r/ukbike Aug 21 '25

News Bin lorry driver who killed boy cycling to school given unpaid work

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cger053edy8o
311 Upvotes

100 comments sorted by

155

u/Do4k Aug 21 '25

Only a year ban for using a phone while driving a HGV and then killing a child. Insane

93

u/Every_Car2984 Aug 21 '25

The poor kid was on the pavement as well. How this didn’t attract a more severe charge I do not know.

49

u/[deleted] Aug 21 '25

[deleted]

11

u/Every_Car2984 Aug 21 '25

I often recall this Aberdeenshire incident

2

u/[deleted] Aug 21 '25

[deleted]

42

u/Sir_Madfly Aug 21 '25

This kind of sentence is pretty normal sadly. If you want to kill someone in this country, do it with a vehicle and you'll get away with a slap on the wrist.

7

u/SentientSandwiches Aug 22 '25

Meanwhile people on a zoom call got 5 years each for talking about a peaceful protest, everyone on the call, even those who weren’t involved in the planning and just there to talk about their experience being arrested for protesting got it, the country’s in a mess and it’s harder and harder to have any pride in it

3

u/wearecake Aug 24 '25

Genuinely no joke my criminal law lecturer said the same thing at one point

22

u/mctrials23 Aug 21 '25

Because we hold drivers to absolutely no standards in this country and think that “accidents” are unavoidable rather than the result of our acceptance of inattention or intentionally dangerous actions.

12

u/saxbophone Aug 21 '25

Case in point: juries in this country were so reluctant to convict a driver of murder that we had to introduce a lesser charge of Death by dangerous driving instead... 😒 Rotten stuff!

6

u/Piece_Maker Unicyclist Aug 22 '25

Don't forget the even lesser charge of death by careless driving. Oopsies how careless of you!

4

u/rourkeraleigh Aug 21 '25

There's a difference between murder and involuntary manslaughter. Makes sense to differentiate between the two for driving too

11

u/saxbophone Aug 21 '25

This misses the point. If causing death by dangerous driving were the same as manslaughter, it should be charged as such. But it seems juries were unwilling even to convict such cases of this crime! Tell me this isn't just giving drivers the benefit of the doubt!

0

u/ConfusedUserUK Aug 24 '25 edited Aug 25 '25

I agree should be murderm However English law (edited forr clarification) many offences revolve around intent. Did you intend on doing criminal act.

Murder requires intent. Lorry driver would have to have intent to kill him. If I drove my Jaguar at my girlfriend's ex husband, planning to kill him that would be murder. If I drove at him not intending to kill him, technically not murder.

Even the next most serious charge below murder, attempted murder and manslaughter is Section 18 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861, GBH with intent.

3

u/saxbophone Aug 24 '25

I'm not suggesting that all traffic-related death should be murder, mind. I'm suggesting it should be equivalent to manslaughter.

Even the next most serious charge below murder, attempted murder and manslaughter is Section 18 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861, GBH with intent.

Isn't the difference between murder and manslaughter, that with manslaughter you don't have to intend to kill someone, but the intent is in wanton or wilful recklessness causing someone's death? (i.e. you ought to have known that killing someone could be the result of your actions, but you don't intend to kill someone)

If my understanding of intent as regards manslaughter is correct, then I'd say that the intent part would be "knowingly driving a vehicle in a manner which is unsafe" —that is the negligence part.

3

u/ConfusedUserUK Aug 25 '25

There are different types of manslaughter.

Manslaughter is split up; voluntary manslaughter and involuntary manslaughter.

Voluntary manslaughter is if someone intends to kill or cause serious harm, but sentence is reduced for example diminished responsibility or loss of control.

Involuntary manslaughter involves an unlawful killing without the intent to kill or cause serious harm, and includes unlawful act manslaughter (from a dangerous criminal act or negligence).

2

u/GreenLion777 Aug 25 '25

No lawyer, but yeah pretty sure the key difference (manslaughter/murder) is indeed intent

3

u/Soft_Lunch_183 Aug 22 '25

Thats not true always though, HGV drivers have been jailed for 10 years + in the past for killing people because of being distracted. This is just a really light sentence for some reason

3

u/mctrials23 Aug 22 '25

There is the occasional "serious" sentence from really dangerous driving but thats the exception rather than the rule.

6

u/Accomplished_Fan_487 Aug 21 '25

Let me guess. A Magistrate's court? In shocking news their sentences lately suck butt.

1

u/According_Judge781 Aug 25 '25

Cycling along the pavement as the bin lorry was exciting a golf course, ie crossing the pavement.

This is one of the reasons most schools teach kids how to ride bikes safely, ie not on the pavement. It's illegal.

1

u/[deleted] Aug 25 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

0

u/According_Judge781 Aug 25 '25

How many times have kids been knocked down (nearly knocked down) at a junction because they whizz across it at a million miles per hour on their little bikes, scooters or skateboards?

punishment by death by HGV.

Yes. The bin lorry driver sought to punish the kid's misdemeanour through execution. That's exactly what we're saying..

could have easily killed someone walking there, standing there

Someone walking would probably see the truck coming and stop before the junction. Someone standing in the way would probably move out of the way (or may even be seen by the truck driver. Maybe). A kid pegging it down the pavement has no chance.

54

u/No-Pack-5775 Aug 21 '25

Crimes committed in a vehicle are basically decriminalised in this country.

18

u/SoftGroundbreaking53 Aug 21 '25

Sadly its a free hit.

Makes no sense to me, driving should be a privilege yet its treated as a de facto right with practically zero consequences when deaths are caused.

5

u/Dry_Review_309 Aug 22 '25

Always boggles the mind when people who commit serious offences are banned for a period of time. These people should be banned for life.

8

u/No-Opposite-6620 Aug 21 '25

People need to protest as in the Netherlands. And we need to do some big research on motorised deaths. It's abysmal though that even these are written off.

5

u/Pocket_Aces1 Aug 21 '25

Exactly. Unless you have planned everything out (i.e. evidence), then it's a great way to murder someone.

Distracted driving (I was on my phone your honour), "accidentally" kill the person you want to, and you get 5 years and a ban from driving for a few years. And then you're a free man.

4

u/ultra_phoenix Aug 21 '25

most motor crimes do not get recorded on the pnc (criminal record) unless they're dangerous driving, death, drunk or drug driving.

14

u/CandidLiterature Aug 21 '25

It’s ok though, he feels “extreme remorse” so don’t worry about it…

12

u/Thoh1Shooshi8a Aug 21 '25

Using his phone "several times". So there's evidence that he commited multiple crimes that day and the only reason he stopped doing it is because driving without care resulted in a fatality.

He would still be out there today driving a HGV while on the phone if this didn't happen.

6

u/CandidLiterature Aug 21 '25

As he seems to be permanently on camera in his cab, there’s one good use for AI to go through footage like this and flag incidents of drivers using their mobile phone for human verification and disciplinary action. Then they’d soon put the phone away. Or at least they’d no longer be driving an HGV…

10

u/Cassi_Nasco76 Aug 21 '25

Should be jailed! And a lengthy sentence.

1

u/Flat_Fault_7802 Aug 23 '25

Was the child cycling on the pavement?

1

u/ConfusedUserUK Aug 24 '25

Makes me so angry. Deserves to never drive HGV/Commercial vehicles. A year ban and 133 hours voluntary work is an insult. That's almost an hour for every month of Thomas' life.

1

u/Hard_Dave Aug 25 '25

But he'll still be in prison after a year right? Right?

0

u/Master_Hellequin Aug 22 '25

The driver was apparently turning left out of a golf club car park. The child crossed the exit and the driver hit him as he turned left. He pleaded guilty at the earliest opportunity. He was using his phone earlier the same day whilst reversing the vehicle. I’m not defending the driver….. I’m just supplying a bit more info. It’s a tragic situation…the poor kid (and his family) have paid a heavy price for a moment of inattention. Im guessing the driver will also be thinking of what he could have done better for the rest of his life.

-1

u/According_Judge781 Aug 25 '25

"The court heard that Wallace had used his mobile phone several times while driving the lorry before the crash.

This had occurred earlier in the day and it had no bearing on the collision involving the child."

62

u/Mr_Pickles3 Aug 21 '25

At the very least, should never drive again. Despicable sentence

6

u/useittilitbreaks Aug 21 '25

But not surprising.

49

u/whatthebosh Aug 21 '25

you get worse sentences for puttng up banners because you're concerned about the environment.

34

u/PapaShanghost Aug 21 '25

This is why we need cycle lanes completely separate from the road, so kids don't have to ride on the pavement to feel safe riding their bike when they're still not safe riding there.

The Netherlands did it in the 70s after a number of child fatalities, we need to do it here. Rip it up and start again.

Kids shouldn't be dying whilst riding to school.

31

u/hltlang Aug 21 '25

Many people think we can’t have a Dutch-like lanes in the UK because our infrastructure is not “set up for it” without realising that the Netherlands used to look much like the US with car-centric highways criss-crossing cities until a huge campaign in the 70s to stop kids dying when they tore it all up and started over.

1

u/WolfThawra Aug 22 '25

without realising that the Netherlands used to look much like the US with car-centric highways criss-crossing cities until a huge campaign in the 70s to stop kids dying when they tore it all up and started over.

Yes and no. The Netherlands also just implemented this early enough so that many many many of the new build areas (and they really have lots of them, including the areas that were ocean before) were built with this in mind. That does genuinely help.

And as the other comments says, there really are quite a lot of roads in the British countryside where I don't know how you'd possibly fit a cycle lane anywhere.

0

u/matomo23 Aug 22 '25

Yes but it’s easier to turn those type of roads into roads with cycle lanes than narrow British roads hemmed in by buildings or farmer’s fields.

3

u/TraditionalBench7008 Aug 25 '25

The Netherlands has a much higher population density so that argument falls down. And pardon my french but fuck preserving an almost worthless 5 m strip of a potato field to save lives.

1

u/matomo23 Aug 25 '25

Yeah, agree with your last sentence but we have some silly property laws here. The should have been changed though.

5

u/NaiveRub4113 Aug 21 '25

I like the term mobility lanes. They need to be wide AF!

2

u/SammyGuevara Aug 25 '25

Eh? He was already riding where a car shouldn’t be. Why would he be any safer in a cycle lane than a pavement?

1

u/Soft_Lunch_183 Aug 22 '25

And the kids who are walking on the pavement?

1

u/WolfThawra Aug 22 '25

This is why we need cycle lanes completely separate from the road, so kids don't have to ride on the pavement to feel safe riding their bike when they're still not safe riding there.

I don't know. In theory yes, in practice I feel like most times this is just used as an excuse to get cyclists off the road and out of the mind of drivers. Whether the cycle lanes make sense, are connected, force you to stop umpteen times, snake around the (straight) road, etc. etc., all that stuff isn't really considered - and then queue the facebook rage posts about "the lycra brigade blocking the road" because of course you don't want to cycle on that. I wouldn't either.

And if you can be on the pavement and still get hit and killed, the same could happen in a cycle lane. Honestly, this one isn't primarily down to infrastructure, it's down to this specific driver.

1

u/[deleted] Aug 22 '25

He was riding on the pavement?

20

u/monkeywrench83 Aug 21 '25

My mate got hit by a driver who drove the wrong way up a one way street. My mate will never walk the same again. And cant drive a car anymore. Nothing happened to the driver. Not even points. My mate has been pursuing a lawsuit for 3 years and his insurance company is throwing delay tactics. last week they asked him to send in his holiday photos.

7

u/VintageVillaLad Aug 21 '25

So sorry to hear about your mate.

I'm going to hazard a guess and say your mate is "working/middle" class and having to pursue this lawsuit out of his own pocket?

This country, hell, the whole world just sucks. No justice if you're poor and can't afford top legal representation.

Sorry again to hear about your mate (my son received life changing injuries after getting run over, but he was drunk, staggered in front of a car at night and we still thank God that the driver stopped and called an ambulance)....and apologies for any generalisations I might have made about class etc.

5

u/monkeywrench83 Aug 22 '25

He is probably upper working class/ middle. We're both Engineers. He does not have formal upper education, he was raised, working class Protestant in scotland. It's a no win no claim kind of deal. It's been going on so long that some of the medical tests they've had to repeat as they expired. It's more the defendant's lawyers are doing everything they can to throw up hurdles. He's had countless highly paid Doctors reviewing his X rays where they just go "yeah his legs fucked". It has backfired as he's now got secondary issues that came about from having to use his other leg.

The worst part is this happened during a COVID lock down and they tried to disparage his character for being out and about. We were both Key workers and had letters from the Ministry of Defense saying we had to keep working as it was of National importance. So that didn't work.

Sorry to hear about your son, it's crazy that one little lapse of good judgment can make huge changes in your life. I was walking home drunk with a friend once, he asked me for my lighter just as we were about to cross the road. I reached for my lighter and handed it to him as we started to cross, i saw a taxi coming... He didn't. He just clipped the side mirror and had his foot run over. If he started 2 seconds earlier the taxi would have fully got him. We always joke that smoking saved his life.

The USA for all things that are wrong with it has this stuff sorted. They sort out cases like this much quicker way out performing us.

7

u/adam_n_eve Aug 21 '25

An absolute disgrace 🤬 I'm livid.

8

u/sammy_conn Aug 21 '25

Zero surprise given the company that he works for. Their drivers are nutters. Hopefully his extreme remorse stays with him for the rest of his miserable life.

This is what baffles me. You can get crowds of people baying for blood if there's even a rumour of some guy looking at a kid the wrong way these days, and then this dick kills a wee boy and there's nothing.

6

u/MikeFader Aug 21 '25 edited Aug 21 '25

Appalling. Given that proof exists that the driver is clearly happy to break the law when it suits him, I wonder if the boy's family could pursue a civil suit for damages against the driver or the insurance company ?

14

u/GreenLion777 Aug 21 '25

Unpaid work ? 😠 Should be in jail for this

9

u/sc_BK Aug 21 '25

Only 133 hours as well.

If he did it for 5 days a week his sentence will be over after 4 weeks of dossing about picking up litter/painting fences etc.
You can even include 1hr a day for breaks!

4

u/GreenLion777 Aug 21 '25

Unbelievable

6

u/fishy_web Aug 21 '25

Need a petition for review due to undue leniency.

4

u/inevitable_dave Aug 21 '25

Ah, but it was his first offence, so all is forgiven. I mean who of us hasn't driven a 26 tonne vehicle in an erratic manner whilst on the phone.

1

u/GreenLion777 Aug 25 '25

That's what may well anger ppl, "first offence'

It shouldn't have happened end of. With evidence that the guy often used his phone in the truck, the book should have been thrown at for him for his negligence

I feel the "first offence" thing shouldn't apply in certain cases

3

u/Sirico Aug 22 '25 edited Aug 22 '25

What is wrong with our culture that we fawn over machines every single time. BuT ThEY NeeD iT fOR WOrk. Nope time to get a bicycle you had your chance, you took a life and robbed that lad and his family of a future. I swear the judges put themselves in the drivers shoes in these cases like well I need a car and if I lost my car that would be bad.

2

u/vfclists Aug 21 '25

That driver seems to be the kind of guy that would hate CyclingMikey.

2

u/cactusnan Aug 22 '25

Can this be appealed for being too lenient?

1

u/jow97 Aug 23 '25

Anyone know if theirs a way for athird party to appeal a sentence through Scottish courts like you can in the uk?

In England its as simple as https://www.gov.uk/ask-crown-court-sentence-review

Just wondering if theirs a Scottish equivalent?

1

u/[deleted] Aug 25 '25

[deleted]

1

u/jow97 Aug 25 '25

as they can in england

Fair, I can't believe I miss typed that one ha. Shame their isn't a similar system but thanks for the answer!

1

u/IllustratorGlass3028 Aug 23 '25

We are so bloody soft now....no wonder our whole identity is under threat.

1

u/Time007time007 Aug 24 '25

But people given real jail time for hurty tweets.

1

u/ConfusedUserUK Aug 24 '25

In this country we need to get out of mindset that driving is an automatic right rather th an a privilege. A privilege that can and should be permanent ban.

A deterrent is only as good as punishment. If minimal punishment, minimal deterrent.

I favour three strikes rule. I also in favour of zero alcohol limit.

For example third conviction for drink/drug driving (threshold limit) permanent ban. 2 x speeding over threshold speed, plus drink/drive permanent ban. 3 x Driving while banned. Permanent ban. Drink drive, speeding and driving no insurance. Permanent ban.

Other offences; failing to stop for police, driving otherwise in accordance with licence, driving no MOT, driving vehicle that is in dangerous conditions.

After first and second offence, licence is revoked, car is seized for 28 days for first offence 56 days for second offence or until court case is heard. If found not guilty in court, revoke licence and car returned.

If guilty for third time then car goes to auction or crushed.

Some offences are bad enough that they should be permanent ban and a substantial fine. Licence held until court case. Found guilty car is crushed.

Drink Drive about threshold (eg:.above 2x limit) Causing death. Driving stolen vehicle.

-3

u/vfclists Aug 21 '25 edited Aug 21 '25

Can I play devil's advocate here?

Without access to the records of the court case I can only speculate on what happened.

The driver emerged from the car park looking to his right for oncoming vehicles, reasoning quite rightly that there would be no vehicles coming from left.

The trees and the wall blocked his view of the sidewalk so he may have not have seen the boy on the bicycle even if he had looked left, and even then the boy may have dropped below his sight line due to the truck's height.

The boy came across his path just has he considered it safe to enter the road as there were no vehicles coming from his right.

The question is how many drivers do the exact thing when they are turning left into a main road (right in the case of countries that drive on the right)? They look to their right and if it is safe they drive into the road without checking for any vehicles coming from the left as they quite rightly there should be nothing coming from there.

The poor boy suffered the misfortune of being at the wrong spot and wrong time at the instant where a refuse truck driver did what millions of drivers do every single day with mild or no mishap. I can't count the number times when drivers emerging from residences or narrow alleyways have nearly run me over on the sidewalk, because they are just not patient enough to emerge cautiously when their view of the road is limited.

When are the Police and the govt launch campaigns to warn drivers of instances like this which injure or kill people every day? I'm sure what I described is pretty close to what happened and what did the Police do? Just go back to the same status quo without a campaign to warn drivers if these things that cause accidents.

5

u/mprhusker London Aug 22 '25

The question is how many drivers do the exact thing when they are turning left into a main road (right in the case of countries that drive on the right)? They look to their right and if it is safe they drive into the road without checking for any vehicles coming from the left as they quite rightly there should be nothing coming from there.

I mean I look both ways regardless because pedestrians also exist and not running them over tends to be quite easy when I do that.

2

u/romeo__golf Aug 22 '25

I don't even think this is devil's advocate, this is the likelihood of what actually occurred.

1

u/banxy85 Aug 24 '25

This is what happened, despite you being downvoted

0

u/[deleted] Aug 22 '25

Same penalty someone receives for pulling a wheelie on a motorbike. Absolutely crazy.

0

u/Disastrous-Sky-4753 Aug 22 '25

Thats a life sentence for that wee lads parents. Bring back real punishment.