- 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)Suspended sentence for driver who killed cyclist three days before Christmas after losing control of sports car while doing 59mph on a 40mph road
A Solihull motorist has been handed a six-month suspended sentence and two-year driving ban after admitting causing the death of a cyclist by careless driving. David McSkimming was driving his Porsche Boxter at 59mph in a 40mph zone when he hit Anthony Satterthwaite on the opposite side of the road after “rebounding” off a tree.
The Coventry Telegraph reports that McSkimming was driving along Eastcote Lane, Solihull, on December 22, 2018, when he lost control on a bend, span onto the wrong side of the road and hit a tree before rebounding into 51-year-old Satterthwaite.
The cyclist suffered fatal injuries and was pronounced dead at the scene.
Investigators found the car had been travelling at 59mph in the 40mph zone in damp conditions.
In a victim impact statement, Satterthwaite’s wife said: "Most people will remember Anthony for his huge smile, his laugh and his friendly demeanour.
"Anthony was an incredibly strong cyclist who was passionate about the sport and would cycle hundreds of miles a week to keep fit and also enjoy the great outdoors as well as the social aspect of cycling."
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
- RoubaixCube 2 hours 6 min ago
And if you put the Gamel Helmet on back to front. You could become Robocop!
- Oldfatgit 3 hours 16 min ago
On the other hand though ......
- hawkinspeter 3 hours 41 min ago
A group of Engineering professors were invited to fly in a plane. Right after they were comfortably seated, they were informed the plane was built...
- David9694 3 hours 48 min ago
Yeah, this whole thing can really just get to fuck. But that's what we're up against - the normalisation of the plucky chancer driver, the...
- don simon fbpe 5 hours 14 min ago
There are times when I think that these right whinger accounts are left wingers in drag, the aguments they espouse are so ridiculous, or don't...
- Cayo 5 hours 17 min ago
Or any non-drivist. A few years back, I was walking and crossing a side road not far from home. The road has particularly wide corners, especially...
- wtjs 6 hours 1 min ago
This was it in November 2022. Now you see the futility of reporting things to the police or DVLA
- katar_6 6 hours 6 min ago
I'm trying to login at my mobile and it says I need to subscreve. What should I do?
- wtjs 7 hours 31 min ago
I can tell you exactly what LC will be doing about that offence: nothing. I used to get letters like those- in fact, exactly like that. When you...
Add new comment
34 comments
Think this sums it up pretty well:
And that is the issue as mentioned multiple time before. Most jurors are going to be drivers and you show me a driver who has never gone above the speed limit and i will show you a liar.
Actually it kinda misses the point completely. Death by Careless driving carries a maximum 5 year prison sentence. He pleaded guilty (in the end, originally not guilty I believe), so it was not a failure of either the CPS or a Jury but a failure of the sentencing Judge for not imposing any kind of custodial sentence, and a trivial ban.
Yes a Death by Dangerous driving charge would have been preferred by most of us here - but the bigger outrage imo is a non-custodial sentence at all.
I used to live on a narrow, single lane road in N London. There we're two schools very close so lots of children. But also lots of rat runners. It was a 20mph zone. After years of requests we finally managed to get the council to put speed strips on the road. These revealed that the majority of traffic was breaking the speed limit by +10% and a significant minority were doing between 40 - 50mph. But still the council wouldn't do anything.
I've been trying to lobby the police to run some speed enforcement on a narrow road near me that has a 40mph limit and frequently used as a rat run.
They've refused, giving the excuse that it's "too dangerous" to stand on the wide pavement with a speed gun. You can't make this stuff up sometimes.
Just like the one where the council refused to clear the cycle lane of leaves and other vegetation as it was 'too dangerous'.
You could always stand there yourself with a fluo jacket and a hairdrier, and watch the drivers frantically braking. Then put up a cardboard cutout of the same. It works.
Meanwhile in the local rag bloke gets 4 months inside for possession of a knife and some cannabis (both found stored in his car).
Just had a look at his strava profile. He was a year-round rider, consistently putting out impressive distances.
On the last ride he posted, he commented that there were lots of nutter drivers out and he had experienced a couple of near misses - just the usual. It shouldn't be the usual.
I just hope that the highway code update and road offences review can make the roads a safer place to ride. The light sentences when the worst happens and lack of enforcement for driving offences needs to change.
"I just hope that the highway code update and road offences review can make the roads a safer place to ride. The light sentences when the worst happens and lack of enforcement for driving offences needs to change"
Not a chance of this 'review' changing anything when the police refuse to enforce the rules we already have. This is combined with the courts viewing killing a cyclist as a minor misdemeanor largely the fault of the cyclist for being on the road. The sentence we want is a significant driving ban of at least 5 years
Others have said it but I will reiterate: How can driving at 50% above the speed limit (under normal conditions which would imply that speed should be reduced on a damp road) to the point of loosing control of the car be not considered as dangerous driving is rediculous. Regardless of the sentencing what message does this communicate? That driving a one and half tonne vehicle at excessive speed on a damp road to the point where you loose control, bounce of a tree and kill an innocent road user is "careless"? What utter nonesense. It is clearly highly irresponsible and therefore VERY DANGEROUS!
anyone who loses control of a car and hits any stationary object should immediately be convicted of dangerous driving. This driver apparently left the road and hit a tree before hitting the cyclist, clearly a driver not in control of the vehicle and therefore dangerous.
The only possible mitigation for crossing the footway and hitting street furniture is reacting to a child running out in the road, but the onus on such a defence should be on the driver to prove it.
How many cases where cars demolish lampposts, traffic lights, railings and even buildings result in dangerous driving convictions? I doubt it is a high percentage.
AN OUTRAGEOUS JUDGE & WEAK COURT ACTION
'Loss of control' due to excess speeding is clear evidence the conviction should have been CAUSING DEATH BY DANGEROUS DRIVING, aswel as ENDANGERING A MINOR.
Judge turning a blind to the severity of the deadly crimes, only points to how corrupt and callous he is, amongst many other judges, and occasionally juries - goes without saying, ALL very likely with a secret anti-cylist agenda.
There are just too many miscarriages of justice against victims.
Aswel as countless anti-cylist cops and CPS failing to take action, or anything appropriate, against proven dangerous and negligent drivers.
Dont let your outrage cloud your point. The judge does not decide what offence to try - the CPS does. Reserve your outrage for the Judge for his sentencing decisions.
The difference between careless and dangerous driving is driving to a standard below v far below that of a competent and careful driver.
So, if going round a bend 50% over the speed limit, losing control, spinning the car and bouncing off a tree isn't FAR BELOW the standard, what is?!
Disclaimer: I've spun a couple of times but never where there was any chance of danger to anyone, not over the speed limit and certainly not so bad as to bounce off a tree... so I reckon I have a good understanding of what careful and competent driving isn't.
To get insurance with this on record would be either impossible or eye wateringly expensive.
The poor killer will be forced to drive without insurance. Luckily the courts don't give a shit about car crime so he'll be alright.
Utterly effing believable based on previous cases.
So what exactly do you have to do to be put in prison other than be riding a bike when you kill someone?
Difficult to believe such a lenient sentence, but perhaps he belongs to the same lodge or golf club as the judge.
The report in the Coventry Telegraph was extremely brief, so I googled for others and found a few; this is a quote from one:
"Passing sentence, Judge Mark Wall QC, told McSkimming: "It's obvious but worth saying no punishment I can pass could restore Mr Satterthwaite to his family, any sentence will seem wholly inadequate. My task is to pass the appropriate penalty for what you did."
"Judge Wall announced the sentence would be suspended for two years after taking into account his remorse, previous good character, guilty plea and the fact that immediate imprisonment would be detrimental to his own son, who had suffered psychologically since the crash, the court heard." [His son was in the car with him.]
"McSkimming must carry out 250 hours of unpaid work and 25 days of rehabilitation activity. He was also banned from driving for two years and must pay court costs and a victim surcharge." https://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/midlands-news/ex-raf-pilot-avoids-...
And this report, which says that initially, he pleaded not guilty to causing death by dangerous driving https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-birmingham-49896980
So he denied causing death by dangerous driving, but admitted causing death by careless driving, so remorseful but not enough to admit to the more serious crime. It's unclear whether a deal was done with CPS to admit to the lesser crime, but it seems likely. Does anyone know the difference in punishment between causing death by dangerous and causing death by careless driving?
Imprisonment would be detrimental to his son? No shit; unless you are a hermit imprisonment is going to affect a few others. I'd have thought having an innocent minor in the car whilst you drive with such recklessness as to bounce off a tree and mow down a cylist would be an aggravating factor, not grounds for leniency. Meanwhile the child learns that the price of a cyclist's life is some litter picking and taxi fares.
14 vs 5 year max. prison sentence
https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/FINAL-Death-by-d...
and having a child in the car would be an aggravating factor.
He did the psycological damage to his own son.
And put him at risk.
: "It's obvious but worth saying no punishment I can pass could restore Mr Satterthwaite to his family, any sentence will seem wholly inadequate."
It's amazing how often you have to read this sentence in conjunction with motorists killing pedestrians and cyclists. And it's always followed by a wholly inadequate sentence.
oddely you never read it if a cyclist is involved in the death of a pedestrian, you just read 18 months in prison.
How 50% over the speed limit isn't considered dangerous driving is totally ridiculous. But its such a tried and tested path, deny dangerous driving, admit careless driving, followed by a suspended sentence, it's fucking sickening.
It is dangerous by any rational definition; someone died, therefore it was dangerous. The law seriously needs updating so that the crime of dangerous driving reflects what most people think it should mean; not some arbitrary judgment dependent on whether the CPS think they can get a conviction. This was dangerous driving, aggravated by the presence of a minor in the car, and he should be in prison.
I agree to some extent. To me careless is driving at legal requirements and having a lapse of control or some external circumstance happens. As soon as the law is broken then any driving is instantly dangerous.
Sentencing guidelines are freely available.
https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/offences/magistrates-court/item/cau...
https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/offences/crown-court/item/causing-d...
Surely there are grounds for a unduely lenient appeal?
2 year ban?
He killed someone while driving illegally and completely innapropriately in a mid life crisis of a car.
A 5 or maybe 10 year ban might have kept everyone a bit more safe.
Lifetime ban would be more appropriate after ending someone's life.
Are the prisons all just full, or what?
Pages