Every case of an RTC involving a cyclist's death, or their serious, significantly life-changing, injury, should go to court. If the defendant is innocent the courts will find them so.
That could have happened here, although I accept it doesn't look like it.
The notion of prosecuting the surviving party in a road traffic collision is a fairly recent one.
No doubt many years ago some drivers involved in fatal accidents rather got away with a killing, albeit an unintentional one.
But I'm not comfortable with the notion every fatal collision should see the surviving driver prosecuted.
A prosecution should be mounted if there is evidence of careless or dangerous driving, which will often be the case, but not always so.
I recall an incident reported on television in which a lass wiped out a cyclist while driving her Mini late at night.
She hit the cyclist with the front nearside of her car.
Evidence gathered at the scene found he was riding a dark bicycle, had no lights and was wearing dark clothing.
Crucially, the cyclist was very, very drunk.
She knew none of that at the time of her police interview, but her account was he must have swerved into her path.
She was not prosecuted, which I believe was the correct decision.
