wiggydiggy
Legendary Member
Cyclist who fractured pedestrian's skull while riding laps of Regent's Park fined £500 over group ride collision on wrong side of crossing
Plus £2500 compensation to be paid by the cyclist Mathew Thornley
> Lawyers representing the cyclist said there was a "build up of traffic" which led to him taking "evasive action" and riding on the wrong side of the road and a pedestrian island, where he hit Ms Dos Santos. Thornley added that he was not riding faster than the park's 20mph speed limit and called the riding an "evasive manoeuvre".
> However, Ms Dos Santos told the newspaper the sentence was "paltry and insulting", claiming she had not been informed of the change to Thornley's plea and never submitted an impact statement.
> She commented: "What annoys me is that the judge has sentenced this cyclist without any input from me about how this collision has affected me. The cyclist was on the wrong side of the road. If a motorist was driving on the wrong side of the road and caused these injuries he or she would have been punished far more severely.
I've got some problems with this firstly if there was "a build up of traffic" then he should have stopped, riding on the wrong side of the road is not an option. His ride is not more important the the laws he should have been following. If he was unable to stop then he is riding without due care, too fast or his bike was defective.
Then she absolutely should have been informed of the hange in plea, but I'm not sure if that would be the resposibility of the CPS/Court or her own solicitors. From something else she said "this man is a cyclist without insurance means he has got away with it. Solicitors are not prepared to fight such cases for victims because cyclists do not have insurance." it sounds like perhaps she didn't. Should insurance for cyclists on organised events be mandatory so pedestrians have some protection?
Plus £2500 compensation to be paid by the cyclist Mathew Thornley
> Lawyers representing the cyclist said there was a "build up of traffic" which led to him taking "evasive action" and riding on the wrong side of the road and a pedestrian island, where he hit Ms Dos Santos. Thornley added that he was not riding faster than the park's 20mph speed limit and called the riding an "evasive manoeuvre".
> However, Ms Dos Santos told the newspaper the sentence was "paltry and insulting", claiming she had not been informed of the change to Thornley's plea and never submitted an impact statement.
> She commented: "What annoys me is that the judge has sentenced this cyclist without any input from me about how this collision has affected me. The cyclist was on the wrong side of the road. If a motorist was driving on the wrong side of the road and caused these injuries he or she would have been punished far more severely.
I've got some problems with this firstly if there was "a build up of traffic" then he should have stopped, riding on the wrong side of the road is not an option. His ride is not more important the the laws he should have been following. If he was unable to stop then he is riding without due care, too fast or his bike was defective.
Then she absolutely should have been informed of the hange in plea, but I'm not sure if that would be the resposibility of the CPS/Court or her own solicitors. From something else she said "this man is a cyclist without insurance means he has got away with it. Solicitors are not prepared to fight such cases for victims because cyclists do not have insurance." it sounds like perhaps she didn't. Should insurance for cyclists on organised events be mandatory so pedestrians have some protection?