Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

Shocking footage released by police shows driver crashing into cyclist, catapulting her into the air (+ video)

Thomas Freeman has been jailed for a year after admitting causing serious injury through careless driving

West Midlands Police have released shocking video footage of the moment a driver, who has now been jailed for a year, ignored 'give way' markings and crashed into a cyclist as she rode through a junction, throwing her into the air and causing serious injuries.

The 71-year-old victim spent five days in hospital after sustaining a bleed on the brain, broken shoulder and broken ankle in the crash, which happened on 6 May this year on Wildcroft Road in Coventry at its junction with Brookside Avenue.

The cyclist gave police her permission to share the footage to highlight the responsibility drivers have towards more vulnerable people, a principle that since January last year has been officially enshrined in the Highway Code under the Hierarchy of Road Users.

> Highway Code changes one year on: Confusion in communication has created the perfect storm and done little to improve safety for cyclists

The video shows Thomas Freeman, aged 29 and from Torrington Avenue in Coventry, pulling out at the junction in his Citroen C3 Flair just as the cyclist, wearing a fluorescent yellow jacket, approaches, catapulting her into the air.

Appearing at Warwick Crown Court on 21 December, Freeman was jailed for 12 months after pleading guilty to causing serious injury by careless driving and was banned from driving for two years.

Traffic Sergeant Jordan Keen, from the force’s Traffic Investigations Unit, said: “This was an appalling piece of careless driving which left the cyclist badly injured.

“She is an experienced cyclist and a member of a local cycling club, but it’s clear from the footage that Freeman’s careless driving when crossing the junction meant she stood no chance.

“I hope that drivers who see this footage know that they have a responsibility to more vulnerable road users out there, such as cyclists and pedestrians,” he added.

West Midlands Police said: “We take road safety seriously, which is why we've launched Operation Triton, a dedicated initiative aimed at tackling dangerous driving and improving safety on our roads.

“Our primary mission is simple yet crucial – to reduce the number of fatalities and serious injuries on our roads. We also aim to disrupt and deter criminals who abuse the road network.

“We are working with communities and partners, including local councils, charities and Transport for West Midlands, to create safer roads for everyone.

Our proactive approach involves active patrolling of key areas, enforcing speed limits, and protecting our communities from the hazards of excessive speed and other road-related issues,” the force added.

The offence to which Freeman pleaded guilty carries a maximum penalty of two years’ imprisonment, and under current sentencing guidelines the sentence handed down to him would have included a reduction of up to one third for his guilty plea.

In determining the sentence, the judge will also have taken a variety of potentially aggravating factors, including that the victim was a vulnerable road user, as well as mitigating factors, into account under Sentencing Council guidelines for the offence.

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

38 comments

Avatar
JLasTSR | 10 months ago
5 likes

I had a similar accident in September. A car pulled out in front on me, I was 8 metres away at about 19 mph I managed to get the bike mostly slowed down not so good at stopping me though. I went head first into the car wing. Then I bounced up and over and wound up landing in front of it. I don't remember any of it but the local shop CCTV showed it all. My sympathies go to the poor cyclist, while it could have been even worse it should not have happened at all. Given that it did I wish them a speedy recovery. It took me a lot longer to recover properly than I would have believed, in fact I still have some discomfort.

Avatar
Benji326 | 10 months ago
4 likes

This sentence is extrodinary as most are way too lenient.

Although it probably went;

* Hi- Vis - Check

*Helmet - Check

*Lights - Check

*Obeying Highway Code - Check.

Nothing to blame the victim on. Hopefully not and I'm just being sceptical 

Avatar
Rendel Harris | 10 months ago
4 likes

Excellent work here from Alan Myles, whom some may remember from these pages as the victim of a shocking assault with a car which Police Scotland failed to act on, swapping the bike for a car. Lots of chumps believed it was real footage of a separate incident; almost nobody said it was the car driver's fault.

https://twitter.com/AlanMyles8/status/1741601386947576057

Avatar
HoarseMann replied to Rendel Harris | 10 months ago
3 likes

I wondered if the blue car was actually going any slower than the cyclist, so I overlaid the video. This shows the blue car is travelling at a very similar speed to the cyclist, yet nobody is calling out the driver of the blue car for travelling too quickly past the scene of a collision...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9J7_4MGqEBI

Avatar
Rendel Harris replied to HoarseMann | 10 months ago
3 likes

Nice work! Amazing how many online commentators were insisting that Alan's video was just cycling propaganda.

Avatar
pdw | 10 months ago
4 likes

This sentence seems bizarrely harsh, given what normally gets handed out for mowing down cyclists with far more aggravating factors.  Were there other factors not mentioned in the story?

Avatar
Rendel Harris replied to pdw | 10 months ago
10 likes
pdw wrote:

This sentence seems bizarrely harsh, given what normally gets handed out for mowing down cyclists with far more aggravating factors.  

Perhaps it just seems bizarrely harsh because the sentences normally handed out are bizarrely lenient. I do agree there may have been more to it than meets the eye though, the guilty plea seems to imply it. It would be interesting to see the judge's sentencing remarks, which don't seem available anywhere.

Avatar
Oldfatgit replied to pdw | 10 months ago
9 likes

Maybe you'd prefer the 6 fixed penalty points and £240 fine that the dude who knocked me off my bike got?
After all, I only broke 11 ribs, left ulna, dislocated left elbow, a TBI, 3 fractured vertebrae, punctured lung, internal bleeding, and a kneecap that what smashed in to four pieces.
I mean ... 6 points seems like a fair trade when the person you hit can't walk or use their arm for 4 months and is off full time work for 18 months.
£240 fine seems quite *reasonable* when the person you hit is left with permanent brain damage, limited mobility and increased risk of early onset dementia.

Or maybe I've read your post wrong ... ?

Avatar
Bungle_52 replied to Oldfatgit | 10 months ago
2 likes

There is no doubt in my mind that sentences for motoring offences against cyclists have been far too lenient in the past. I hope that what @pdw was trying to say is that this sentence is a move in the right direction and I personally hope it continues along the same path. As others have pointed out we rarely get to hear the whole story behind these trials and sentences but on the face of it this is good news.

Avatar
mctrials23 replied to Oldfatgit | 10 months ago
5 likes

I read it as nothing more than an observation on the fact that someone can be caught high, banned and a reapeat offender and still not end up in jail after hitting a cyclist. I don't think they were suggesting it was correctly lenient. 

Avatar
HLaB replied to pdw | 10 months ago
3 likes

The sentence is not harsh but on the face of it relative to other tripe sentences that get handed out it seems unproportionate.  We are only seing a 48s clip however, and I suspect the judge was weighing up bigger factor.  Im no leagle eagle but I think the fact it was a Crown Court means it has went beyond the Magistrates level.

Avatar
Tom_77 replied to pdw | 10 months ago
3 likes
pdw wrote:

This sentence seems bizarrely harsh, given what normally gets handed out for mowing down cyclists with far more aggravating factors.  Were there other factors not mentioned in the story?

The offence of Causing Serious Injury By Careless Driving is fairly new (came in June 2022). If this incident had taken place before then, the offender could only have been charged with Driving Without Due Care and Attention and the most you can get for that is a fine and driving ban.

Avatar
Rcartes | 10 months ago
8 likes

Some of the comments below the line in the Torygraph's report on this (https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/12/28/elderly-cyclist-flips-mid-ai...) are dreadful, combining victim-blaming (she was going too fast) with excusing the driver (his view was obscured). Here's a selection:

“She actually hit him. Admittedly he crossed a junction probably without looking well enough, but she seemed to be the one speeding and not looking.”

“If you are put in jail for an accident then none of us are safe from the state.”

“I think the car in front of him almost certainly obstructs his view of the cyclist.”

s that stupid cyclist for damaging his car. It was obviously [sic] her fault for going too fast.”

Avatar
brooksby replied to Rcartes | 10 months ago
7 likes
some twunt of a Torygraph reader wrote:

“She actually hit him. Admittedly he crossed a junction probably without looking well enough, but she seemed to be the one speeding and not looking.”

So they missed the bit about how the person already on the main road and going straight having priority? Some people...no

Avatar
chrisonabike replied to brooksby | 10 months ago
6 likes

They can't have priority though, they're a cyclist. As they're clearly *going much slower than cars* it's sensible that they should always give way to drivers. Anyway the driver had clearly timed it correctly to clear the junction if the cyclist hadn't been *going too fast*...

My take - either straight up didn't look, or only looked for cars, or saw a cyclist and assumed they were going slowly or would just get out of the driver's way. Sadly all produce the same outcome.

Avatar
hawkinspeter replied to brooksby | 10 months ago
11 likes
brooksby wrote:
some twunt of a Torygraph reader wrote:

“She actually hit him. Admittedly he crossed a junction probably without looking well enough, but she seemed to be the one speeding and not looking.”

So they missed the bit about how the person already on the main road and going straight having priority? Some people...no

It's amazing how these people change their opinions of roadcraft based on the type of vehicle, or at least have dual standards. If you replace a bike with a bus and replay the scenario, they would completely change their opinion of the driver - "that idiot just drove in front of a bus without looking".

Avatar
Hirsute replied to hawkinspeter | 10 months ago
2 likes

This driver was speeding and is at fault for driving into the car from the left.

https://youtu.be/0LXzm_8RWRQ?t=541

Avatar
Hirsute replied to Rcartes | 10 months ago
1 like

I hope you don't pay to read that tripe !

Avatar
wtjs replied to Hirsute | 10 months ago
5 likes

I hope you don't pay to read that tripe !

Fair's fair! He's doing it so we don't have to!

Avatar
Cycloid replied to Rcartes | 10 months ago
1 like

“I think the car in front of him almost certainly obstructs his view of the cyclist.”

I have posted three images below of a pull out near miss, in which I was temporarily in a driver's blind spot. The reason I posted the images was that after looking at the video and extrapolating lines of sight I thiink it may be possible that a similar situation occured in this case. 

It works both ways of course, the cyclist could not see the car and had no chance of avoiding the collision.

The motorist performed a manoeuvre when he could not see that it was safe to do so. I agree with Rendel's double thinking, the sentance is appropriate... But would the outcome have been different if the driver was represented by Mr Loophole?

Avatar
Hirsute replied to Cycloid | 10 months ago
3 likes

No as there would not be any technicalities involved such as "I didn't receive the nip in 14 days", "I needed a shit", "I'm famous and famous people never do anything wrong"

Avatar
mctrials23 replied to Rcartes | 10 months ago
4 likes

The comments on these articles tells you everything about the everyday fuckwit that inhabits our roads. The sort that thinks that if you can't safely do something then you should just do it anyway because obviously its not your fault if you cause an accident. The sort that thinks cars behaviour around cyclists shouldn't be held to a higher standard than when they are around other cars despite the danger being 100x more. 

Avatar
Annaanna replied to Rcartes | 10 months ago
0 likes

Yes. Exactly why these punishments are important.

Hopefully some of these morons realise you 'not paying attention' isn't an excuse for driving over someone.

Avatar
brooksby | 10 months ago
3 likes

Watching the video clip, who'd like to wager on there being a bit of "Everyone knows that cyclists travel slowly so I've got plenty of time" going on...? 

Avatar
Hirsute replied to brooksby | 10 months ago
0 likes

I think it was like image 2 by cycloid - basically didn't look

Avatar
mctrials23 replied to brooksby | 10 months ago
0 likes

I feel like I have had this quite a few times with drivers pulling across me and nearly hitting me. Well, I say nearly hitting me but it was exactly like this video. I nearly went into the side of them at a rate of knots. 

Avatar
Cycloid | 10 months ago
3 likes

A terrible bit of driving, he should be suspended over a motorway bridge by his testicles.

Quite simply he "Failed to look Properly" before pulling out.

Here is another "Failed to look Properly" that happened to me

A clear winter afternoon, with very little traffic in the village, I'm wearing HiVis and carrying lights.The driver on the right is waiting to make a right turn onto the main road, he has decided to wait for the vehicle coming from his right to pass before he starts his manoeuvre. I assume he has alteady looked to his left.

Avatar
Cycloid replied to Cycloid | 10 months ago
1 like

A textbook pull out - no excuse

Avatar
Cycloid replied to Cycloid | 10 months ago
2 likes

Fortunately it was fairly slow motion and a collision was avoided,

Here's the bit in between 

As the oncoming car passes I am in the driver's blind spot. So maybe he did look, but did not look properly. It's no excuse, but may help to explain what happened. My road reading skills were not up to anticipating that situation on the day, but my reactions compensated!

 

Avatar
Oldfatgit | 10 months ago
5 likes

So glad I'm not on Shitter.

Pages

Latest Comments