- 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
broken bike.jpgMotorist involved in fatal collision with cyclist banned – for driving home with a broken windscreen
One of the motorists involved in the collision that killed cyclist Declan Shea in Essex last year has been banned from driving and handed a suspended jail sentence for driving home from the scene with a broken windscreen.
Shea was cycling on Harwich Road in Elmstead towards the B1029 in Great Bromley on September 16, just after 8pm, when he was hit from behind. He was then hit by another vehicle travelling in the opposite direction and while police and paramedics attended, he died at the scene.
Gazette News reports that one of the motorists involved, Terence Smith, was cleared of any blame in relation to Shea’s death because it was proven it would have been impossible to have seen him.
After the crash, the 72-year-old drove his car home. It had sustained considerable damage to the windscreen and front bumper. He admitted a dangerous driving charge which related to the condition of the car.
Pictures shown in court revealed he would not have been able to see fully out of the broken windscreen and he was handed a one month suspended jail sentence and a 12-month driving ban.
Matthew Swash mitigating, said: “It was only yesterday Mr Smith was told he was not at fault at all for the cyclist’s death even though we have had 13 months of being constantly in contact with the Crown Prosecution Service and the police.
“He cannot sleep at night thinking about what he could have done better. His wife suffers from dementia – they have been married 48 years – so who does he think of when he think he will be in trouble? His wife.
“He had stopped at the scene but he then goes home, sees his wife and tells her something dreadful has happened.
“They were only away for five minutes because he lives just down the road. He has closed his business as a result of this and wants to move away from the area – he is reminded constantly of this.
“The only reason he has been charged with dangerous driving is because the windscreen is in such a state of disrepair. There is no doubt he was suffering with shock at the time.
“He arrives back at the scene and is there before the police and says he is the one responsible for this. This is the single most difficult thing he has had to face in his life.”
Campaigners have previously raised concerns about a blackspot near to where Shea was hit. They have been calling for the speed limit to be cut to 30mph.
Alex has written for more cricket publications than the rest of the road.cc team combined. Despite the apparent evidence of this picture, he doesn't especially like cake.
Latest Comments
- jamesha100 1 hour 2 min ago
I have been in Belfast for work this week and have been shocked by the congestion around the city centre. There are lots of frustrated drivers...
- David9694 1 hour 24 min ago
Cyclists should be made to have insurance etc https://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/news/24757516.four-vehicles-seize...
- A V Lowe 1 hour 55 min ago
On a bus the driver has a fully glazed double set of doors that give a direct view of any cyclist or pedestrian travelling right into the left side...
- matthewn5 2 hours 21 min ago
A friend in my cycling club has a new Ribble Allroad, I think the model with 105, and when I asked how he was finding it (before reading this...
- Rendel Harris 2 hours 30 min ago
Well yes but that's if you're looking at an equation x = n x 3 where n is any number less than 5. If you're looking for a number that is three...
- check12 3 hours 47 min ago
Get them back? They've never gone away for me, cheap tdf winning bikes on eBay with rim brakes and cheap rim brake aero wheels, just don't tell...
- Simon E 4 hours 30 min ago
It used to be called Buy Nothing Day as a protest against the the Black Friday discounting madness. The constant BF adverts, promos and stuff...
- chrisonabike 6 hours 46 min ago
Apologies - you're quite right! Something about presentation and comprehension...
- wtjs 7 hours 6 min ago
You can find out whether they're lying about 'taking action' by asking them what they actually did. When they refuse to tell you, citing various...
Add new comment
21 comments
Yes, according to the article you must drive at 60mph on that road "the 60mph Harwich Road" - ffs
UPDATE
https://www.gazette-news.co.uk/news/17268481.cyclist-killed-in-crash-was...
There we have it - wear a helmet and get hit at 60 mph and you just walk away.
Whilst I strongly think lights are a necessity at night, I strongly question whether 60 mph on this road enables a driver to stop within the visibility they have.
What was ther driver's eyesight like?
Not convinced by the police test - would they have stopped even if the PC was lit up ?
In the reconstruction, forensic collision investigator PC Kat Burke said, “I couldn’t see him or the bike, all I could see were the yellow flashes from the reflectors" - Erm: doesn't that mean that she could see him?
In the case involving my colleague David Irving the driver of the vehicle who ran him over wasn't prosecuted. He was immediately behind the driver who knocked him off, who was acquitted at trial because low winter sun m'lud
I was involved in a similar accident myself recently, i.e. knocked off my bike by a car running in to the back of me and throwing me down the road and tumbleing across the path of oncoming traffic to end up on the offside verge. Thankfully escaped any serious injury, and when the police were notified that my condition was non-life threating or life changing they were more concerned about the state of the driver than my condition.
Expecting the elder lady driver to be let off as "it would not be in the public interest" to charge her. Not even going to bother giving a statement if the police get in touch following up the incident as it'll be a complete waste of time. Police and judiciary don't care whether you live or die.
Waiting on Prince William being killed or put in to a veggie state while cycling as then something might get done.
I was hit by a car a fortnight ago. I was pretty much uninjured but my bike was written off. I spoke to the police on the day, and filled in a form that they sent me. I had an independent witness and the driver admitted fault, which helps. She's being sent on a driver improvement course, for what that's worth, and I've already got a new bike as her insurance paid out the same week.
So give your statement. Even if the driver who hit you "only" gets sent on a course like that, some good will come of it.
I guess that it is all just conjecture following the reporting. As per above poster; "Cyclist dies, no one cares." Move on now!
Cyclist dies, no one cares. More on that story never.
To be fair, making allowances all around, Sunset was at 7pm, so if it was overcast and the cyclist had no lights it may well have been very very difficult to see the cyclist. If the old guy was the first to hit Terence, and at his advanced age, the shock (it says he stopped) may have meant he carried on home and then returned and (importantly) claimed responsibility to the police. I think in reality it may not be reasonable to expect much more of the elderly gentleman.
This doesn't mean I think it's right in any way for him to have been cleared of responsibility for the cyclists death (allowing for the inadequacy of the journalism, the court's ruling may not have been that it was "impossible" to have seen the cyclist). I just think that all things considered his actions post event may have been reasonable. Perhaps his son did encourage him to return. The important thing is that he did. My mother is elderly and recently hit a lump of firewood that fell off a truck in front. She carried on driving 10 miles to a garage to get her car checked. The guy in the garage wouldn't let her drive any further as the damage to the undercarriage was such that it made the car unsafe. I asked Mum (she range me from the garage) why she hadn't stopped to check the car and she wasn't able to give me a coherent explanation. She was in shock. I expect the court was able to extend that kind of allowance to the driver for his actions after the incident. Again, I don't thnk it is reasonable that he was cleared of responsibility for the cyclists death if he was the first driver, but I think the outcome is proportional to what happened after the accident.
I posted the update to the original roadcc story about a week ago.
I have subsequently found that no detailed records are kept of magistrate's courts proceedings, only the outcome of the case.
"Terence Smith, was cleared of any blame in relation to Shea’s death because it was proven it would have been impossible to have seen him."
We don't know if that was said in court or whether that is the journalist's view. Suffice to say the standard of journalism particularly in the online version of the paper is not very good.
It would have been dark at 8pm, perhaps that came into it ?
I drove along that road a couple of weeks ago. There is one dip where a slight amount of care is needed and the odd building entrance.
It is very unclear why the cyclist was hit.
So, was the windscreen broken before the incident took place which made it impossible to see the cyclist? If so is this not a manslaughter case? They tried to pin this charge on a cyclist with an unroadworthy vehicle, who incidently was found guilty of a lesser charge and was imprisoned in a young offenders institution!
I'd guess that the windscreen got broken when the cyclist hit it.
If events happened as I think they did, then what happened was Mr Shea (the cyclist) was hit from behind by a driver and knocked into the path of Mr Smith. Mr Smith was unable to react/see Mr Shea and hit him again, breaking his windscreen (and front bumper). Mr Smith then drove home (with a newly broken windscreen) to inform his wife and then got his son to return him to the scene of the incident before the police had even arrived.
If that is true, then I'd consider Mr Smith as a second victim of this incident, but am now curious about the first driver to hit Mr Shea.
However, this is pure conjecture on my part.
I am still confused how it can be impossible for the driver not to see the cyclist when they are using the same road. Surely it is probable and possible that he was seen. If it was impossible was the cyclist invisible? From the Gazette News picture of the scene of the incident, the road is straight with open fields on either side.
I'm thinking that the cyclist was first struck by a motorist (presumably not named due to on-going court case) and knocked into the path of another driver who didn't have any time to see/react to that.
So, was Mr Smith the second person to hit Mr Shea? That would make some sense out of "impossible" to see if Mr Shea was knocked into Mr Smith's path with no time to react.
If so, it is a very strange wording - you'd expect it to be explicitly said Shea was knocked into Smith's path.
Yes. I'm thinking that the incident reports are being censored due to the on-going case, or at least I hope that the situation as otherwise it doesn't make much sense.
The intial report was
Coroner’s officer Jo Duggan said: “This gentleman was riding a pedal cycle towards the B1029 when he was struck by a vehicle from behind and then by another vehicle travelling in the opposite direction.”
So that would mean there is a third vehicle if there is another on going case.
Although the lastest article says
"Terence Smith was driving his Mercedes ML207 in Harwich Road, Great Bromley, when he was involved in a crash with cyclist Declan Shea and a passing Nissan Juke"
Not sure the journalist meant Smith hit the Nissan as well as Shea.
Whatever mitigation might be offered on behalf of Mr Smith, I still feel Mr Shea got the worse of it
and, from the original story:
To be clear, this is utter speculation on my part ...
but can you imagine the situation where the driver hits a cyclist, thinks "Crap! Best scarper.", gets home, son makes him do the right thing and return to the scene of the incident.
Also, bafflling how "it would have been impossible to have seen him".
So, his son drove him back to the scene in a different car - that's still a hit and run. How can that be less serious than driving with an obscured windscreen??
The news article doesn’t really explain how the collision was so unavoidable.