Motorcyclist fined after fireball Cambridge car crash

[Chippy_Tea]

There isn't much detail in the BBC article about the speed of the bike so that may be the reason he was prosecuted my initial thoughts were the car driver caused the crash not the biker, even if the biker was going too fast the car driver shouldn't have cut across him.




Motorcyclist fined after fireball Cambridge car crash

A motorcyclist has been fined £120 and had nine points added to his licence after a crash with a car that saw his bike explode into a fireball.
Dashcam footage showed Stavius Gordon being thrown from his bike after the crash with a car travelling in the opposite direction in Ditton Lane, Cambridge, just before 18:00 BST on 9 September 2022.
The 31-year-old, formerly of Barnwell Road, Cambridge, lost a toe in the collision. He pleaded guilty to driving without due care and attention and driving without insurance at Cambridge Magistrates' Court.

 

[AJA]

The car has the civil liability imo. Plenty of time to see the motorbike, and stop the manoeuvre.

The motorcyclist was done for driving without a license, without insurance, and without due care and attention. I imagine the latter was tagged on because he's already in court.

 

[Chippy_Tea]

I imagine the latter was tagged on because he's already in court.

This is what is annoying me as an X biker who has seen too many of these type of crashes, how did the car driver get away with that if anyone was driving without due care it was the car driver, as you say they had plenty of time to stop.

 

[ale_crowe_holic]

Car definitely had time to check if it was clear, it hardly slowed down before making the turn across traffic.

Bike looked like it was shifting a bit.

Both equally to blame in my opinion but if the bike driver didn't have a license or insurance then the courts will go harsher on them.

9 points though will make zero difference to someone riding without a license, and the £120 fine is laughable. There really isn't a deterrent to this.

I take it the car driver didn't have any charges against him?

 

[AJA]

The motorcyclist was already in prison for a separate violent crime against his ex partner too.

 

[Chippy_Tea]

I take it the car driver didn't have any charges against him?

Nothing mentioned in the article so i assume not

I have now read several articles from different papers and non mention the car driver.

 

[The Baron]

Can not believe the car driver has got away with that!

 

[Clint]

But...driving the bike without a licence and insurance isn't excusable! He should have not been there.

 

[Chippy_Tea]

But...driving the bike without a licence and insurance isn't excusable! He should have not been there.

Correct but the outcome would have been the same had he been legal.

 

[Clint]

Though willfully driving with no licence and insurance placed him in the situation.
It's full of "what ifs.." The car might have stopped then the biker may have gone on and knocked over someone crossing the road while continuing to ride without a care. Which is what he was doing.

 

[MashBag]

I think the bike was going like stink Tbh and the driver had such little time to react if he could see it at all.

(I to an am ex-biker & have done court time)

 

[Rodcx500z]

Having been a biker for well over 40 years i agree he should not have been on the road, but i must question should the driver of the car be driving they had a lot of time to see that bike, i have always said for a long time, after an accident as well as the b test an eye test should be arranged before blame is apportioned and any charges brought

 

[Chippy_Tea]

the biker may have gone on and knocked over someone crossing the road while continuing to ride without a care.

The car driver has not been punished it makes no odds whether the rider should have been there or not the fact is he was and the car driver cut across his path the driver was guilty (the same as the biker) of driving without care but it would seem he got away with it, i hope the next person he/she takes out is as lucky as the guy on the bike.

 

[MashBag]

I disagree, I think the driver looked and there was no motorcycle to see due to the speed and the slight left hand bend of the road.

 

[Ross1974]

I'm a biker. He was speeding for sure. Looks like he overtook cars on the road ahead. Possible that the car didnt see him due to the speed, and proximity to the car in front, but its a difficult one. I'd say his "previous" meant the book was thrown at him to be honest but some blame does rest with the driver.

 

[MashBag]

Spot on. it is a difficult one.
Previous is not included if there was a jury.

 

[Ross1974]

Spot on. it is a difficult one.
Previous is not included if there was a jury.

True but they don't decide the outcome, just guilty or not. But I am basing this on Scots law, which may well be different. Judge can and will take into account previous incidents, if they're a factor.

 

[MashBag]

Agreed, But it isn't necessarily one charge. So they aren't necessarily guilty of all. Not binary at all.

 

[Davegase]

The playback speed of video gives a false impression.

 

[Sozzled Sab]

I have studied the footage a few times and concluded that due to proximity of traffic in front the car driver could not see that the road ahead was clear. He should have paused before making the turn.
PS it did look like the bike was shifting a bit especially as it looks like a residential area.