CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Cycling News

Driver avoids jail over death of cyclist Sally Preece

(11 posts)

No tags yet.


  1. crowriver
    Member

    A 77-year-old driver whose mistakes caused the death of a woman taking part in a charity cycle ride has been spared jail because of his age. Kenneth McClelland overtook without making proper checks and collided with Sally Preece who was coming the other way on her bike in September 2014. Ms Preece, from Cheltenham in Gloucestershire, died of her injuries the following day.

    The crash happened on the A85 near Killin, Stirling. The 49-year-old cyclist was a week into a nine-day Land's-End-to-John-O'Groats cycle to raise money for the Alzheimer's Society. McClelland, from Largs in Ayrshire, had earlier admitted causing her death by careless driving.

    At Stirling Sheriff Court, the sheriff sentenced McClelland to carry out 300 hours of unpaid work, banned him from driving for five years, and ordered him to re-sit his test before ever driving again. Sheriff William Gilchrist said McClelland's offence could have led to imprisonment. "However, given your age, I do not think it would be appropriate to impose a short period of imprisonment, which would be essentially a matter of weeks," he said.

    More grim details at: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-tayside-central-35485674

    Posted 8 years ago #

  2. Tulyar
    Member

    Hopefully the cost of insurance and potential that at 82 he would not pass the current driving test will convince this man that there are ways to travel around without being a driver.

    Posted 8 years ago #

  3. Luath
    Member

    While I'd usually advocate prison for killing someone, I'm not sure it would achieve much in this case. As well as a lengthier ban to make sure he doesn't drive again, a hefty fine would be more appropriate. If he's driving an S40 R design he's clearly not short of a bob or two. Something like £50,000-100,000 would probably have a similar deterrent effect to prison.

    Posted 8 years ago #

  4. barnton-to-town
    Member

    Not sure I like your logic, Luath. If you do the crime, you do the time.
    Are you suggesting that, had the perpetrator had no money, they should go to jail, whereas in this instance, the (shall we say) murderer has a bob or two, so should pay to avoid jail?
    Someone being reckless, or simply careless, with a firearm and killing someone WILL almost certainly go to jail. I have no idea why you are likely to get off effectively scot-free when your weapon, unintended or otherwise, is a fekcin motorised vehicle.

    Posted 8 years ago #

  5. Kim
    Member

    The default sentence for anyone who causes a death while driving should be a life time driving ban, other penitentials could be added as required. But if you kill another person, you should not be allowed to drive again.

    The important thing to remember is that there is no right to drive, it is a privilege granted under licence. If that privilege is abused, then it should be withdrawn. Saying that it was just an accident should not be acceptable. The only defence should be unavoidable mechanical failure (ie failure of maintenance would not be an acceptable defence).

    Posted 8 years ago #

  6. 559
    Member

    It is manslaughter, unintentional murder. Sentence should reflect that.

    Posted 8 years ago #

  7. Luath
    Member

    @barnton-to-town I'm suggesting that as this guy seems to have a lot money you'd need to give him a large fine for it to have the same effect as a smaller fine would have on a less well-off person.

    Prison is used as means of delivering rehabilitation, deterrence, incapacitation and retribution. In this case, I think the first three are better delivered outside prison through education/testing (rehabilitation), fines (deterrence) and driving ban (incapacitation). I'd also argue that removing a significant amount of wealth from an individual that has very limited capacity to earn would deliver more effective retribution than what would be, let's face it, a fairly short prison sentence.

    Posted 8 years ago #

  8. Kim
    Member

    @559 in pedant mode I would point out that in Scotland we don't not have the offence of manslaughter, it is involuntary culpable homicide. But otherwise I tend to agree with you.

    Posted 8 years ago #

  9. barnton-to-town
    Member

    I believe the principal aspect of deterrence is to stop others from committing a similar crime. If you kill someone when driving and get jailed for it, that's more of a deterrence to others than some financial penalty.

    A financial hit, when someone has died because of your careless/dangerous driving? It's not enough. How much would you fine a billionaire for future deterrence? Or someone who is penniless?

    Not cycling related, but the likes of this demonstrates yet again how being the driver of a car seems to offer you a degree of protection from the law as well.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-35493964

    Found guilty of careless driving the result of which some people died ... but he's not guilty of causing deaths through careless driving? It beggars belief.

    Posted 8 years ago #

  10. crowriver
    Member

    Defendant claims he "couldn't remember" what happened. Coincidentally he happens to be a defence lawyer. A bit like claiming "no knowledge" of who was behind the wheel of a hire car, perhaps?

    Thankfully there's not been much sun this winter otherwise we'd be seeing the old favourite defence of "blinded by the light" so driver couldn't see where they were going and accidentally killed someone. Oh that's alright then, off you go here's a sharp telling off.

    Posted 8 years ago #

  11. 559
    Member

    @Kim, I stand corrected.

    @Crowriver, the chap in question is a Defence lawyer for motoring cases according to the firms website.

    Posted 8 years ago #

RSS feed for this topic

Reply

You must log in to post.


Video embedded using Easy Video Embed plugin