority of the time the wishes, needs or demands of those left behind and the greater need for public safety take a firm second place behind the 'anguish' and future needs of the killer.
What gives judge?
I just don't understand why they don't have lifetime bans for professional drivers. If you are a surgeon, turn up to work pissed and kill someone, the general medical council or another body will look at your cases merits and give you a lifetime ban. There you are you twat, you can't be trusted to do this professionally so we are removing your ability to do so. there is no reasonable justification for this dirver to get his full licence back after his ban.
If he is to serve a ban, he should start back at the beginning. provisional licence, theory, extended practical. And if he gets through all of that he can start back on the road to HGV assessments with none of his grandfather rights like having 15 tonnes as standard.
Jail wouldn't have a deterrent effect here. However, a short custodial sentence as punishment plus a lengthy ban would have been appropriate.
A more effective punishment wold have been a huge fine to subcontractor for whom he was working. That should have the effect of forcing more companies to require awareness and safety training.
What possible excuse can a truck driver have for not bothering to indicate when the proven consequences are so severe? They know the risks, or they wouldn't have safety systems fitted. The law should treat such cases accordingly.
Also couldn't a lorry have auto indicators and safety systems once the wheel had been turned through X degrees?
Plea for clemency or not, why is a killer only banned for 12 months?
The trial has established that the driver is incompetent to operate a motor vehicle, and an innocent person has paid with their life. A year from now, this driver will be out killing again, and being paid to do so.
Hmm, it's not quite as it appears. The Judge is entitled to read the victim statement and attach worth to it.
But, thing is, "after" here means in time. Not consequence. The Judge had reached the non custodial decision but was comforted by the words. He took confirmation from it.
It's a slighty different interpretation to the headline.
Not sure why the ? appeared, it wasn't a question but a statement...
He's a far better man than I?
I do agree though, it shouldn't really be down to him. Maybe have offered the 'defendent' prison and 12mo ban or no prison and lifetime ban - see what he has learned...
Sorry, it's bullshit Judge.
I don't give afcuk what her husband said, this is about keeping other people safe as well.
Sticking him in jail is an expensive and unnecessary way of keeping other people safe. A permanent revocation of his driving license would be preferable.
But it's not just about this one individual; it's about the deterrent that exists for others.
If the precedent is that a careless driver who acted like a careless prick and killed a woman went to prison for 3 years, that will have more of an effect on other people’s behaviour than a guy getting a fine, a short driving ban and a spot of community service.
Quite right! Look how the war on drugs is totally being won!
Oh shit, is the Daily Mail website down again?
.......oh.....the....ironing
<facepalm>
It sounds like he's genuinely repentent for what he did so I doubt he'll be taking his eyes off the road again. In what way would putting him in jail 'keep other people safe'?
Stolen from an online article, clearer than what I could cobble together:
"One of the statutory aims of sentencing is deterrence. It is common sense that in addition to punishing, rehabilitating and sometimes providing recompense for victims, the law should operate as a deterrent to others. Prevention is better than a cure, as they say."
It sends a message to the next tipper driver that wants to spend time at traffic lights tidying instread of concentrating...
He doesn't want to spend time tidying because he's paid per load, and every minute he can save is one fraction of another load. Part of the reason that so many tippers are involved in fatalities is the payment system.
He might well be sorry for what he did - he'd be a pretty piss poor excuse for a person if he were not. That might keep him attentive for a while, but he has already shown an inability to sustain this concentration level, so why believe he will continue to manage it in the future? Probably locking him away is unhelpful, but revoking his licence permanently is surely justifiable.
[[[[[ By virtue of the DETERRENT FACTOR, of course.
nonsense, Prison sentances don't act as deterant to crimanals as the don't expect to get caught. No driver thinks, "I can drive like a knob because IF I kill someone they'll be lenient" most genuinely think they are good drivers, and that they won't kill someone on the roads.