Ebike court case

[jowwy]

Dreadful prosecution lawyer - one of the things a "careful" driver does is adapt their speed, positioning and observation to the environment, so if one of those pesky pedestrians does do something unexpected they can take avoiding action. A halfway decent prosecutor could easily have shot down what is a fairly vague and non specific defence, and I've seen that very defence screwed over first hand in court more than once.

I'm surprised as well he got not guilty on the licence and insurance charges, when so many other people caught riding simiarly modified e-bikes have been successfully fingered for it.

But hey ho. All it needs is an indifferent prosecutor, or one not especially well versed in the sphere of law at hand, and a mad/indifferent/gullible jury and stuff like this happens.

So if she ran out in front of a car doing 30mph....how quick would the driver react and reduce speed before hitting her???

 

[Cycleops]

I wonder if the outcome would have been the same for the pedestrian if he had been riding a road legal e-bike?

 

[Pale Rider]

Slagging off the prosecutor may be unfair.

The law accepts there are circumstances in which a driver may hit a pedestrian.

Essentially, if the pedestrian darts out in front of a moving vehicle , as happened in this case.

It seems the jury found the rider had no realistic prospect of missing the pedestrian, and accordingly, acquitted him.

 

[winjim]

I wonder if the outcome would have been the same for the pedestrian if he had been riding a road legal e-bike?

Wrong question. What would the outcome have been had he been riding a legal, licensed, insured moped or scooter?

 

[mjr]

Don't understand why you are conflicted unless you think "now it"s our turn to flatten people" .

Because it's nice to see a cyclist get off for a change but why this one this of all!

No difference between speeding unlicenced irresponsible folk guiding illegally modified vehicles in my book, whether on four or two wheels. The defence appears to have been based on the self serving junk some drivers tell themselves about their oh so wonderful driving skills.

Yes, the vast majority of drivers think themselves above average. To be fair, I do too but that's partly because what I see from the bike makes me think mostly-competent is above average, rather than thinking I'm much good!

 

[classic33]

Would it have made any difference in how its being viewed, if she'd been hit and killed by a car doing thirty in a twenty zone?

He was 10mph over the speed limit.

 

[Deleted member 26715]

Because it's nice to see a cyclist get off for a change but why this one this of all!

I beg to differ, there is nothing nice about this

 

[Smudge]

He was riding a non road legal vehicle, had no licence or insurance, was riding 30% over the speed limit and hits and kills a pedestrian. Yet gets off scot free.
If that isn't a travesty of justice, i don't know what is.

 

[Ming the Merciless]

Was the question asked what the outcome would have been had he been travelling within the speed limits?

 

[Deleted member 26715]

Was the question asked what the outcome would have been had he been travelling within the speed limits?

Well presumably had be seen travelling 50% slower he wouldn't have been anywhere near the lady

 

[Randy Butternubs]

Hang on, I've lost track. Was there evidence given regarding his speed in the end? I thought the 30mph figure was a witness' estimate, and therefore fairly meaningless.

 

[fossyant]

He was riding a non road legal vehicle, had no licence or insurance, was riding 30% over the speed limit and hits and kills a pedestrian. Yet gets off scot free.
If that isn't a travesty of justice, i don't know what is.

It's just wrong. Take in case the poor chap cycling a legal bike, under the speed limit, that hit the person using a phone - he got hammered on the civil case

 

[Milkfloat]

Surely he got off the careless charge because he was treated as a motorist, rather than a cyclist.
Maybe he got off the legal vehicle, tax and insurance charges because there was no proof that is what he was riding at the time or Plod could not be bothered to get the bike tested. If I remember correctly he took the bike away from the scene and then dumped it, plenty of time for someone to have tamped with it, honest Guv.

 

[Deleted member 26715]

It's just wrong. Take in case the poor chap cycling a legal bike, under the speed limit, that hit the person using a phone - he got hammered on the civil case

But he too was riding an illegal bike

 

[Deleted member 26715]

Hang on, I've lost track. Was there evidence given regarding his speed in the end? I thought the 30mph figure was a witness' estimate, and therefore fairly meaningless.

Did you bother to read the first line? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-51647068