New laws have to go both ways
The collision between Charlie Alliston and Kim Briggs was a tragic and preventable accident. Now that the court case is over, let’s try and piece together what actually happened and how the situation might have been very different with just a few small changes.
Alliston was riding his bike along Old Street in Shoreditch, London . He was riding a fixed-wheel bike — illegal on the road without a front brake. Alliston’s bike had no front brake and therefore he was wrong to be riding it along a public road. He was going about 18mph — a fairly typical and safe speed for riding a bike along a street.
Briggs was on her lunch break from work. She was looking at her phone and stepped out into the road, apparently without checking that it was clear before she did so. She stepped into Alliston’s path and he shouted out a warning. He braked, slowing down to about 10–14mph. He swerved to avoid her and shouted again, but instead of moving out of his way she moved back into his path.
Their heads collided. Alliston was not wearing a cycle helmet. Somehow his injuries were minor but Briggs’s were “catastrophic” and sadly she died from them a week later.
In the ensuing court case, Briggs was acquitted of manslaughter but convicted of “wanton and furious driving” — an offence designed for horse-drawn carriages (after all, you don’t “drive” a bike, you ride it).
There are so many “what if”s about this case. If Alliston had been driving a car and Briggs stepped out into its path without looking, would Briggs have been punished as harshly? Martin Porter believes not.
If it was Alliston who suffered catastrophic injuries from that collision of heads and died a week later, would Briggs have been charged with manslaughter? Would the Crown Prosecution Service have dug up some other archaic law to prosecute her with and would she have been convicted of it? I have a strong suspicion that the answer to all those questions is “no”, even if his bike had been road-legal.
Too often when I ride around Southampton on my bike, pedestrians recklessly walk along or step into a cycle lane or road without looking and I am forced to take evasive action. This case shows that I wouldn’t have to be going very fast for someone to die from a collision caused by such an event.
If a reckless pedestrian steps out in front of a car, or even when a sensible pedestrian misjudges the speed of motorist traffic when crossing the road, they’re usually vilified. Yet if they do it to a cyclist, whatever happens, people see it as the cyclist’s fault.
Matthew Briggs, Kim’s widower, is today calling for a change in the law so that there are new offences for causing death or serious injury by dangerous or careless cycling, mirroring the similar offences that exist for driving motor vehicles.
He says, “I’ve lived in London for 28 years. I cycle in London, this is not a witch-hunt against cyclists. This is dealing with a specific issue of reckless cyclists.”
He’s right. There are reckless cyclists about and they give all of us cyclists a bad name. There should indeed be appropriate laws to prosecute cyclists when their recklessness causes death or serious injury.
But reckless road use is not limited to motorists and cyclists. Pedestrians should also be responsible for their actions and there should be appropriate offences for causing death or serious injury to cyclists, and damage to cycles, when pedestrians walk into a road or cycle path without looking, or rapidly change direction without warning on a shared use path.
The court heard that a front brake would have enabled Alliston to slow to a speed where the collision of heads might not have been life-threatening. Yet cycling along a road at 10–20mph can hardly be termed reckless or dangerous. It’s equally true that if Briggs stopped and looked before stepping into the road, the accident could have been prevented altogether — surely a better outcome than reducing the speed of the impact.
Had Briggs stepped into the road a few yards further along, Alliston would have had no opportunity to brake at all; the lack of a front brake on his bike isn’t (or, at least, shouldn’t be) the main point we take away from this tragedy.
Neither Briggs nor Alliston caused the accident on purpose. Both could have done things differently that would have prevented it or reduced its impact. And we don’t really know why a collision of heads resulted in catastrophic injuries to one and no lasting injuries to the other.
We do need laws that apply when people do stupid things on roads, cycle lanes and shared use paths. But those laws should apply to everyone.
But better still, let’s get away from the legal arguments and show a bit of common sense and respect for one another. Make sure your vehicle is road-legal. When crossing a road, put your phone down; stop, look both ways and listen.
And if somebody steps, or drives, straight into the path of an oncoming cyclist without looking and causes an accident, let’s have a little think about whose fault that really is, regardless of who comes off worse.
