- 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)'Low sun' explanation rejected after driver left cyclist with brain damage
A motorist who claimed that low sun had caused him to crash into a cyclist in the Scottish Highlands has been told that the sun would not have been low enough to affect his vision and that it would have been up to him to take more care if it had.
The Press and Journal reports that Cameron MacFadyen hit cyclist Mark Georgeson on the A832 between Muir of Ord and Tarradale Mains on June 28 last year.
Georgeson suffered a traumatic brain injury, multiple rib fractures and spinal injuries. He now suffers from cognitive and memory problems.
Fiscal depute Susan Love told Inverness Sheriff Court that MacFadyen made no attempt to slow down or manoeuvre around the cyclist in front of him.
“He stated at the time of the offence that ‘the sun caught my eyes and next thing I hit something’. He did not stop immediately but proceeded for another 0.2 of a mile before pulling in to a lay-by. It is noted this is probably due to being in shock.”
Sheriff Gordon Fleetwood said that at 7.30am the sun would not have been low enough to affect MacFadyen’s vision.
He also said that had he been blinded, it was up to him to stop, slow down or take more care.
Defending, Martin Black said MacFadyen was extremely remorseful for the offence and concerned for Georgeson. He said the 23-year-old roofer was a “new driver” and that his future employment was in doubt due to the inevitable disqualification.
Fleetwood fined him £450 and banned him from driving for four months.
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
- LeadenSkies 32 min 54 sec ago
The collision investigator needs a lesson in basic English. The bus driver COULD have seen the poor lad, not would have seen....
- hawkinspeter 46 min 14 sec ago
She's He's not my Queen King and certainly has no ownership of our language!
- bensynnock 1 hour 38 min ago
I see a car go through a red light at almost every single cycle at every single junction. ...
- chrisonabike 2 hours 36 min ago
Also don't forget - Sustrans are a charity *....
- chrisonabike 2 hours 48 min ago
Yes ... but (just due to the large numbers of people affected) this likely would only proceed in the UK at a very ... cautious ... pace....
- EK Spinner 3 hours 5 min ago
Arsehole in the van not with standing, how did they manage to get a risk assessment allowing a race (a group not a TT) group to be competing on ...
- RafaDy 3 hours 1 min ago
I think reviewer completely missed the point here trying to match bike's name with what it can do. Ribble is namin git's bike weirdly, the...
- Moist von Lipwig 6 hours 26 min ago
Bit of googling gone wrong in the article - the JAT is the Junction Assessment Tool, the Joint Approval Team appears to be a coutner terrorism...
- HKR 7 hours 41 min ago
Can't believe that child threw his bike on the floor at the end of that. Young people today have no respect... ;))
Add new comment
12 comments
Remorse is so very easy after the event, maintaining good driving so the event does not occur, seemingly almost impossible.
Defending, Martin Black said MacFadyen was extremely remorseful for the offense (Oh that's okay then) and concerned for Georgeson (how very good of him). He said the 23-year-old roofer was a “new driver” (aww bless, I'm sure he'll get better at it in time) and that his future employment was in doubt due to the inevitable disqualification (poor sausage, why doesn't he ask Mark Georgeson if he can borrow his bike for four months)
What is wrong with this country. 'Finally' it seems as if we get some sort of justice which doesn't accept the 'dog ate my homework/sun was in my eyes' SMIDSY excuse and when the punishment is doled out, it appears £450 is what life-altering brain damage and a number of broken bones is worth. FFS.
Should have had my collision last year, in which a motorist drove in to the back of me claiming low sun, in Scotland. At least it might have been taken seriously by the police, who did all they could to give the motorist a get of of jail card - including falsify the collision report, and the CPS wouldn't have suspended my private prosecution. But then again, everything is a postcode lottery in this country.
Interesting
I should have pushed it further but when a car clipped the bars of my fixie sending me into a ditch (a fortunately soft one) the police accepted the 'sun in my eyes'excuse. I argued initially similar to what the judge said had he been blinded, 'it was up to him to stop, slow down or take more care'.
While the reversal of a SMIDSY excuse is to be welcomed, the sentence is perplexing to say the least. He drove a motor vehicle in a reckless manner and as a result seriously injured an innocent party, some might say he was lucky not to have killed them, but gets a fine that seems more appropriate to shoplifting a bottle of vodka.
Is this a sentence thst can be appealed? Seems less than a slap on the wrist to me: £450 & a 4 month ban for causing " traumatic brain injury, multiple rib fractures and spinal injuries. He now suffers from cognitive and memory problems." But then again it was only a cyclist so...
I was surprised as well. What would have happened if the "Sun" defense had been accepted?
The price of a human life is very cheap, it seems.
"traumatic brain injury, cognitive and memory problems" and the driver only gets a £450 fine and four-month ban? Is this some kind of joke? Multi-year bans are required for incidents like these.
Only in Scotland mate, and they can pretty much ride anywhere too.
"He [the Sherrif] also said that had he been blinded, it was up to him to stop, slow down or take more care."
So is this the end to SMIDSY being accepted in court? And even if it is, does it make any difference when the penalties are so inconsequential anyway?