Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

Twitter user's response to media coverage of cyclist jailed for killing pedestrian is hard-hitting - and heartbreaking

Thread prompted by Charlie Alliston case also highlights how justice system fails vulnerable road users

A Twitter user’s response 18 months ago to saturation coverage in the mainstream media of the jailing of cyclist Charlie Alliston for causing the death of pedestrian Kim Briggs in London has resulted in his putting together a thread underlining how cases involving drivers are treated by both the media and the courts,  and which at the same time is simply heartbreaking.

Starting the thread on 20 October 2017 – two days after Alliston, then aged 20, was sentenced to 18 months in a young offenders’ institution for causing death through wanton and furious driving – Twitter user @Ormondroyd said: "A thread for all the pundits lining up to wring their hands about dangerous cycling and light sentencing in the wake of the Alliston case."

"When Ichhapal Bhamra carried Tom Ridgway for 90 yds on his bonnet before crushing him into a tree, and was fined £35, where was your voice?

"When Lee Sewell, speeding after a 14hr taxi stint fatally smashed Gary Glymond 120yrds off a crossing, and was fined £500, what did you say?

"What about the killer of Eilidh Cairns, fined £150 for driving without glasses? He did it again 2yrs later, killing again. Did you speak?

"Where was your anger for four year old Esme Weir, killed while scooting along the pavement by a kerb-mounting van driver who was acquitted?

"How about Clinton Pringle, killed by an inattentive driver who had been texting moments before impact. He was 3. Eight months, suspended.

"If you really cared about safety, and this wasn't just a pop at cycling, you'd find plenty to speak about. Every day. Instead: tumbleweed."

He added: “Media/politician posturing over Alliston is fake: Your life is cheap to them if a motorist ends it. Because drivers vote, buy & click.”

He also contrasted the case with one in which a five-year-old child, who was on a pavement, was killed by a motorist who was driving into an illegal car park but was never charged over the youngster’s death.

“This story never made it to the UK national papers. No mention in Hansard. Wall to wall Alliston coverage, no voices for Lennon,” @ormondroyd said. “Says it all.”

Since then, he has added dozens of reports, mostly from national newspapers, of cases in which drivers who have killed or seriously injured vulnerable road users such as pedestrians or cyclists have been cleared or, if convicted, had what many would see as extraordinarily lenient sentences handed down to them – if, indeed, they were charged in the first place.

The reason that cases such as the one involving Alliston make national headlines is because they are so rare, as are serious injuries to pedestrians in such incidents – and all too often, mainstream media reaction disproportionate.

Three weeks after Alliston was sentenced, for example, with the perceived threat cyclists pose to pedestrians still a hot topic for the national newspapers, the Daily Express reported that Department for Transport statistics revealed that during the previous seven years, a total of 25 pedestrians had lost their lives and 700 seriously injured as a result of a collision in which a cyclist was involved.

Its headline? “Cyclists kill or maim two pedestrians every week, according to statistics.”

While the article notes that the data “does not state who is at fault in the accidents,” the headline certainly points the finger at whom the newspaper believes to be the guilty party.

Now put those figures – which average four deaths a year, and 100 serious injuries – into the context of overall road casualties and the frustration of cycling campaigners when faced with such sensationalist coverage is easy to understand.

In 2017 alone, 1,792 people were killed and 24,831 seriously injured on Britain’s roads. Among those killed were 470 pedestrians and 101 cyclists, with thousands more seriously injured.

Not all of those casualties will be the fault of a motorist. Genuine “accidents” – in the strict sense of the word, that is an event brought about purely by chance, rather than the sense still employed too much by some elements of the media and even official sources as a catch-all term for road traffic collisions – can and do happen.

But all too often, clearly a driver is at fault, which brings us back to @ormondroyd’s thread.

We've shown below a selection of cases below that he has highlighted on Twitter (one addressing transport minister Jesse Norman) and it's difficult not to draw the conclusion that the fact so many of these shocking cases go unreported at national level, and the feeling that the criminal justice system fails vulnerable road users, is what society has deemed an acceptable price to pay for mass motor vehicle ownership.

Let us know your thoughts in the comments below.

Simon joined road.cc as news editor in 2009 and is now the site’s community editor, acting as a link between the team producing the content and our readers. A law and languages graduate, published translator and former retail analyst, he has reported on issues as diverse as cycling-related court cases, anti-doping investigations, the latest developments in the bike industry and the sport’s biggest races. Now back in London full-time after 15 years living in Oxford and Cambridge, he loves cycling along the Thames but misses having his former riding buddy, Elodie the miniature schnauzer, in the basket in front of him.

Add new comment

43 comments

Avatar
ktache | 5 years ago
4 likes

The investigating officer made a ludicrous claim that a driver could not be expected to react for 5 seconds.

Avatar
burtthebike | 5 years ago
6 likes

All in all, a total condemnation of our pathetic justice system, but it's worse; remember Mick Mason?  Killed by a driver on a legal bike in a well lit street who didn't even stop.  She wasn't charged and only ended up in court after a private prosecution, when she was acquitted.

https://road.cc/content/news/220521-breaking-news-driver-mick-mason-case...

Avatar
kil0ran | 5 years ago
4 likes

I've known Orm for years. Has a talent for uncovering stuff like this and snarking at govt, long may it continue (he also noticed that Seaborne Freight - that Brexit ferry contract FUBAR - had contracts relating to fast food delivery)

I think CyclingUK and the like could learn a lot from the ByDonkeys poster campaign (nothing to do with Orm). With the permission of victims' relatives I think a similar campaign (crowd-funded if need be - it's not expensive) could have a real impact. If not on a change in the law, perhaps on driver consciences. Focus on the kids killed for maximum impact - Esme & Lennon's cases in particular. Those poor kids weren't even in the road, they were killed by drivers mounting the pavement which seems to be standard behaviour these days.

Locking offenders up isn't the answer. Life driving bans are, enforcable by a suspended prison sentence if they're caught breaching them.

Avatar
Ad Hynkel | 5 years ago
1 like

That is some depressing reading. +1 on getting something going regarding a better voice for vulnerable road (and pavement) users. The trouble is the way it seems to work is mainly by getting their (i.e. politicians) snouts in your particular trough. And that needs money. There are some that are powered by the needs of others and that is enough for them, but not sure there are that many.

I guess addressing your local MP/MEP (for now)/MSP etc. and asking them what they are doing for the above group is a start as an individual.

Avatar
ironmancole | 5 years ago
4 likes

We, as very vulnerable road users MUST accept we are part of the problem.  Why?  Whenever we are collectively outraged by the next death or travesty of justice what do we do?  We come on here, have a moan and move on with our day.  Where is our collective voice?  I've tried numerous times to launch petitions and what do you get...64 signatures.  

It's little wonder we remain firmly on the sole of the politicians feet, completely out of view.  As a group we are incredibly lacking when it comes to acting as a powerful, well entitled collective fed up with threat, intimidation and violence at the hands of another social group.  I ask everyone...where are we and what are we going to do about this?

 

 

 

 

Avatar
hawkinspeter replied to ironmancole | 5 years ago
4 likes
ironmancole wrote:

We, as very vulnerable road users MUST accept we are part of the problem.  Why?  Whenever we are collectively outraged by the next death or travesty of justice what do we do?  We come on here, have a moan and move on with our day.  Where is our collective voice?  I've tried numerous times to launch petitions and what do you get...64 signatures.  

It's little wonder we remain firmly on the sole of the politicians feet, completely out of view.  As a group we are incredibly lacking when it comes to acting as a powerful, well entitled collective fed up with threat, intimidation and violence at the hands of another social group.  I ask everyone...where are we and what are we going to do about this?

As we are a much smaller minority, I think it's a losing battle trying to compete with motorists for getting the politicians' attention.

What I am dismayed about is the complete dismissal of all facts and statistics regarding road safety, overall population health, air pollution and use of public land and funds to subsidise the motorists. Even just the return on expenditure makes it extremely clear that cycling provisions are a fantastically great deal compared to spending yet more on roads that are leading people to early graves.

Avatar
DaxPlusPlus replied to ironmancole | 5 years ago
5 likes
ironmancole wrote:

 I've tried numerous times to launch petitions and what do you get...64 signatures.  

 

Keep trying with the petitions .. keep sharing them. Maybe one will go viral. Maybe they'll prompt something else that will work.

Avatar
brooksby replied to DaxPlusPlus | 5 years ago
7 likes
DaxPlusPlus wrote:
ironmancole wrote:

 I've tried numerous times to launch petitions and what do you get...64 signatures.  

 

Keep trying with the petitions .. keep sharing them. Maybe one will go viral. Maybe they'll prompt something else that will work.

I think the problem with petitions is that Govt really couldn't give a F.

 

(How many people signed the petition about revoking Article 50, again...?).

Avatar
burtthebike replied to brooksby | 5 years ago
3 likes
brooksby wrote:

Keep trying with the petitions .. keep sharing them. Maybe one will go viral. Maybe they'll prompt something else that will work.

I think the problem with petitions is that Govt really couldn't give a F.

[/quote]

Petitions have no effect, and protests that don't cause disruption have no effect.  Millions protested agains the Iraq war and it still happened.

We've just seen the effect that Extinction Rebellion have had, maybe it's time for us to try the same tactics?  Or enlist the help of XR since they must love cyclists for saving the planet.  As I recall, they were allowing pedestrians and cyclists through their road blocks, so they recognise green transport when they see it.

Avatar
hawkinspeter | 5 years ago
11 likes

This government is an actual disgrace and a complete waste of time.

So, what have they achieved since May 2014, when the then Justice Secretary Chris Grayling MP announced the Government’s intention to launch “a full review of all driving offences and penalties”, stating that he “wanted to make our roads safer”?

Well, in September 2017 (after the Alliston case), they announced (https://www.gov.uk/government/news/government-launches-urgent-review-into-cycle-safety):

Jesse Norman wrote:
  • Although the UK has some of the safest roads in the world, we are always looking to make them safer.
  • It’s great that cycling has become so popular in recent years but we need to make sure that our road safety rules keep pace with this change.
  • We already have strict laws that ensure that drivers who put people’s lives at risk are punished but, given recent cases, it is only right for us to look at whether dangerous cyclists should face the same consequences.
  • We’ve seen the devastation that reckless cycling and driving can cause, and this review will help safeguard both Britain’s cyclists and those who share the roads with them.

So, rather than looking at the statistics and figuring out some of the REAL problems, they instead pander to the outraged Daily Heil readers and figure out that as Alliston got a mere 18 months that obviously cyclists need to be penalised more harshly?

How can anyone take these clowns seriously when even the tiniest bit of fact checking demonstrates that they are not at all interested in acting as public servants and instead think that the public should be serving their (the politicans) needs?

Avatar
burtthebike replied to hawkinspeter | 5 years ago
2 likes
hawkinspeter wrote:

This government is an actual disgrace and a complete waste of time.

So, what have they achieved since May 2014, when the then Justice Secretary Chris Grayling MP announced the Government’s intention to launch “a full review of all driving offences and penalties”, stating that he “wanted to make our roads safer”?

Well, in September 2017 (after the Alliston case), they announced (https://www.gov.uk/government/news/government-launches-urgent-review-into-cycle-safety):

Jesse Norman wrote:
  • Although the UK has some of the safest roads in the world, we are always looking to make them safer.
  • It’s great that cycling has become so popular in recent years but we need to make sure that our road safety rules keep pace with this change.
  • We already have strict laws that ensure that drivers who put people’s lives at risk are punished but, given recent cases, it is only right for us to look at whether dangerous cyclists should face the same consequences.
  • We’ve seen the devastation that reckless cycling and driving can cause, and this review will help safeguard both Britain’s cyclists and those who share the roads with them.

So, rather than looking at the statistics and figuring out some of the REAL problems, they instead pander to the outraged Daily Heil readers and figure out that as Alliston got a mere 18 months that obviously cyclists need to be penalised more harshly?

How can anyone take these clowns seriously when even the tiniest bit of fact checking demonstrates that they are not at all interested in acting as public servants and instead think that the public should be serving their (the politicans) needs?

Took the words out of my mouth, especially the ones about the utter incompetence of this government.  All they are interested in is lining their own pockets, so bike-riding plebs are not quite as important as normal plebs, if you can be less important than nothing.

Avatar
peted76 | 5 years ago
9 likes

Ah I gets emotional reading this. No words, so bad so sad, where is the justice. 

When will driving be seen in law as a privilege and not a right?

#drivingisaprivilege

Avatar
Hirsute | 5 years ago
5 likes

Lauren Johnson - 'motorist not charged due to condition' - that should be accommodated in sentencing not in charging. And how the hell do you do over 50 in a 20 ?

Pages

Latest Comments