- 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)Driver who thought he hit pothole when he ran over cyclist acquitted
A motorist who believed he had driven over a pothole when he ran over a cyclist in Cambridge has been cleared off driving without due care and attention.
Cyclist Daniel Davis was lying on the ground after falling from his bike when he was run over by a car driven by 42-year-old company director Mark Tyler 12 months ago, reports Cambridge News.
During his trial at Cambridge Magistrates’ Court, Mr Tyler, from Whitchurch, Hampshire said he had not seen Mr Davis, but insisted he was not distracted by the hands-free mobile phone he was using.
The incident happened at around 6pm on 27 November at the junction of Brooklands Road and Trumpington Road.
Mr Tyler, who said it had left him “shocked and devastated,” told the court: “As I turned into Trumpington Road I felt something but it felt no worse than some of the potholes which are around.
“I stopped immediately and got out of the car to understand what had occurred and my car had gone over the cyclist.”
It was not reported how Mr Davis, who suffered a cardiac arrest as he lay beneath Mr Tyler’s car, came to be lying in the road prior to the collision, nor were details of any other injuries or his recovery recorded.
The motorist said: “It was truly awful. I tried to be as helpful as possible – had I been distracted I wouldn’t have been able to remember the specific details of it all.”
Defending him, Simon Rice said: “You have heard absolutely no evidence as to how the cyclist ended up on the floor – there is no suggestion Mr Tyler hit the cyclist and caused him to fall.
“It is a very difficult case and an emotive issue for all parties involved. Mr Tyler is of good character and has an impeccable driving history.”
Lead magistrate Phil King acknowledged Mr Tyler’s driving record and also highlighted “significant gaps” in the evidence presented to the court.
“This incident clearly had huge consequences,” he told Mr Tyler. “It is accepted you were the driver of the vehicle that collided with a cyclist and there is no dispute about the time or place.
“What is not accepted is whether or not you were distracted by the use of a hands-free phone or whether your driving fell below the test of a competent driver.”
Acquitting the defendant, he added: “We find that whilst phone conversations can cause distractions there is no direct evidence that this was the case in this incident.”
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.
Latest Comments
- Bungle_52 35 min 8 sec ago
At last. A police force which sees cyclists willing to voluntarily spend time, effort and money in assiting them to police our roads as an asset...
- ike2112 6 hours 42 min ago
So that 2nd article is about the rantings of people in Bury - home of the Yates twins. Proud of their professional cyclist local heroes? Wanting to...
- stonojnr 7 hours 42 min ago
I dunno, probably not I assume they were picking up the scaffolding as there was other space they could have parked in, but I half expected the...
- tubasti 7 hours 44 min ago
Arguably, the Trek Domane with Isospeed decoupling at both ends, and the Specialized Roubaix, with various iterations of Zertz, doglegged blades...
- HoarseMann 8 hours 44 min ago
Watch it again, I was already in primary as they approached. They beeped as I blocked the close pass, then beeped again as they swerved towards me...
- David9694 9 hours 23 min ago
Calling car 237, come in car 237 ...
- Eton Rifle 10 hours 16 min ago
Then why do they all own cars, if the infrastructure to use them is not there? ...
- ktache 10 hours 38 min ago
I've been carrying the big heavy butyl for over five years...
- quiff 10 hours 45 min ago
I have a Shazam mini and love wizard works, but it's a bit chicken and egg - the Shazam does look quite a lot like the bags Carradice have been...
- ktache 10 hours 42 min ago
But then why would an otherwise law abiding driver need to react to a speed camera, real or imitation?...
Add new comment
24 comments
bullshit. you don't stop when you hit a pothole.
Being a local lad I can say that by modern standards this is a confined road junction, which is generally busy and yields a lot of data for a road user to process especially on a dark night. Assuming the cyclist was making the same turn as the car involved then it is easy to imagine him slipping off his bike without assistance. A following car driver would instinctively have been looking at the remainder of the junction and would have been less likely to concentrate on the road surface ahead and below therefore I suspect he was given the benefit of the doubt by the magistrates (a judgement which in my opinion was flawed). Mr Tyler needs to ask himself 'was that telephone conversation worth a life?'. nb Thank you road.cc author for at least mentioning that the condition of the cyclist is unknown, this is something the reporting newspaper has failed to do.
If a car runs over an obstacle it rises then falls, the opposite occurs when a deep pothole is met.
Sounds like the funny handshake club to me. The Free in Freemason has such profound meaning.
Staggering. Is there any end to what you can get away with in a car?
I'm waiting for someone to drive through a busy school playground killing and maiming on their little jolly before using the excuse there was no lollipop lady about.
Court would probably buy that too.
Has top gear ever been on record to support cyclist registration?
I know of top gear presenters who have voiced against it...
Top gear and the like want the cycling fraternity to wear identification so wrong doers can be identified....I suggest ALL cars be fitted with cameras to record these numbnuts.
How is talking on a hands free any more distracting than talking to a passenger or god forbid having a baby or young child on board? Not seeing a body in the road is the issue here.
Because you might hope that the passenger will shut up if you need them to, the phone won't
Apparently it is more distracting because you have to solely rely on audio cues to communicate which requires more concentration than taking to someone next to you.
http://www.techtimes.com/articles/17432/20141008/hands-free-device-use-i...
RPK, just read the link, it doesn't mention if hands free is any more distracting than having adults or children talking to you, which was my point.
tell me this is a joke ????
vine gets done for speeding on a bike then this fucktard gets off !!!!
tell you all what ... how about we all go out and run over some judges or ministers wife or kids ... how fast will the law change then ?
O brave new world, where whether you were distracted by a device is more of a test of driver competency than whether you run over a human being.
Trying to remember the last time, while driving, I wasn't able to see a pothole before putting my wheel in it.
He was quite clearly going too fast for the conditions, while using the phone.
Pretty careless and it resulted in a death.
Did the guy die?
I would have said that the fact that he hit a person that was stationary in the road is evidence that he was distracted or otherwise not paying sufficient attention.
My car lights allow me to see well enough - dazzling lights would do the job but no mention of that. Not sure how driving over a body feels like going through a not-that-bad pot hole. And why did he stop? Because he noticed when he knocked him off maybe? No proof so that's that.
This is utter bollox. The magistrates must be simpletons to believe this BS and the driver to get off.
Or, maybe, just maybe, he is telling the truth.
So the suggestion is that the guy was lying in the road already? How does one not notice a person in the road? Or maybe the rider wasn't lying in the road but the driver took him out whilst turning?
Use your imagination mudshark....6.00pm Nov 27 - It was dark.
If you have oncoming headlights dazzling you then the likelihood of seeing dark objects (or potholes) in the road is low.
More to the point, as others have said, is why did he stop? Does he stop every time he hits a pothole? I doubt it. So why this time?
So, IF Mr impeccable driver had driven into a brick wall with his eyes closed, he could have said exactly the all same things and would have been found to be driving WITH care & attention!!
Is it still correct that Mr Tyler still has a 'good character' & 'impeccable driving history'?
There aren't many removals companies in Clifton Way Cambridge, so cyclist might want to boycott them when next moving house, unless they apply their corporate responsibility.
Why did he stop then? I call BS.
I've been wondering this. I can't recall a time I have stopped because I have hit a pothole, I certainly haven't thought "Oh, that actually wasn't that bad or big of a pothole, I've certainly driven over far worse potholes. I'd better get out and check...."