- 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
Cyclist flung over car by driver on pavement (credit, Kent Police)Drug driver who smashed into cyclist on pavement while twice the legal limit for cannabis, flinging rider through the air and leaving him with life-changing injuries, handed six-month suspended sentence after motorist claimed he “faced impossible choice”
A motorist has been spared jail after leaving a cyclist with horrendous, life-changing injuries in a sickening head-on collision on the pavement, despite being twice the legal limit for cannabis, after his defence barrister claimed the driver was left with “an impossible choice” – to hit the car in front or swerve onto the pavement and into the path of the oncoming cyclist.
Clive Williams was handed a six-month suspended prison sentence and disqualified from driving for two years after pleading guilty to causing serious injury by careless driving following the shocking crash, which saw cyclist Les Norris fly into the car windscreen and over its roof, while his bike was flung through the air.
The 64-year-old suffered a serious injury to his pelvis, as a well as broken ribs and a fractured wrist, in the collision, and was forced to spend six weeks in hospital, where doctors told him he was lucky to be alive.
The incident took place on 30 April 2023 in Hawkinge, near Folkestone, Kent, as Norris cycled home from work on a longer route than usual, which he says he took due to it being sunny. According to the cyclist, as he rode on the pavement, he noticed that the line of traffic next to him had slowed, when a silver car suddenly veered into his path.
Folkestone Magistrates’ Court heard this week that Williams was following another motorist in front as he emerged from a roundabout onto the Canterbury Road, who then braked sharply, which prompted the 41-year-old to swerve onto the footpath, immediately hitting Norris head-on.
The force of the collision saw the cyclist slam into his handlebars, shattering his pelvis, before hitting the car’s windscreen and being thrown over the vehicle and onto the ground.
Footage of the incident, captured on a nearby property’s CCTV, shows Norris riding on the pavement before his bike can be spotted flying through the air. Dashcam footage from a motorist approaching the roundabout was also played in court (and also appears in the above clip), showing the moment Norris was struck as Williams swerved onto the pavement.
In a statement later given to the police and read in court, Norris said he could remember hitting the windscreen of the vehicle, going over the top, and then lying with blood dripping from his head.
“I remember the air ambulance paramedics putting me on a stretcher and I was in pain and total shock. I was wheeled to the ambulance and had ketamine to sedate me because of my injuries,” the statement said.
The cyclist was forced to undergo emergency surgery and remained in hospital for six weeks after the crash, which has left him with metal plates in his pelvis and wrist which will never be removed.
In a victim impact statement, Norris said he felt cheated by the crash, as he had always been fit and healthy and that had now been ripped away from him.
“When I saw the CT scan of my pelvis there were bits of bone everywhere and it was like it had exploded, I couldn’t believe the mess,” he said.
“The doctors said it was life-threatening and I was lucky the impact had not killed me.”
Detailing how he has been forced to give up his hobbies, such as skiing and paddleboarding, the 64-year-old continued: “This is the hardest most traumatic time of my life. I was in the Navy on submarines for three months [at a time] and that seems like a walk in the park [compared to this].
“My surgeon said it was the most complex operation he’d ever done before, and I now have a titanium cage [in my pelvis] for the rest of my life which I can feel and even turning over in bed causes me pain.”
The court heard that Mr Norris is now forced to sleep in an adjustable bed without his wife and still suffers from a frozen shoulder and pain in his wrist, while suffering from mild PTSD, which has seen him undertake cognitive therapy. He also said it will be “some time” before he cycles again and that he is still reliant on painkillers.
In another statement, Mr Norris’ wife said her “world had been turned upside down” by the crash, and that she also often feels low and depressed.
“Seeing him on a ventilator in the hospital broke me,” she said. “Les was the main victim, but I feel like a victim too.”
The court also heard this week that Williams had smoked a cannabis joint the night before the crash, and that a test for drugs found the 41-year-old to be twice the legal limit.
However, despite being charged with causing serious injury by careless driving, to which he pleaded guilty in August, he was never charged with any drug-related offences.
Nevertheless, Terry Knox, prosecuting, told the Magistrates that Williams’ test result this was still an “aggravating factor” that should be taken into account when it comes to sentencing.
In court, Williams denied driving dangerously or speeding, and said he recalled the driver in front of him slamming on their brakes, arguing that he carried out an emergency manoeuvre to avoid a collision.
Mr Knox said the standard of driving was just below the threshold for dangerous driving and sentencing guidelines said the starting point for punishment was a year’s custody.
Defending, Olivia Rawlings said Williams had admitted his guilt at the outset, and that there had been no malice in his actions.
“He was facing an impossible choice – to hit the car in front or swerve – and [with] the timescale he faced, he swerved away from the car and even Mr Norris said he must have been trying to avoid the car,” she said.
“There was no evidence of speeding. He was too close to the car in front. He was not charged over the cannabis, but that should be taken into consideration he smoked a small amount the night before.
“He’s of previous good character and has genuine remorse. He’s not driven since the incident and has some health problems.”
While taking into account the “distressing” impact the crash has had on Mr Norris and his wife, the chairman of the bench said they accepted there was a low risk of Williams reoffending and, as a result, he would be sentenced to 24 weeks in prison, suspended for 18 months.
The motorist was also ordered to carry out 200 hours of unpaid work and disqualified from driving for 24 months. Williams was also ordered to pay a victim surcharge of £154 and £85 court costs.
Ryan joined road.cc in December 2021 and since then has kept the site’s readers and listeners informed and enthralled (well at least occasionally) on news, the live blog, and the road.cc Podcast. After boarding a wrong bus at the world championships and ruining a good pair of jeans at the cyclocross, he now serves as road.cc’s senior news writer. Before his foray into cycling journalism, he wallowed in the equally pitiless world of academia, where he wrote a book about Victorian politics and droned on about cycling and bikes to classes of bored students (while taking every chance he could get to talk about cycling in print or on the radio). He can be found riding his bike very slowly around the narrow, scenic country lanes of Co. Down.
Latest Comments
- CyclingInGawler 2 hours 35 min ago
"Folkestone Magistrates’ Court heard this week that Williams was following another motorist in front as he emerged from a roundabout onto the...
- eburtthebike 4 hours 54 min ago
But of course that entire generation was wiped out because they weren't wearing a helmet.
- HoarseMann 5 hours 9 min ago
It's only 999 if it's a threat to life or a crime in progress. Once the perp has driven off and there's no longer a threat, it's a 101 job.
- chrisonabike 6 hours 5 min ago
Another I'd missed last month:...
- andystow 6 hours 27 min ago
Wow! This is a place I go to a few times a year, but it's right across the parking lot from the pub I go to weekly.
- lonpfrb 7 hours 8 min ago
This administration has the opportunity missed by the previous one to join up the departments to address the fact that capable people just don't...
- stonojnr 7 hours 42 min ago
I'd question how did the driver heard the swearing to make such a complaint....
- mark1a 8 hours 39 min ago
Thankfully, there was a massive clue at the top of the article.
- john_smith 9 hours 30 min ago
"Not really - use of the word 'accident' implies that an incident was unavoidable."...
Add new comment
21 comments
"Folkestone Magistrates’ Court heard this week that Williams was following another motorist in front as he emerged from a roundabout onto the Canterbury Road, who then braked sharply, ...." to turn right into a presumably signed road junction....no, absolutely no way Williams could possibly have predicted that with on-coming traffic the car in front of him might come to a halt. Give me strength!
I'm sure no-one in the UK needs me to say this, but on my occasional visits back there since moving to South Australia in 2005 I would have to say that driving standards have fallen depressingly. I'm sure there are many reasons, but courts giving offenders like Willaims what is effectively a free pass don't send anything like the right signal.
Stay safe all (to the best of your limited ability to influence that).
Well he didn't face an impossible choice did he.
1. To take cannabis and be high as a kite. A dumb choice that most likely led to the accident.
2. To drive inappropriately so when the car in front slowed down he couldn't stop, another choice that was not a clever one.
3. When faced with crashing into the car in front went on the pavement, irrespective of what was there. Or did not form the plan that if something was there to go further off the road to avoid hitting a cyclist or pedestrian that happened to be there. Overall no impossible decisions just a series of bloody awful ones.
This is one where the book should be thrown at someone, drunk or drugged and cause an injury then you should be made an example of.
All true, but it is the legal system at fault, not just the driver.
Hit a car with multiple safety features or plough along a footpath. Not really an impossible choice. I hope the insurance claim hurts him like the victim of his drug driving
Mr Knox said the standard of driving was just below the threshold for dangerous driving and sentencing guidelines said the starting point for punishment was a year’s custody.
That is correct, I've checked it out on the "Sentancing guidlines uk" website.
I cannot see any extenuating circumstances. I don't think having a good defence lawyer counts.
So What went wrong, why is this guy not behind bars?
What a nasty collission.
Does anyone know if the same 40mph speed limit applies for the oncoming traffic? Around this corner, with very poor visibility, 40mph seem far too much - in particular if irresponsible, drugged drivers add another 10mph on top.
Another degenerate drug user walks from court having left a cyclist with life changing injuries and who knows what damage to his mental health.
Today I read that a man was fined a total of £9,000 (including costs) for silently praying in a restricted area, Adam Smith-Connor. I also read that a bigot has been sentenced to 31 months imprisonment for inciting people on Twitter, Lucy Connolly.
Surely Clive William's offence must fall somewhere between these two? Instead he's been fined barely £250 and two years (24 months) suspended. No justice in this country if you offend in a car.
Jesus. F*cking. Wept.
And there's a "war on motorists" you say?
Yes, using feather dusters as weapons.
The no-option option:
Every car has at least two of these pedals ... one to make it go faster, one to make it go slower.
There is *always* an option ... and it should always be the middle pedal.
Let's for arguments sake say the driver didn't just seriously hurt the cyclist but left them as a vegetable or even killed them. Would that of brought a different sentence?
While we are at it, let's not forget this was on the pavement so remove cyclist insert mother pushing young child in pram or pushchair. Is it still the same punishment? Would that be an impossible choice to make over an oncoming steel box?
I really do not understand the courts leniency in this case. Remove all mention of the word cyclist , he hit a person on the pavement while high on drugs. How the fuck is that not dangerous driving?
Lost for words. What will it take to deal with dangerous road users? Justice has not been done. #motonormativity rules in the UK. Vehicles through dangerous road users kill and maim day in day out and it is accepted by society.
Some harsh actions taken under the cover of darkness spring to mind.
So much wrong with this:
- last 'impossible choice' - hit a safety cage with associated repair bill and probabl;y a whiplash claim, or smite a vulnerable road user.
- Preceding bad choices:
Since when was electing to drive on the pavement anything other than dangerous, especially when over the limit.
Courts and CPS drawing their salaries under false pretences again.
Mr Knox said the standard of driving was just below the threshold for dangerous driving.....
If it was just below the threshold for dangerous driving, how come someone was seriously injured and almost killed?
Answer: it wasn't just below, it was way, way over the threshold. Anyone closely following another car at speed on the exit of a roundabout is driving dangerously, so quite how our legal system says it isn't dangerous, is beyond me. If someone is seriously injured because of the way someone drove, then ipso facto, the driving was dangerous, a statement so bleedin' obvious that it really doesn't need saying.
Never mind, soon be time for the comprehensive review of road offences to report. I wonder if the new government will do anything?
EDIT: Has anyone asked the odious IDS what he thinks?
The "Impossible Choice" is a standard scenario.
Very often when I get overtaken on a blind bend, the driver has an impossible choice. Go for the head on collision or swerve over to the left and take me out.
It's never the former. perhaps this degree of anticipation should be part of the driving test.
Er, no - he had the choice to leave sufficient room in front of him, and to look where he was going.
I'm not sure the definition of the word "impossible" includes a choice between a repair bill for a couple of dented car bumpers, or crippling someone for life. Seems like "selfish" would be the more appropriate adjective. Although, it could be argued that he is a slave to an addiction – to his car more than to marijuana.
What can one even say when a court reinforces the idea that almost killing a cyclist is better than rear ending the car in front of you because you are driving too close?
"just below the threshold for dangerous driving": that impossibly high bar again. Something needs to change.
Possibly, but sorting out a dangerous cycling law is clearly more important.