Driver pushes cyclist under bus, escapes punishment

[Mr Jack]

You can read the full BBC news story here: Gap in the UK's law on cycling?

The short version is this, the driver had stopped and opened his door into a cycle lane without looking. A cyclist collided with the door, fell under a bus, and was killed. The police charged him with manslaughter but the jury didn't convict.

I'm interested in OCUK's thoughts on the matter.

It seems to me that the driver is guilty of a criminal offence. His negligence led directly to the death of the cyclist and he was reckless in his duty of care to more vulnerable road users around him. However, it's not clear to me that manslaughter is really the appropriate charge. I'm pretty sure almost everyone has opened a door without looking properly at least once in their lives; and, in almost every case, it's the kind of slip-up that goes unpunished. This cyclist, and the driver, got unlucky.

Does the law on careless driving need updating to include situations like this? Do we need a more general law providing an offence equivalent to "death by careless/dangerous driving" that applies outside of the motorcar?

 

[d_brennen]

Accidents happen. If an apple fell out of a shopping bag you carelessly packed and an old biddy slipped to her death, would you expect to serve up to 25 years inside?

 

[Mr Jack]

Accidents happen. If an apple fell out of a shopping bag you carelessly packed and an old biddy slipped to her death, would you expect to serve up to 25 years inside?

Failure to check before opening your door is a little more than an accident; it's failing to do something you should be doing to ensure the safety of others.

 

[fornowagain]

I'm sure there's plenty of laws that would fit endangerment one way or another, but that just sounds like an unfortunate (for the cyclist) accident.

 

[End Creditz]

Mr Aydogdu had added a tint to his car windows which reduced the visibility to 17%. During the trial, he admitted he made a mistake by not looking in his mirror - but he insisted that he had only opened the door wide enough to turn his head and see traffic.

That's the bit that stands out for me. Maybe with a legal, or zero, tint level he might've seen enough to spot the bike before opening the door for a clearer view as even the twitch of a door is enough to make most of us wobble, be it on a bicycle, motorbike or behind the wheel of a car/van/lorry. Could be the tiniest of wobbles most of the time but with so little tyre to road surface contact it's easy as anything to be an accident on a bicycle.
Driving without due care and attention would seem appropriate, even stationary, as he's still in charge of the vehicle in the same way as drunk in charge can apply.

 

[The Running Man]

SO you could ram someone into another car and if they die its the other person or no ones fault?

Of course it shouldnt matter which part of the car you ram someone with, be that a door, wing, bonnet etc...

 

[GeX]

Sounds like the bus was too close if it couldn't stop, or the driver wasn't paying attention and take avoidance action.

The jury had the full facts and acquitted him in an hour - I highly doubt anyone else is going to come to any kind of impartial conclusion based on what the press has reported.

 

[Morba]

Sounds like the bus was too close if it couldn't stop, or the driver wasn't paying attention and take avoidance action.

The jury had the full facts and acquitted him in an hour - I highly doubt anyone else is going to come to any kind of impartial conclusion based on what the press has reported.

Agree with that. It was decided pretty quickly so there must be more than just what the article says.

 

[Dogbreath]

Driving without due care and attention would seem appropriate, even stationary, as he's still in charge of the vehicle in the same way as drunk in charge can apply.

You have contradicted yourself. If someone was caught drunk driving, they would face a driving under the influence charge. If they were not driving then the offence would be drunk in charge.

How can a driving charge stand in this case when he clearly wasn't driving? You need an offence of "Being in charge without due care and attention", which doesn't exist.


With the limited details available it sounds like the bus was likely following too close to be able to stop in time, but there is no mention of the bus driver being charged with anything.

One thing I would say is that the title of this thread is plain wrong, and (deliberately) inflammatory. It makes it sound like someone deliberately pushed a cyclist under a bus, which would be murder.

 

[trojan698]

Tough one, but next time I kill someone I'm using this scenario!!

Surely manslaughter is accidental killing anyway? The driver should've been convicted, despite how much the jury (I'm sure they were all motorists) sympathised.

 

[d_brennen]

Failure to check before opening your door is a little more than an accident

Yes, a little. What isn't answered as far as I can see is how the cyclist came into contact with his door. The cyclist was in the bus lane, the driver parked next to the bus lane. Either he had massive doors (he stated that he cracked the door enough to poke a look down the road, something I've done many a time) or the cyclist was too close to his car

 

[trojan698]

My mate got a car door opened on him and his head landed on a fence spike, went up his lower jaw into his mouth.

Drivers need to be more aware. Cyclists are not second class road users, despite what you pay in tax, insurance, and fuel.

And, with the ever rising cost of fuel, there will only be increasing numbers of cyclists.

Plus it's good for you. Everyone should go buy a bike right now. £500 minimum spend, anything less is just a waste. It's like supporting Farnborough FC, total waste of time.

 

[The Running Man]

Didn't Patrick kluivert get found guilty for manslaughter whilst driving? Think he got community service and lost his license. This case sounds like it warrants that kind of sentence minimum ..

 

[Gribs]

The problem with these sort of incidents is that juries won't convict as they think it could be them in the dock. It's the same reason we have the stupid offense of causing death by dangerous driving rather than just manslaughter.

 

[Westyfield2]

I thought the general rule was that if you drive into an open car door (whether it had been open for 0.001 seconds previously or 10 seconds) it's your fault as you should have been driving slow enough to stop in time, or wide enough for you not to hit the door? Don't see why it would be any different for a cyclist going into a door then.

That said, surely the bus should have been keeping back enough to stop in-time incase the cyclist fell off from a pothole or wobble anyways?

 

[Stretch]

That said, surely the bus should have been keeping back enough to stop in-time incase the cyclist fell off from a pothole or wobble anyways?

I agree with this. I've never been sure about the concept of combined bus and cycle lanes but if you're going to have them the busses need to be careful.

 

[Orion21]

Surely it depends which side you open the door to, i.e. if its the door next to the pavement, I wouldn't expect to check for someone going up the side of me, but then again there wouldn't be the gap left for someone to do that.

Does anyone actually check their mirrors to make sure no one has gone up the side of them (in a single lane situation while waiting to turn)? That is the responsibility of whoever thinks that was a good idea, I see too many cyclists going up the side of cars when they're waiting to turn or at traffic lights, in a single lane I do not expect someone to go up the side of me, nor am I particularly paying any attention to guard against it. I'll check when I'm doing something that puts the responsibility on me like changing lanes or opening a car door.

 

[Matt82]

Why would this car driver be any different to all the other car drivers? I'd bank on it that he didn't look, particularly so considering he was one of those idiots who drive about with tints on the front

 

[Richie]

no one has brought up the fact that it is actually an offence to open your car door without due care and attention yet? The offence is s.105 of the The Road Vehicles (Construction and Use) Regulations 1986

No person shall open, or cause or permit to be opened, any door of a vehicle on a road so as to injure or endanger any person.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1986/1078/regulation/105/made

 

[Meridian]

I thought the general rule was that if you drive into an open car door (whether it had been open for 0.001 seconds previously or 10 seconds) it's your fault as you should have been driving slow enough to stop in time,

As Ritchie points out, it's the opposite: if you open your door into someone else's path, it's your fault if there's an accident. Usually, however, the issue is assigning blame, but in this case a camera made it easy. And in this case the act of opening the door was the basis of the charge. The problem is, he wasn't driving so it not liable for things like Due Care and Attention. To successfully bring a manslaughter charge you need to overcome a load of legal hurdles, not just a single reckless act which results in a death. For a start, death must have been a reasonably foreseeable consequence of the act - but the circumstances here were very unusual.

Gribs also makes a solid point (which I've pointed out many times before): people are very seldom charged with manslaughter or murder for driving offences because juries very seldom convict for them.