Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

Taxi driver who sped through red light jailed for killing cyclist

Said he thought the light had been on amber when he went through

A taxi driver has been jailed for nine months at Newcastle Crown Court after admitting causing the death of a cyclist by careless driving. Ian Wilson accelerated when he saw a set of traffic lights change to amber and hit 20-year-old Daniel Rushton after passing through on red.

The collision took place on the Great North Road at around 9.30pm on January 27. Rushton had been returning to the Hazlerigg home he shared with his girlfriend.

Metro reports that while he didn’t have his LED lights on, the incident took place on a well-lit stretch of road. Despite this, Wilson, who had worked as a taxi driver for eight years, said he didn’t see him.

Rushton was taken to Newcastle’s Royal Victoria Infirmary but died from his injuries.

Wilson said he thought the light had been on amber when he went through it and told police afterwards: ‘I’m very, very sorry. I can’t imagine what they are going through.’

As well as being jailed for nine months, Wilson will be banned from driving for 18 months after his release.

In a statement, Rushton’s mother, Lisa, said: “He has been taken from us by someone who ignored a red light and I can’t forgive him for what he has done to me and our family. It would never have happened if the taxi had been driven safely.”

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.

Add new comment

23 comments

Avatar
Critchio | 7 years ago
0 likes

Disgusting result and yet another example of why the offences of death by dangerous and death by careless (and the fucking sentencing) are not fit for purpose. This is a deliberate piece of dangerous driving.

The standard defence to traffic light or railway crossing offences is always, "I thought it was amber..." Bullshit. If you can't spot the difference then you should not be driving.

The offence (restricted to traffic signal offences only) is only complete or prosecuted when the front wheels of the offending vehicle pass the stop line on a red light. (Consider slow-moving, long vehicles). This however should have resulted in a long prison sentence and a 20 year driving ban. He killed another person heaven's sake.

Avatar
ClubSmed | 7 years ago
0 likes

OK, let's stop with the "Victim blaming" label!

What I did was just ask a question to better understand and make an observation. After further investigation (by myself because no-one here seemed to be willing to engage in the debate) I realise that my observation was irrelevant to this case as he was not cycling on the road so therefor did not require lights. I apologise for making this statement in the wrong context.

These situations are terrible, any incident that ends in loss of life is absolutely horrific! There is absolutely no way that what has been done can be reversed and that is tragic. Hopefully though by talking about it we can learn things and be educated as to how to stop these things happening in future. Yes the courts discuss all the facts but that is only for their own purposes (sentencing the individual and setting precedence for future sentencing of similar) not for future prevention education.

From asking the questions and investigating further I have learnt something new. Although I knew it was illegal to cycle on the pavement I had only considered the dangers as far as they are presented to pedestrians, I had not previously considered the dangers of cycles using an infrastructure that was not designed for them. I can now see that that the delay between the Red traffic light and the green man may be sufficient to save pedestrians at a walking pace from interacting with bad drivers, it is not designed for faster vehicles such as bicycles.

So next time when I am talking to my neighbour about cycling and his wife chimes in with (as she always does) that she would not ride on the roads as they are too dangerous, that's why she rides on the pavement I will be able to point out a new danger. Whilst I do not expect this to stop her cycling on the pavement, I do hope that it will make her more aware of the dangers of riding on an infrastructure not designed for her and save her from a similar fate from other idiots driving their weapons of destruction.

If someone was to open up the victim of cancer to investigate how it killed them and learn something for the future they would not be labelled a "Victim Blamer"! All I am trying to do is the same, dissect the incident to try and take away something that can help people stay away from such tragedy.

I am in no way trying to take away blame from the taxi driver, he was guilty and if he had not made that illegal manoeuvre then that lad would still be alive today. There are no ifs or buts there, he did wrong and hopefully the sentence given will go some way to deter future idiots doing the same. I am just trying to see it from all angles to try and find ways to stay safe from these idiots that are not deterred by this sentencing.

Avatar
DrG82 | 7 years ago
0 likes

Red light jumping is ridiculously common in Swansea, and yet there are hardly any cameras. I'd like to see some form of pop up barriers developed that rise when the lights go red and would likely destroy a tyre/shock absorber if hit at speed. The jeopardy of potentially expensive car repairs would stop people racing to get through on amber.

Avatar
Awavey replied to DrG82 | 7 years ago
0 likes
DrG82 wrote:

Red light jumping is ridiculously common in Swansea, and yet there are hardly any cameras. I'd like to see some form of pop up barriers developed that rise when the lights go red and would likely destroy a tyre/shock absorber if hit at speed. The jeopardy of potentially expensive car repairs would stop people racing to get through on amber.

the speed with which people hit speed bumps, or bump up pavement kerbs, leads me to believe they dont link the cause to the effect of expensive shock absorber/wheel bearing car repairs

but cameras on traffic lights, at least within central city areas would be a good idea, at least plant the idea that someone may watch and you will be caught doing it. I was just this weekend gone at a crossing where the stop line is near on 2-3 car lengths back from the crossing itself (think they are worried about turning lorries or something),but the light went red, the green man was lit, Im halfway across the road and Im almost being runover by the first car who refused to stop and the second car following had the damn cheek to rant I was blocking his way !!! he got an earful about what the colour red meant, but as soon as I was across the road his car still crept forward into the junction, couldnt even be bothered to wait for the next green light.

Avatar
Metaphor | 7 years ago
0 likes

Another reason why I never use taxis.

Avatar
atgni replied to Metaphor | 7 years ago
2 likes

Ramuz wrote:

Another reason why I never use taxis.

Or trains - Ladbroke Grove

Or trams - Croydon

Or buses - M40

Or ships - titanic

Or planes - or airships etc.

That's not really a reason to not use taxis.

Avatar
ClubSmed | 7 years ago
1 like

Having read some more into this I now know that the cyclist did not run a red light because he was cycling on the path. This would explain why he didn't have his lights on. He did cross before the green man came on though just like we all do. I am not trying to victim blame and not trying to troll, I was just asking questions because I'm curious and never like to just accept things at face value.

Avatar
Housecathst replied to ClubSmed | 7 years ago
0 likes

ClubSmed wrote:

Having read some more into this I now know that the cyclist did not run a red light because he was cycling on the path. This would explain why he didn't have his lights on. He did cross before the green man came on though just like we all do. I am not trying to victim blame and not trying to troll, I was tasty asking questions because I'm curious and never like to just accept things at face value.

link please, I can't see anything in the reports on this to suggest he had ridden from the pavement. 

The fact that a jury has convicted and a judge has give a custodial sentence (all very unlikely event where the death of a cyclists is concerned) means that the motorist was considered totally at fault. 

Avatar
ClubSmed replied to Housecathst | 7 years ago
0 likes
Housecathst wrote:

ClubSmed wrote:

Having read some more into this I now know that the cyclist did not run a red light because he was cycling on the path. This would explain why he didn't have his lights on. He did cross before the green man came on though just like we all do. I am not trying to victim blame and not trying to troll, I was tasty asking questions because I'm curious and never like to just accept things at face value.

link please, I can't see anything in the reports on this to suggest he had ridden from the pavement. 

The fact that a jury has convicted and a judge has give a custodial sentence (all very unlikely event where the death of a cyclists is concerned) means that the motorist was considered totally at fault. 

http://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/north-east-news/taxi-driver-who-kill...

Avatar
cidermart | 7 years ago
0 likes

And as for the 18 months driving ban WTF!

Avatar
cidermart | 7 years ago
0 likes

So a, allegedly, professional driver gets nine months (four and a half let's be honest) for killing a cyclist is it any wonder that they don't jail the average Joe? Driving through a red light is stupid and illegal at any time of the year so stop victim blaming.

Avatar
ClubSmed | 7 years ago
1 like

This is very sad news that yet again a cyclist has died as a result of a motorist not following the rules of the road. It is good to see that jail time has this time been given though little comfort.
I would however like to add a little balance and ask if maybe the cyclist jumped the red light too? Usually there is a delay between one set of lights turning Red and the other set turning Red-Amber to avoid such incidents.Also riding at that time of night in January without lights is both foolish and illegal.

Avatar
Jonny_Trousers replied to ClubSmed | 7 years ago
3 likes

ClubSmed wrote:

This is very sad news that yet again a cyclist has died as a result of a motorist not following the rules of the road. It is good to see that jail time has this time been given though little comfort.
I would however like to add a little balance and ask if maybe the cyclist jumped the red light too? Usually there is a delay between one set of lights turning Red and the other set turning Red-Amber to avoid such incidents.Also riding at that time of night in January without lights is both foolish and illegal.

 

All good points. I'm sure the taxi driver didn't intend to kill the cyclist, but his silliness caused a catastrophe.

We humans are far too stupid to be in control of machines as potentially deadly as automobiles. Bring on driverless cars, I say.

Avatar
Housecathst replied to ClubSmed | 7 years ago
2 likes

ClubSmed wrote:

This is very sad news that yet again a cyclist has died as a result of a motorist not following the rules of the road. It is good to see that jail time has this time been given though little comfort.
I would however like to add a little balance and ask if maybe the cyclist jumped the red light too? Usually there is a delay between one set of lights turning Red and the other set turning Red-Amber to avoid such incidents.Also riding at that time of night in January without lights is both foolish and illegal.

I'm sure that would have been covered in depth in the trail and would have been a key part of the defence if he had. An average jury of cycle hating motorists would have had no problem with returning a not guilty verdict if there had been any suggestion. Given that the article made reference to him not having any lights I sure it would have included any suggest of the cyclist having jumped the lights. It far more likely they the motorists underestimated how badly he had jumped the red light. 

Have I been suckered by a troll ? Dam it !

Avatar
ClubSmed replied to Housecathst | 7 years ago
0 likes
Housecathst wrote:

Have I been suckered by a troll ? Dam it !

Not trolling, just trying to add balance as this may be a one sided summary

Avatar
Housecathst replied to ClubSmed | 7 years ago
5 likes

ClubSmed wrote:
Housecathst wrote:

Have I been suckered by a troll ? Dam it !

Not trolling, just trying to add balance as this may be a one sided summary

no balance, just wild speculation and a bit of classic victim blaming. 

Avatar
Jackson replied to ClubSmed | 7 years ago
4 likes
ClubSmed wrote:
Housecathst wrote:

Have I been suckered by a troll ? Dam it !

Not trolling, just trying to add balance as this may be a one sided summary

No one needs you to "add balance" here. That's what the trial is for.

Avatar
davel replied to ClubSmed | 7 years ago
2 likes
ClubSmed wrote:

This is very sad news that yet again a cyclist has died as a result of a motorist not following the rules of the road. It is good to see that jail time has this time been given though little comfort.
I would however like to add a little balance and ask if maybe the cyclist jumped the red light too? Usually there is a delay between one set of lights turning Red and the other set turning Red-Amber to avoid such incidents.Also riding at that time of night in January without lights is both foolish and illegal.

Point about not having lights on: ok.

Point about RLJing: not ok, not balance - speculative bullshit about a lad who was killed by someone we know drove for a living and did RLJ. Could easily have been T-boned by the impatient twat.

Avatar
TriTaxMan replied to ClubSmed | 7 years ago
0 likes

ClubSmed wrote:

Usually there is a delay between one set of lights turning Red and the other set turning Red-Amber to avoid such incidents.

I disagree with you on that point, many lights now have little or no delay in sets of lights from different directions. i.e. both sets of lights hit amber at the same time rather than set one going to amber then red before set 2 goes from red to red and amber

There is one particular traffic light controlled junction where I live that there has been multiple accidents due to the poor sequence timing of the lights, and no matter how many times this has been reported, or how many accidents there have been the council/police refuse to do anything about changing the light sequence.

It is a T junction, and if you are on the 'main' road, not the road joining it and you are stopped at the red lights, you can also see the lights which signal the joining road, and both sets turn amber at the same time.  The junction is on a local boy racing loop and more often than not they come racing up to the lights, see thier set going from green to amber and try to beat the lights not caring that the lights on the other side have also began to change.

Avatar
ClubSmed replied to TriTaxMan | 7 years ago
0 likes

craigstitt wrote:

ClubSmed wrote:

Usually there is a delay between one set of lights turning Red and the other set turning Red-Amber to avoid such incidents.

I disagree with you on that point, many lights now have little or no delay in sets of lights from different directions. i.e. both sets of lights hit amber at the same time rather than set one going to amber then red before set 2 goes from red to red and amber

There is one particular traffic light controlled junction where I live that there has been multiple accidents due to the poor sequence timing of the lights, and no matter how many times this has been reported, or how many accidents there have been the council/police refuse to do anything about changing the light sequence.

It is a T junction, and if you are on the 'main' road, not the road joining it and you are stopped at the red lights, you can also see the lights which signal the joining road, and both sets turn amber at the same time.  The junction is on a local boy racing loop and more often than not they come racing up to the lights, see thier set going from green to amber and try to beat the lights not caring that the lights on the other side have also began to change.

You are probably right on that, I know that they used to have delays but now most have hoods on so that you can't see the other set so I wouldn't have noticed the change in thinking.

That sounds like an horrific T junction, I wonder who it is that is in charge of light sequencing (not something I had concidered before). Maybe we should start cataloguing poor sequencing traffic lights as they are arguably more dangerous that pot holes?

Avatar
STiG911 | 7 years ago
5 likes

For the sake of waiting a few seconds, maybe a minute. Scumbag.

 

Avatar
rct | 7 years ago
13 likes

AMBER means ‘Stop’ at the stop line. You may go on only if the AMBER appears after you have crossed the stop line or are so close to it that  to pull up might cause an accident

AMBER means ‘Stop’ at the stop line. You may go on only if the AMBER appears after you have crossed the stop line or are so close to it that to pull up might cause an accident

Avatar
brooksby replied to rct | 7 years ago
0 likes

rct wrote:

AMBER means ‘Stop’ at the stop line. You may go on only if the AMBER appears after you have crossed the stop line or are so close to it that  to pull up might cause an accident

AMBER means ‘Stop’ at the stop line. You may go on only if the AMBER appears after you have crossed the stop line or are so close to it that to pull up might cause an accident

How many vehicles have you seen obeying that one lately? Or the bit about go on *green* (if it's clear to proceed)? Most cars only stop on red, and then go again on amber.

Latest Comments