My first thought is that for the damage done and the failure to stop and render assistance actually it seems fair.
It's only harsh when you compare to the sentences other drivers have received for hitting (and killing) cyclists. At least you can say that this judge has got the message from parliament, that cyclists are vulnerable road users and there is a greater burden of care required from motor vehicle drivers towards them.
As a once-regular commuting cyclist (soon to be again, I hope) it is a welcome message.
no way its harsh ive read in interviews that chris would clock up 1400 ks a week on a roadie so surely he would appreciate the dangers of being a cyclist on the road. On top of that the fact that it was drink driving makes him a disgrace
.. that's a party they won't forget. Seems pretty harsh.
My first thought is that for the damage done and the failure to stop and render assistance actually it seems fair.
It's only harsh when you compare to the sentences other drivers have received for hitting (and killing) cyclists. At least you can say that this judge has got the message from parliament, that cyclists are vulnerable road users and there is a greater burden of care required from motor vehicle drivers towards them.
As a once-regular commuting cyclist (soon to be again, I hope) it is a welcome message.
no way its harsh ive read in interviews that chris would clock up 1400 ks a week on a roadie so surely he would appreciate the dangers of being a cyclist on the road. On top of that the fact that it was drink driving makes him a disgrace
I reckon not stopping after hitting someone is just about unforgiveable - add to it that he was drunk and he knew the guy and it's just insane!