- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Tubeless valves
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
news
Justice (Lonpicman, Wikimedia Commons)Driving ban for motorist who reversed into cyclist
A driver who braked suddenly then reversed into a cyclist who had banged on his car window after a close pass has been banned from driving for 12 months.
The motorist, Matthew Scarpellini from Warwick, aged 25, was given a conditional discharge after admitting dangerous driving at Warwick Crown Court, reports the Leamington Observer.
The incident happened in May 2013 when the cyclist, named as a Mr Green from Coventry was riding along Myton Road in Leamington Spa.
As he approached a traffic island, Scarpellini drove up behind him and sounded his horn, and what was described as “a bit of argy-bargy” between the pair as the driver tried to overtake the cyclist at the point where the road narrowed due to the traffic island.
During the court case, the prosecution said that Mr Green had banged on the car’s window with his hand.
That led to Scarpellini braking suddenly and reversing into the cyclist, who sustained a grazed elbow and knee after falling off his bike, which was also damaged. He drove away, but police found him later the same day.
Judge Sylvia de Bertodano said: “This was an altercation with a cyclist. It matters not in the least whose fault it was.
“The cyclist didn’t like the way he was driving and hit his side window, and he stopped and reversed back and hit the bike.”
Scarpellini was ordered to pay the Mr Green £100 compensation and will also have to pay a £60 victim surcharge.
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.
Latest Comments
- Miller 4 sec ago
That is an appalling article! You have to get deep into it to find out the e-bike riders were chased and rammed by someone driving a Landrover...
- lawrence18uk 5 min 41 sec ago
I must admit I find it odd. I assumed a cyclist had run into a bus driver, fallen off and as a consequence, died (as in "run over by a bus driver")...
- kingleo 27 min 28 sec ago
Did commuting to and from work on my bike for 46 years in the London traffic increase the number of my red blood cells? - my breathing is superb, ...
- Bungle_52 44 min 57 sec ago
I am afraid you won't be able to stop close passes but you can play your part in trying to hold drivers to account which may reduce the problem in...
- Hirsute 43 min 5 sec ago
I made a complaint within an hour of the story being published. I have zero faith that they will amend anything....
- chrisonabike 1 hour 1 min ago
Especially children, near a school, one might imagine? By a bus driver driving children to school?...
- chrisonabike 1 hour 4 min ago
TBF I think that's before she saw the light and got on her bike. Not so great if her views have been informed by Mr. Briggs though.
- Saracen888 1 hour 44 min ago
That's a great price. Just bear in mind Import duty and handling charges will be applied pre delivery.
- Griff500 3 hours 6 min ago
Yep, I appreciate your problem. I wouldn't buy a bike without at least sitting on the same frame configuration on a trainer in the shop, something...
- Secret_squirrel 4 hours 20 min ago
One less thing to clutter up your jersey pockets no? Though difficult to retrieve in a hurry...
Add new comment
58 comments
If you're close enough to a bicycle for him to tap on your windows you're already driving too close (unless they are passing you in a traffic queue). I get drivers attempting to pass before traffic islands quite often (we need more warning signs for motorists like this one - http://www.alamy.com/stock-photo-a-cyclist-passes-a-new-do-not-overtake-...)
Actually Wolfie Smith there was an incident in Coventry where a motorist used his vehicle to kill a cyclist that I think had broken a mirror.
I agree that the charges were light as attempted murder would be far more relevant but when it comes to cars we make so many exceptions as they are so vital to our lives today. Which is tragic when you think about it.
My son got hit by some cars racing in Lincoln. My son parked his car, and then one of the racers then deliberately came back and rammed his parked car into a hedge causing a lot of damage.
The police classed the ramming as a road collision and took no action against the culprits .
They are still having unofficial and illegal races in the same area regularly, but never seen any police around.
Pathetic but true.
Long reply lost.
I am a Lawyer
1. It wasn't a snide comment.
2. It was a direct comment in response to the boorish comment made by danthomascyclist regarding the giving suggestion of misinformation.
3. You have, indeed, misunderstood. The "surely" is looking for affirmation of my belief, but happy to be educated by a qualified source, that'll be a lawyer. A question was asked earlier and thanked without the need for put downs from the responder to the question.
4. I also put that I would await the response to clarify from a lawyer, I'll keep on waiting...
makes me cringe how anal some folks are on forums.
I am genuinely amused at liking your own posts too.
I have like my own posts once, on a 'peoples choice' vote on here when told to do so by road.cc. Please don't let that spoil your omnipotent knowledge of voting habits.
Ouch!
Wasn't directed at you Mr Sensitive, but if you like your own posts too, then yes, I'm laughing at you too.
My apologies - given it was in a reply to me alone I rather thought it was... surely ?
Still, as others have suggested, I shall now chill.
The addition of question marks in my posts would indicate that I'm asking questions and using the forum as a research base. Therefore I am not suggesting misinformation. Your inability to read the question correctly, however, makes me wonder about the value of your answers.
Are you also liking your own posts? You are, aren't you?
'surely' at the end of sentence is normally used as a reaffirmation, as one description has it "urely is used to say that the speaker believes something in spite of reasons to believe the opposite" - which would make your 'question' rather less open than you're trying to have the poster believe. It's followed by 'hence', so the next bit is not a question either which makes your insistence you're just on a quest for knowledge seem a tad disingenuous - which it may not be, but comes across like that to me at least especially considering the snide comments at the end.
"Don't call me Shirley!".
Sorry, had to say it. C'mon, people, chill a little.
Now, shake hands and play nicely.
They started it...
I don't expect anyone to take my answers at face value. Which is why I put a source of my information (the publicly available Coroners and Justice Act 2009).
Given that I've answered your question correctly, accurately, and with a source, I'd suggest I've understood it.
Yes, I'm liking my own posts.
....and if he'd done the same to a pedestrian? Put his car in reverse and then hit them. Surely that would be deemed worthy of a heavier sentence?
Longer ban, having to retest and do some cycle awareness training wouldnt go amiss TBH. Maybe some anger management as well.
I don't think we have enough information here. The mere fact a Con Dis was given suggests the defendant had no previous convictions or involvement in the criminal justice system. Which might then suggest that, however selfish and dangerous the overtake was, his lawyer could argue that what then happened was out of character and arose out of a provoking act from the cyclist. Then the speed and distance of the reverse become important. The slower the speed and shorter the distance then the less serious the offence, especially in the context of apparent provocation.
Also, we don't know what mitigation was offered up by the drivers Lawyer. Mitigation can be very powerful especially when it is as it should be specific to the defendant and their personal circumstances. This took a long time to come to court. Perhaps the impact on the driver of the delays and loss of licence were significant. Perhaps the cyclist said something in his statement or through Cps suggesting a degree of culpability? or forgiveness? who knows Look at the guy who got a suspended sentence yesterday for keying a 100k car. The car owner didn't want him to go inside.
It looks to me - reading the article - as if the judge decided that Mr Green's banging on the car was an "aggravating factor" and that Mr Scarpellini would not have carried out his "dangerous driving" if he had not been goaded into it. Which is annoying as f**k, to be honest.
The article says that "the driver tried to overtake the cyclist at the point where the road narrowed due to the traffic island.", which is dangerous in a lay sense if not in a legal sense (I fear it wouldn't even count as 'careless' driving, under the law).
So, Mr Green is afraid he's about to be knocked off, the adrenaline rushes and he lashes out with his hand.
Mr Scarpellini takes offence (1) that someone is criticising his driving and (2) that someone has touched his car, and also lashes out. Using a tonne of motorised metal, rather than his glove.
Yes, its an 'altercation', but in no way are the two actions proportionate/equivalent.
Judge Sylvia de Bertodano said: “This was an altercation with a cyclist. It matters not in the least whose fault it was.
Was this quote abridged or taken out of context because it makes no sense whatsoever for a judge not to be looking into matters and ascertaining who is to blame and punishing them appropriately.
I very much doubt that chain of events could occur, but feel free to dig up a case citation. Failing that, I'm sure it'll make the news in due course.
@vonhelmet - the Criminal Attempts Act 1981 governs the law on attempts and it doesn't give an exhaustive list of what crimes can be attempted and what ones can't. It simply states "if, with intent to commit an offence to which [the act applies], a person does an act which is more than merely preparatory to the commission of the offence, he is guilty of attempting to commit the offence". In English law one can have ones charge reduced from murder to manslaughter due to diminished responsibility, usually a recognised mental illness. therefore theoretically someone can plot a murder while in the throes of a mental illness, be unsuccessful in the murder, be charged with attempted murder and have the charge reduced to attempted manslaughter due to diminished responsibility
Ironically, now he has been banned for a year he may turn out into a cyclist. I live just off Myton Road, I wonder if he will use the useless cycle path or brave the road?
No, he won't turn into a cyclist. My money is on his just continuing to drive (without insurance and a licence). Or maybe on his appealing against the ban because he needs to drive for work, innit.
Just carrying a knife in the car, or a baseball bat is an offence as it denotes a prediction of a situation where you would use said weapons. Using the car to run people down in the absence of such weapons should be considered too.
Don't be ridiculous. How else are you supposed to get to a baseball game you're playing in? Or bring a kitchen knife back from a shop? I don't doubt that people have been killed with golf clubs. Do you suppose the police should arrest everyone carrying a bag of clubs?
Carrying something that can be used as a weapon is not the same as carrying a weapon.
That doesn't sit with...
...setting out to kill and heat of the moment. You can murder someone in the heat of the moment if you're aware that your actions are going to kill, surely? Hence, driving at a pedestrian/cyclist aware that the action could lead to death can be considered as premeditated and therefore murder.
Awaits a lawyer to confirm.
No. That would be voluntary manslaughter. Loss of control reduces murder to voluntary manslaughter. Look at s.54 of the Coroners and Justice Bill.
Please do your research before suggesting misinformation. Some of the misinformation in this thread is making me cringe.
What's the time limit to determine premeditated?
There's not. It's a grey area of law.
For example, if the motorist had gone home, calmed down, then found out where the cyclist lived, turned up in the night and killed him, that would be murder.
If he'd chased him in his car, calmed down a little, then spotted the cyclist and killed him, would that be manslaughter or murder?
It's all very grey. Which is why you should always make sure
1) You've got a good lawyer.
or
2) You just stick to killing cyclists
People confusing manslaughter and murder.
Attempted murder requires:
Death was desired outcome
Premeditated (i.e. he set out to kill the victim)
Manslaughter requires:
Death was the outcome
It wasn't premeditated (i.e. it was done in the heat of the moment)
Let's say hypothetically the cyclist had died - it would be manslaughter, not murder.
The actions in this case fit into neither of the above definitions as it was neither premeditated, and the victim isn't dead.
However, I would argue that there should be a common assault charge included, and prison time would be appropriate. It's disgusting that this person has had such a light punishment for what is such a serious offence.
@danthomascyclist - I'm sorry but your definitions are incorrect. Manslaughter is when death results from an act where the perpetrator was reckless as to whether death would be caused, ie if during a fight you push someone on to a road, you may not have intended for them to be hit by an oncoming car and killed, but you did a reckless act which put them in a position where they are likely to be killed. Murder does encompass what we would colloquially call heat of the moment decisions, ie if during a fight scenario with a stranger you only just came across you became so enraged you picked up a nearby hosepipe and started bludgeoning someone to death. You may have not intended to kill anyone when you left the house that morning, and indeed never met the man before that you ended up killing, but because at some point you made a decision to kill, you are guilty of murder.
An attempted crime is when you intend to do something but the act is not completed, so the non complete act in both attempted murder or attempted manslaughter is the killing. Using the same examples above, attempted murder would be if you started bludgeoning the victim but he does not die, and attempted manslaughter would be if you pushed the victim onto a road, a car hit them but they survived.
I'm not sure I agree with all your definitions either. For one thing there's definitely no such thing as attempted manslaughter, because you definitely can't attempt to accidentally kill someone. I'm also not entirely convinced that pushing someone into the road in the course of a fight whereupon they happened to get hit by a car would land you with a manslaughter charge, but this is obviously getting into a much more nuanced area.
Pages