Teenage motorist who hit and killed cyclist banned from driving for a year, ordered to complete 180 hours unpaid work, and fined £240

23 comments

1. And yet, if he was on a bike(Not motorbike), ran someone over, he would get a more harsh sentence.

2. As usual, if you want to kill somebody in the UK do it with a car.

   The rest of the shockingly light sentence aside, I simply cannot comprehend the logic behind giving somebody who hit and killed a cyclist in broad daylight two weeks after their test only a one year driving ban.

   They’ve only just got the license, so the usual excuse of they need it for work can’t be used. So why on earth is the ban not permanent or at least for a significant amount of time?

3. He must have hit the guy with some force. This exact thing happened to me when an old lady pulled out on me while I was on my lambretta. This does sound like a tragic accident if the driver is to be believed. I feel sorry for all involved.

4. That’s an absolute disgrace of a sentence. Makes you sick.

   But when you have Scotland letting out criminals due to overpopulation, nothing should shock you.

5. I got fine more for MS90 even though I didn’t receive letters from the police. Ffs

6. I’m guessing the fact the driver was seemingly not intoxicated and was not performing a dangerous manoeuvre, has led to a lighter punishment in this case.

   Still, it does leave a sour taste in your mouth that someone has needlessly died as a result of someone’s lack of attention and carelessness – while they get off with a year’s driving ban, a small fine, and some unpaid work. If it was one of my loved ones, I’m not sure I could take that on the chin.

   I suppose the youngster will have to live with that for the rest of his life, however. Drivers need to be trained better in seeing potential hazards, especially hazards such as cyclists as they are often harder to see when you’re in a big metal box. I don’t think the current hazard perception test is enough.

7. That should be a much longer ban and retake before they can drive again, killing someone two weeks after passing is insane.

8. [deleted]

9. What a fucking joke. This lad was obviously not paying attention. The punishment is ridiculous. One year ban? That’s it? If I was the victims wife this would send me to the grave as well because the rage I’d feel would do me in. Not only has this poor man died, but the person who did it has basically got away with it. He’s taken someone’s life yet once he’s done his poxy community service and got the bus for a year, he can trot off as if it never happened.

10. Rock bottom country here you get away with murder if you hit a cyclist, where is the justice here if road rage murder is not punished?

11. If you want to plead the defence to the more serious Dangerous Driving Charge that you didn’t see the person, it should come with the acceptance that you will never be a safe driver and should never be allowed to drive. 

    A year long ban won’t fix the fact that this man is apparently unable to see cyclists. So he will remain incredibly dangerous. 

12. Hit man for hire. Will deal with problem cyclists for £3k.

13. If the cyclist had paid road tax this definitely wouldn’t have happened etc etc

14. I had a collision with a cyclist end of last year and all i can think is It’s mental how someone who only passed the test 2 weeks prior to the incident and killed the other person involved got 120 hours more in community service than I did. Considering in my case the cyclist got a broken rip which healed in 4 weeks and I hadn’t had a single point on my licence for the 11 years I’d been driving, the fact the only difference between our punishments is more community service for the guy who killed someone actually staggers me. I also had to give up my job because I needed my vehicle for work and wasn’t allowed to plead additional hardships due to the courts giving me an immediate bad whilst they gathered evidence for a court date 3 months later.

15. Seems reasonable really, not that it would seem like justice to the cyclist’s family, but it was a genuine error on the part of the driver and to be honest, an error from the cyclist not anticipating cars pulling out at junctions. One paid a heavier price than the other, but we shouldn’t wreck their life too just for the sake of ‘justice’. I did look for the full judgement but doesn’t seem to be available yet.

16. Reading the article, I get why they didn’t think a custodial sentence would be beneficial – he made a catastrophic mistake but did everything he could from that point to cooperate and plead guilty immediately.

    BUT (massive ‘but’) a mere one year driving ban is far too little. Should be more like 5-10 years at a minimum.

17. All of you calling for this kids life to be ruined because of what he did.
    I doubt any of you know him or how this has impacted him
    The sentence does seem very lenient I agree but that is what was handed down.
    It’s absolutely tragic for the family of that cyclist and they may well have every right to be angry but the vitriol directed at the driver here is more than just about the accident itself.
    Be careful what you wish for because one day it could be you they are demanding a prison sentence for.
    There but for the grace of God…

18. It does seem to be a lenient sentence given the fact that someone was sadly killed but I’m not still not convinced that a much more severe punishment, a permanent ban for example, is necessarily warranted in cases like this where it wasn’t because of a stupidly dangerous manoeuvre or intoxication.

    This was a moment of carelessness resulting in a collision which would most likely have only caused minor injuries 99 times out of a hundred. I know nothing of the character of the driver but if that was me & at that age, I know that this incident would weigh extremely heavily on me for the rest of my life I can guarantee I’d never be so careless again.

19. “Swann must complete an extended driving test” after his ban.

    Why?

    This is evidence that our current driving education process is not up scratch. It’s not the sole cause of the accident, any age driver with any amount of experience could have made a similar mistake. But for a judge to say this guy needs a more substantial test says to me that the normal test isn’t good enough because this is the type of driver it produces.

20. Can anyone tell me why these sentences are perpetually light? I just want to understand the process. It’s bizarre and atrocious.

21. For a forum of people who predominantly believe in rehabilitating criminals, many of you sure are immensely unforgiving to this individual who clearly screwed up, but likely did not go out to deliberately murder a cyclist.

22. If you kill or seriously injury someone it should be default perma ban from driving and thats before prison for assault/murder with a deadly weapon the uk is such a joke

23. Everyone in this thread baying for a harsher punishment – I just have to ask why? What purpose would a prison sentence serve? The guilty party here was fully cooperative, remorseful, accepted responsibility and the means by which he killed someone has been, at least temporarily, removed. So what purpose would prison serve beyond consigning someone else to a considerably more difficult life?

    Any other thread about sentencing everyone is jumping up to say that justice should be about rehabilitation, not punishment. Putting this guy in prison would be punishment, plain and simple, for what was fundamentally an accident. He just didn’t see the cyclist. From what can be garnered from the article he’s an upstanding guy and there’s nothing to rehabilitate.