Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

E-bike rider cleared of causing London pedestrian's death by careless driving

Thomas Hanlon was travelling at around 30mph on modified e-bike when Sakine Cihan ran into road

A man who was riding a modified electric bike when he struck a pedestrian who later died from her injuries has been found not guilty of causing her death by dangerous driving.

Thomas Hanlon, aged 32, faced the charge because the bike he was riding had been modified to go faster than the permitted 15.5mph above which the motor is required to cut out, meaning the bike was classified as a motorcycle.

In what is thought to be the first case of its kind involving a modified e-bike, BBC News reports that Hanlon was also acquitted of driving without a licence.

During the trial, one cyclist who witnessed the fatal collision on Kingsland High Street, Dalston, East London on 28 August 2018, described how he thought, ‘Jesus, that’s fast!’ as Hanlon passed him moments beforehand.

Pedestrian Sakine Cihan, who was filmed by CCTV cameras running across the road, sustained fatal head injuries after Hanlon, who was estimated to be travelling at 10mph above the 20mph speed limit, collided with her. He left the scene but subsequently handed himself in to police.

Claire Howell, defending Hanlon at the Old Bailey, said that Ms Cihan “ran out in front of him.”

She continued: “He is going straight along a straight road on a sunny clear day when he has got the right of way and he can see the lights have changed to green and he's just moving through.

“His reactions were quicker than many confident and careful drivers in the time it took him to react to her stepping out, which suggests he was keeping a good look out,” she added.

The jury returned not guilty verdicts on the charges Hanlon had been facing after deliberating for around an hour.

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

41 comments

Avatar
brooksby | 4 years ago
0 likes

I wonder what would have happened if a cyclist (riding a normal, non e-powered bicycle) had been put on trial after a pedestrian had run or even walked into their bicycle, and fallen over, hit their head, and died.  Would a jury have just let them walk...?

Agree with other commenters, though - surely even if not dangerous driving, he ought to have faced charges for the illegal vehicle?

(IIRC, BTBS always used to say, that Charlie Alliston ought to have faced charges on his illegal bike, not on hitting the pedestrian...).

Avatar
Shades | 4 years ago
1 like

Bit of a moral debate here.  Chip an e-bike because you want to go faster than 15mph (doesn't seem unreasonable) but now you're riding without a licence, MoT? or insurance.  Everyone 'howls like crazy' if a motorist causes an accident and is found to have their licence suspended with no insurance.  But you can easily get your road bike above 15mph (hmm?)  Never ridden an e bike but when the motor 'kicks-in' is there a feeling (even more if the bike's chipped) of having less control over slowing down (ie just get the pedals going and suddenly you're up to, in this case, 30mph?).

Avatar
AlsoSomniloquism replied to Shades | 4 years ago
2 likes

The important bit is mechanically powered above the speed set speed allowed. As mentioned multiple times on here, speed limits are for Mechanically powered vehicles and although we have fancy gears mechanically, the power applied after from legal ebikes and normal bikes after 15mph is human/ natural (Gravity). 

I've tested a few ebikes at bike shows legally, never a chipped so can't fully answer. The power is there from first push on pedals and normally they have multiple levels. On testing the inital acceleration can surprise the unprepared but that can be adapted to. They are also normally built with a cut off when brakes are applied. The power cutoff is noticable depending on gearing selection and road conditions, ie if going up an incline in an assisted higher gear and hitting above 15mph will then mean you are suddenly having to push that gear by yourself. And as most ebikes weigh between 20 and 30 kgs, you will notice when the power stops.

With chipped bikes, if the motor is on the wheel, then pretty much the cyclist does have to do anything but hit a button on the handlebar. No pedalling required. If the motor is in the frame / front crank, then I believe "pedalling" would be required. 

Avatar
Rick_Rude | 4 years ago
6 likes

So there you have it. Add motor, become motorist and get away with it.

Not sure how this guy got away with the no licence thing. Need to fit some 1000w motor and start going to work at 3x the speed with no legal repercussions.

Avatar
eburtthebike | 4 years ago
5 likes

One possible way to approach this is to ask what would have happened if the bike was legal, e.g. a moped, but he was doing 30mph?  Would he have been prosecuted for causing death by dangerous driving?

It seems to me that he bears some responsibility for the death by speeding, but the prosecution may have been brought because the bike wasn't street legal.

Avatar
AlsoSomniloquism replied to eburtthebike | 4 years ago
1 like

On your first bit, I would hope yes as the actual speed limit is 20mph in that area and the moped is required to have a speedo as well where I expect the "cyclist" could argue he had no way to tell his speed. 

Avatar
jollygoodvelo replied to AlsoSomniloquism | 4 years ago
0 likes

AlsoSomniloquism wrote:

On your first bit, I would hope yes as the actual speed limit is 20mph in that area and the moped is required to have a speedo as well where I expect the "cyclist" could argue he had no way to tell his speed. 

Ignorance of the law or your compliance with it is never a defence.

Avatar
BIRMINGHAMisaDUMP | 4 years ago
3 likes

I have just bought the latest 'generation' Bosch equipped Riese & Müller and they can't be 'chipped'. It's quite easy to 'chip' an eBike. I never have but a mechanic colleague of mine explained to me how to do it and it's not difficult. I think manufacturers are wising up to it and are making it more difficult or hopefully not possible. 

Avatar
Philh68 replied to BIRMINGHAMisaDUMP | 4 years ago
4 likes

Aftermarket conversions can be absurdly easy to change, I have a Bafang mid-drive with the dpc-14 display on a recumbent and you can set the cutoff at any speed up to 99kmh by entering a PIN number in the display to unlock advanced settings. No “chip” required. And no, I haven’t set it above the legal 25kmh…

Avatar
OldRidgeback replied to BIRMINGHAMisaDUMP | 4 years ago
0 likes

You can buy a power wheel for not too much money and a battery for a bit more and convert an existing bike into an e-bike. I must admit that I've toyed with the idea myself for my fairly long (for ordinary cycling) commute of 17 miles. Such adapted bikes are of course not restricted. As I've got a motorbike licence, I'd have to register the bike to make it truly legal.

Avatar
Hirsute | 4 years ago
7 likes

Thank for the link to the video tom_77

On the 20 mph limit, the gov stats https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploa...
show that
Under free flow conditions 87% of cars exceeded the speed limit at the 20mph sites. 22% exceed the speed limit by more than 10mph
On 20mph roads 86% of cars exceeded the speed limit during weekdays, and 91% during the weekend.

Still very odd that he isn't guilty of anything. I wonder if he will face any civil action.

Avatar
Awavey replied to Hirsute | 4 years ago
2 likes

And worth remembering in light of TfLs 20mph zone announcements, the issue is lack of enforcement primarily, though I thought there was a weird quirk in the law that said 20mph limits weren't enforceable anyway, but regardless if people know noone will ever stop them for speeding in a 20mph limit,the vast majority do so with impunity

Avatar
OldRidgeback replied to Awavey | 4 years ago
0 likes

The speed cameras in central London are being re-adjusted for the new 20mph limit within the congestion charge zone. I'll have to readjust myself to be honest as 20mph does seem very slow along a major road link. Anyway, you can't technically fine a cyclist for speeding, as bicycles don't have calibrated speedometers.

Avatar
Hirsute replied to OldRidgeback | 4 years ago
0 likes

It's because they are not motorised vehicles.
You can be fined in some me royal parks though

Avatar
Mungecrundle | 4 years ago
3 likes

All rather missing the point. The bike had a motor, it was a motorcycle, not "one of us". The jury obviously gave the lad credit as wanting to be a proper road user, i.e one using a motor vehicle, hence the result.

Avatar
Secret_squirrel | 4 years ago
2 likes

I for one hope road.cc gets a legal interpretation of this one.  I can't conceive how he didn't go down for something.   Did the CPS go s**t or bust for the jackpot and miss an easier charge?

Avatar
Tom_77 replied to Secret_squirrel | 4 years ago
0 likes

Secret_squirrel wrote:

I for one hope road.cc gets a legal interpretation of this one.  I can't conceive how he didn't go down for something.   Did the CPS go s**t or bust for the jackpot and miss an easier charge?

https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/road-traffic-charging

Not sure why he wasn't charged with Causing death by driving while unlicensed or uninsured. For that charge to stick "the accused's driving must have some link to the collision, even if this is less than what would be required in an inconsiderate driving/due care case." Seems like it would be easier to get a conviction for that though.

Avatar
srchar | 4 years ago
6 likes

I can just about understand the lack of conviction for death by dangerous driving (although I wouldn't ride a moped that quickly through a high street), however was he prosecuted for driving uninsured or without MoT or reg plates? I'm not anti eBikes - I think they're great - but I've grown tired of seeing hacked models being driven dangerously and think this guy needs to be made an example of.

Avatar
roubaixcobbles | 4 years ago
7 likes

Astonished that this idiot appears to have got away scot free. Regardless of blame, he was riding an illegal vehicle, he should at least have been found guilty of that. Big missed chance to send a message about these bikes - I'm a big fan of ebikes as one kept me cycling through a period of serious illness but I am sick of being cut up in cycle lanes by twats with 750W motors doing 35mph plus. This poor woman isn't going to be the last killed by one of them.

Avatar
dodgy | 4 years ago
8 likes

I think this guy is extremely lucky not to go inside.

 

  • Illegally modified e-bike - perhaps an opportunity for the courts to pass precedence by punishing appropriately before this kind of thing gets out of hand, opportunity missed and passing a clear message to the many owners of illegally modified bikes to just carry on.
  • No license
  • And because of the above, no insurance
Avatar
WiznaeMe replied to dodgy | 4 years ago
1 like

When a jury finds someone not guilty on all charges (if that's what happened) then the court has no sentencing options and the accused walks out the door.   

Avatar
Hirsute | 4 years ago
6 likes

The footage at the time showed he had no chance of stopping and it was green for traffic (she also hit him from the side, not him hitting her) so it's unclear why the charges were brought.
Don't understand why he got off not having a licence. Does he get points and a fine for speeding?

Avatar
StuInNorway replied to Hirsute | 4 years ago
3 likes

He's been found not guilty on the death by driving, on the licence/modified bike he may have claimed he was unaware the spec was illegal, which could be true.
I fairness I think it partly comes down to the fact that the video clearly showed that the pedestrian ran into him, and he had done what he could to avoid the collision. Had there been video of the Charlie Anniston case the outcome there might have been different too.

Avatar
HoarseMann replied to StuInNorway | 4 years ago
4 likes

I think you are right about the CCTV footage. Once that was made public, the inital hysterical reporting from the likes of the Daily Mail suddenly stopped.

This case says a lot about the acceptance of speeding in a 20mph zone.

I think even a modern vehicle equipped with collision avoidance would have struggled to avoid contact with the pedestrian with the speed in which she ran out into the road. But if the vehicle had been doing 20mph it might have been a different outcome.

The judge made a point that e-bikes can't go any faster than 15.5mph, but that's just the point at which the motor cuts out, a strong rider could hit 30mph on that long straight road.

Also, that bike could have been licensed as a moped and been perfectly legal on the road.

I'm surprised that he didn't get done for leaving the scene of an accident though.

 

Avatar
roubaixcobbles replied to HoarseMann | 4 years ago
0 likes

The judge made a point that e-bikes can't go any faster than 15.5mph, but that's just the point at which the motor cuts out, a strong rider could hit 30mph on that long straight road.

Not on a heavy mountain bike further loaded with a big electric motor.

Also, that bike could have been licensed as a moped and been perfectly legal on the road.

Yes, but it wasn't, so how did he get away with it?

 

[/quote]

Avatar
I love my bike replied to roubaixcobbles | 4 years ago
0 likes

As a motorist?

Avatar
HoarseMann replied to roubaixcobbles | 4 years ago
1 like

People don't get done for dangerous driving if they're caught driving without a MOT, licence or insurance. Perhaps they should, but that's not the law as it stands.

Point is, the legality of the vehicle or rider was not a contributary factor in this collision. The speed possibly was, but doing 30mph in a 20 zone is not seen as dangerous (again, possibly ought to be).

I didn't realise there was no obligation for a cyclist to stay at the scene of an accident (again, ought to be). But as this was not classed as a bicycle, he really ought to be done for that at least. It depends how far you can push the ignorance as a defence angle.

Avatar
Philh68 replied to roubaixcobbles | 4 years ago
2 likes

I’ve hit 57.7kmh (36mph) on a slight downgrade (maybe 2%) on my Tern GSD cargo bike, and that was spinning madly because I had used up the gears and wishing for another. That’s a 35kg pedelec with 20” wheels. Going by that I’d say it’s likely rare but not implausible for a strong rider on a lighter 29er or hybrid e-bike. I don’t consider myself a strong rider (Too many years and too many beers under the belt).

Avatar
longassballs replied to HoarseMann | 4 years ago
0 likes

Are you legally obliged to stay at the scene of an accident as someone on a bicycle (not a moped)?

Avatar
roubaixcobbles replied to longassballs | 4 years ago
6 likes

No, the RTA says only the driver of a "mechanically propelled vehicle" has to stop. Which is a bit daft. About time this country had a "Good Samaritan" law like France where it is an offence not to offer assistance to a fellow citizen who needs it.

Pages

Latest Comments