Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


Five years for driver who killed cyclist while using mobile phone

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the The Scotsman site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 01 March 2008
A SPEEDING driver who was sending a text message when she hit and killed a teenage cyclist was yesterday jailed for four years.




Kiera Coultas, 25, a hotel manager, was replying to a message on her mobile phone when she hit Jordan Wickington, 19, a scaffolder.

The teenager, who was not wearing a helmet, stopped at traffic lights momentarily and went through them
on red.

Coultas admitted that her BMW was doing 45mph in a 30mph zone when she drove across a junction in Southampton shortly after 7am on 7 February last year.

Coultas, who has a four-year-old daughter, did not see him because she was replying to a text message from her estranged husband, Southampton Crown Court heard.

Mr Wickington, from Netley Abbey, Hampshire, died in hospital later that day.

The court heard that Coultas, from Hythe, in Hampshire, had received three fixed-penalty tickets for speeding – two of the offences were committed on a road leading to the junction.

She denied one count of dangerous driving but was found guilty by a jury.

The judge, Jeremy Burford, QC, sentenced her to four years in jail and disqualified her from driving for five years.

He said: "The serious part of your conduct was that you were sending a text on your mobile phone, having just received one."

He added: "It occurred at precisely the worst time because you failed to see the cyclist who was crossing the road, having gone through the red light, and travelling as you were at 45mph, you hit him, and he suffered injuries from which he later died."

Mr Burford accepted the "shock and remorse" and "severe symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder" Coultas had suffered since the crash.

He ruled that she would have to take an extended driving test after the five-year ban.

Daniel Hickman, 32, the dead man's half-brother, said in his victim impact statement, which was read to the court: "The major thing is knowing that whatever happens in my life from this point onwards … Jordan is not there to share the moment.

"He is always in my mind and any happiness I feel in my life is dampened by the fact my brother has gone at such a young age.

"I don't think Jordan's death has completely sunk in. I now know how it feels to lose someone so close to you. It's like having a part of you taken away."

His mother, Christine, in her victim impact statement, described the moment she was told that her 19-year-old son was not expected to live.

"Our lives changed forever on 7 February, 2007. As I held his hand and stroked his face as he slipped away, I felt as if someone had reached inside and ripped out part of my heart and soul."

Mrs Wickington described Jordan as "kind, thoughtful and chatty".





The full article contains 489 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 01 March 2008 12:22 AM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
  • Related Topics: Mobile phone driving ban
 
1

Isla Valassie,

01/03/2008 08:35:03
Why mention the cyclist was not wearing a helmet? The wearing of helmets in this country is not compulsory. The motorist was the one breaking the law and not the unfortunate cyclist. Is the Scotsman implying the cyclist contributed to their own death by not wearing a helmet?
2

Unimpressed one,

01/03/2008 09:29:03
Given that the cyclist was equally culpable, it's a bit of a draconian sentence. Suspended would have been more appropriate in the circumstances.
3

Isla Valassie,

01/03/2008 10:03:56
#2 So the cyclist deserved it? Motorists have an obiligation to be in full control of their vehicles at all times and be aware of any potential hazard. The mention of the lack of helmet is irrelevant to the circumstances.
4

HBOS Customer,

KILMARNOCK 01/03/2008 10:35:54
She was speeding and not watching the road. It could just as easily been a baby in a pram. She deserves a jail sentence as she was at fault.
We let motorists who kill and injury off too lightly in many cases
5

Loki - The Scourge of the Schemies,

EH1 01/03/2008 12:00:19
#4 So the cyclist deserved it?
How did you manage to reach such a conclusion?
The artice is clear that the cyclist rode through a red light. That does not absolve the motorist who had been driving in excess of the speed limit and who had been using her mobile telephone whilst driving but it does not absole the cyclist either who should not have passed a red traffic signal. It seems to me that both persons involved had not been mindful of their reponsibilities in respect of the law.
6

Reckless,

911 was an inside job 01/03/2008 12:11:45
"Five years for driver..."

"...was yesterday jailed for four years."

Any more offers?
7

Reckless,

The EU is a communist fraud 01/03/2008 12:13:47
BTW, a cyclist who jumped a red light should take 50% responsibility.

I dislike dangerous drivers and idiot cyclists. Send them all to gaol.
8

Bien E. Bien,

01/03/2008 14:26:27
It is my understanding that most cyclists believe that red lights do not apply to them.
9

Isla Valassie,

01/03/2008 16:08:18
#6 The article also implies that by not wearing a helmet the cyclist contributed to their own death
10

Artemis,

Embra 01/03/2008 16:40:07
#8 - Hard to make this particular cyclist take responsibility, seeing as he was killed. Hard to send this particular cyclist to gaol, seeing as he was killed.

Of course cyclists who jump red lights should be prosecuted and fined if they're caught. But, this bloke was hit by a driver who was doing 50% over the speed limit and texting while she did it. She was absolutely and deliberately reckless, and she had three previous speeding convictions. In this case, she hit a cyclist who had stupidly jumped a red light. She could just as easily have hit a child who ran into the street, an elderly person crossing the road slowly, or anyone else she didn't have time to see and avoid because she was going too fast and looking at her phone.

#9 - and it's my understanding that most motorists choose to ignore the bits of the highway code which say they should give cyclists plenty of room and treat them as the vulnerable road users they are.

The bit about him not wearing a helmet is a red herring. A helmet wouldn't have saved him, even if it was the law that he had to wear one - which it isn't.
11

Alternative (High Octane) Fuel Head,

Edinburgh 01/03/2008 17:19:55
I think you'll find that both of them share the blame in this case.

Remove any one of the factors and this may not have happened.

And before some of you start, this was one time when mobile phone use WAS causing a danger.
12

Artemis,

Embra 01/03/2008 17:28:53
Motorists don't just have a responsibility to drive according to the law. They also have a responsibility to drive in such a way that they can react to other people doing unexpected or stupid things. Doing 50% over the speed limit whilst texting through a junction removed her ability to react to the idiot cyclist who jumped a red light. Unfortunately, the cyclist is the one who paid the ultimate price for his stupidity, and hers.
13

Ross Fyffe,

Scotland 01/03/2008 23:15:11
red light means stop, that includes cyclists, he ran a red light, as far as I am concerned he committed suicide by car ............ the woman desrves a speeding ticket if it can be proven, the useof a mobile is a 50 quid fine, ........... get over it
14

Artemis,

02/03/2008 00:27:05
Red means stop, yes, and green means proceed with caution, not speed through at 50% over the speed limit whilst texting.

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.