A driver who deliberately rammed a cyclist following an argument about a close pass has been given a suspended sentence for dangerous driving and assault occasioning actual bodily harm, the incident seeing the victim flung into the air and left with whiplash after complaining to the motorist about an earlier overtake, telling her he had it on camera and later striking her wing mirror after she again drove too close to him.

Sarah Torgerson was sentenced on Friday at Leicester Crown Court, Leicestershire Live (link is external) reports, and was told by recorder Justin Wigoder that she had "effectively ruined" the cyclist's life and the "very serious offence" would carry the "right sentence [... of] three to four years in prison", but due to mitigating factors she instead received a two-year sentence suspended for two years.

The victim thought he had broken his spine, such was the collision force, and described the incident as "like a hate attack" against cyclists, explaining that his bike worth £8,000 is unusable due to the damage and he "almost had a panic attack" when he tried to ride again post-recovery.

The incident happened on 2 February 2022, the man cycling south on Loughborough Road in Birstall when he was overtaken by two vehicles, the second being driven by 40-year-old Torgerson who close passed him.

As the traffic stopped he caught up with the driver and objected to the close overtake, telling her that he had a camera running and had filmed the incident.

In response, the driver stuck a finger up at the cyclist and both parties continued on their way. Moments later, at the Red Hill Roundabout, the driver stopped her Ford Focus very close to the cyclist who "reached out and banged down on her wing mirror".

Torgerson then rammed into the cyclist, launching him into the air and causing a heavy impact to his spine as he landed on the kerb and hit his head on the road. The driver, who it is reported has a previous conviction for dangerous driving from 2007, admitted ramming the cyclist when she phoned Leicestershire Police from the scene.

The man suffered whiplash and bruising, his bike written off and a watch worth more than £700 smashed. He also reported having to cancel a cycling trip to Mallorca.

In a statement heard in court, read out by prosecutor Eunice Gedzah, the cyclist said the incident had ruined his life and felt like a "hate attack" on him for being a cyclist.

"This incident felt like a hate attack on me. I feel hate towards cyclists is getting worse. We are people too," he said. "Since this incident, when I last went out on my bike I almost had a panic attack. I'm even a lot more nervous in a car, even when my wife's driving me. I'm not normally a nervous person. It's the fact she deliberately drove into me."

Torgerson's legal representation, Michelle Harding, said the cyclist had hit the vehicle's wing mirror "with some force because he felt she was too close to him" and argued the subsequent attack was partly explained by her client's mental health struggles.

"She turned her wheel into him and knocked him off his bike," Ms Harding admitted. "Her condition is not an excuse but goes some way to explaining why she may have behaved as she did."

Having heard the evidence, Mr Wigoder concluded "it's that serious" that under normal circumstances a motorist who acted as Torgerson did should expect to be sent to prison for three to four years as "cyclists are vulnerable and it's the court's first duty to protect them".

However, he decided Torgerson should not be sent "straight to prison" due to mitigating factors, including her mental health history, the fact she has two young children, and a doctor's opinion that she suffers with post-traumatic stress disorder that might cause "outbursts".

"I'm not going to send you straight to prison," Mr Wigoder said. "But what you did was to drive your car deliberately at a vulnerable cyclist. He thought he had a broken spine and, as you heard, you have effectively ruined his life. The one thing he really enjoyed was cycling, both to work and socially, and he can't do that now.

"This was a very serious offence indeed. I think the right sentence is three to four years in prison — it's that serious. Cyclists are vulnerable and it's the court's first duty to protect them."

Torgerson's two-year sentence is suspended for two years and she will be required to spend 30 days working with probation services. She was also banned from driving for two years and must take an extended retest in order to reclaim her licence.

https://road.cc/content/news/woman-avoids-jail-deliberately-ramming-cyclist-304777

Simon Mason <swldxer1958@gmail.com> wrote:

> A driver who deliberately rammed a cyclist following an argument about a
> close pass has been given a suspended sentence for dangerous driving and
> assault occasioning actual bodily harm.

> As the traffic stopped he caught up with the driver and objected to the
> close overtake, telling her that he had a camera running and had filmed the incident.

And what good did he think that would do?

> In response, the driver stuck a finger up at the cyclist and both parties
> continued on their way.

Fairy Nuff.

> Moments later, at the Red Hill Roundabout, the driver stopped her Ford
> Focus very close to the cyclist who "reached out and banged down on her wing mirror".

Now that was kinda stupid. Who gave him the authority to strike a car? and
under what law?

> The man suffered whiplash and bruising, his bike written off and a watch
> worth more than £700 smashed. He also reported having to cancel a cycling trip to Mallorca.

That’s a shame. While in Mallorca he could have reflected on the wisdom of
his actions.

And cyclists wonder why they are so disliked, the jumped-up Little Hitlers.

> https://road.cc/content/news/woman-avoids-jail-deliberately-ramming-cyclist-304777

--
Spike

However, he decided Torgerson should not be sent "straight to prison" due to mitigating factors, including her mental health history, the fact she has two young children, and a doctor's opinion that she suffers with post-traumatic stress disorder that might cause "outbursts".

Someone explain this to me. How can having mental health issues that render you fundamentally unsuitable for the responsibility of driving, knowing that, and yet continuing to drive regardless be used as a mitigating factor? She's had a doctor suggest that her mental health issues mean that she can't suffer the smallest conflict/disagreement without resorting to attempted murder, and she's using that as a defence?

Surely the fact that she continued to drive while in that mental state should increase the severity of the offence? That's like running someone over and trying to use "I was drunk" as a mitigating factor.

Simon Mason <swldxer1958@gmail.com> wrote:

> Someone explain this to me. How can having mental health issues that
> render you fundamentally unsuitable for the responsibility of driving,
> knowing that, and yet continuing to drive regardless be used as a mitigating factor?

You need it spelling out in words of one syllable?

> She's had a doctor suggest that her mental health issues mean that she
> can't suffer the smallest conflict/disagreement without resorting to
> attempted murder, and she's using that as a defence?

Are you absolutely sure that that is what the doctor actually said? Or have
you gone into hyperbole to support your position?

> Surely the fact that she continued to drive while in that mental state
> should increase the severity of the offence? That's like running someone
> over and trying to use "I was drunk" as a mitigating factor.

No, it isn’t equivalent in the slightest.

--
Spike

cbrndc | 1 hour ago
5 likes

The Judge said, "I think the right sentence is three to four years in prison — it's that serious" but she didn't get that sentence. Am I missing something?

QUOTE: The driver, who it is reported has a previous conviction for dangerous driving from 2007, admitted ramming the cyclist when she phoned Leicestershire Police from the scene. ENDS

At least she phoned the police to hand herself in - probably why her two year sentence got suspended.

On 30/10/2023 08:08 pm, Simon Misogynist wrote:

> QUOTE: The driver, who it is reported has a previous conviction for dangerous driving from 2007, admitted ramming the cyclist when she phoned Leicestershire Police from the scene. ENDS
>
> At least she phoned the police to hand herself in - probably why her two year sentence got suspended.

Your latest nickname is obviously well-deserved, M'Lud.

On 30/10/2023 06:27 pm, Simon Mason wrote:

> cbrndc | 1 hour ago
> 5 likes
>
> The Judge said, "I think the right sentence is three to four years in prison — it's that serious" but she didn't get that sentence. Am I missing something?

Where to start...?

leedorney | 6 hours ago
1 like

Sarah Torgerson is CLASS BITCH of huge proportions...so the way she acted basically means all drivers are mental cases and will avoid prison??

Simon Mason <swldxer1958@gmail.com> wrote:
> leedorney | 6 hours ago
> 1 like
>
> Sarah Torgerson is xxxxx xxxxx of huge proportions...so the way she acted
> basically means all drivers are mental cases and will avoid prison??

And they wonder why women aren’t taking up cycling.

Cyclists, eh?

--
Spike

chrisonatrike replied to Left_is_for_Losers | 2 hours ago
2 likes

Of course that's pragmatic, especially as drivers in the UK aren't trained, tested and licenced.

Ah - I forgot, it's not a licence to operate dangerous machinery in a public space, it's a one-off right (sic) of passage. And if you break the conditions you'll rightly be told "do this again, and we'll be forced to tell you not to do it again!"

As you were!

Simon Mason <swldxer1958@gmail.com> wrote:
> chrisonatrike replied to Left_is_for_Losers | 2 hours ago
> 2 likes
>
> Of course that's pragmatic, especially as drivers in the UK aren't
> trained, tested and licenced.

> Ah - I forgot, it's not a licence to operate dangerous machinery in a
> public space, it's a one-off right (sic) of passage. And if you break the
> conditions you'll rightly be told "do this again, and we'll be forced to
> tell you not to do it again!"

> As you were!

It could be worse, like the untrained, untested, unlicensed cyclists riding
unregistered, untested, and untaxed killer machines.

--
Spike

Avatar
Bungle_52 replied to Left_is_for_Losers | 2 hours ago
2 likes

I agree to a large extent. I don't confront drivers any more and I've stopped hitting wing (sic) mirrors, I just submit the footage. In an ideal world this should be enough but the response from the police is so patchy and inconsistent that submitting footage is no guarantee of action and in many cases the driver "gets away with it" and may not even realise they have done anything wrong.

Under these circumstances it is at least understandable that some cyclists feel the need to make their feelings known to the driver. If only the police would be more proactive and consistent with submiited footage it would not be necessary

Simon Mason <swldxer1958@gmail.com> wrote:
> Avatar
> Bungle_52 replied to Left_is_for_Losers | 2 hours ago
> 2 likes

> I agree to a large extent. I don't confront drivers any more and I've
> stopped hitting wing (sic) mirrors

CLEVER CHAP to give up the illegal activities.

--
Spike

What the heck is wrong with people? I mean come on. She should be banned from driving for 5 years and then have to pay for at least 20 lessons and pay for and pass the driving tests again.

No, she should never be allowed to drive again. This a second conviction for dangerous driving. I find this aspect of the sentencing worse than the lack of custodial sentence, which is bad enough.

Simon Mason <swldxer1958@gmail.com> wrote:
> What the heck is wrong with people? I mean come on. She should be banned
> from driving for 5 years and then have to pay for at least 20 lessons and
> pay for and pass the driving tests again.
>
> No, she should never be allowed to drive again. This a second conviction
> for dangerous driving. I find this aspect of the sentencing worse than
> the lack of custodial sentence, which is bad enough.

What would you dole out as a sentence in this case like this:

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1975_Dibbles_Bridge_coach_crash>

QUOTE The proprietor of the coach company, Norman Riley, was later fined
£75 (equivalent to £669 in 2021[7]) for running a motor vehicle with
defective brakes.[8] UNQUOTE.

--
Spike

You are quite right, the appropriate repsonse to her two vehicular assualts would have been to drag her out of her car and then use it to launch her into the air and cause her very serious injuries.

If she has previous for Dangerous Driving why the hell has she not been sent to prison?? She's proved she should not be allowed to drive so instead of a serious ban (and prison!) the judge has just given her a short ban and used the reason she should not be driving as an excuse. Lunacy.

Simon Mason <swldxer1958@gmail.com> wrote:
> You are quite right, the appropriate repsonse to her two vehicular
> assualts would have been to drag her out of her car and then use it to
> launch her into the air and cause her very serious injuries.

And what would you suggest is done to the cyclist who "reached out and
banged down on her wing mirror"?

> If she has previous for Dangerous Driving why the hell has she not been
> sent to prison?? She's proved she should not be allowed to drive so
> instead of a serious ban (and prison!) the judge has just given her a
> short ban and used the reason she should not be driving as an excuse. Lunacy.

Another cycle-group lawyer…

--
Spike

On 31/10/2023 04:15 am, Simon Mason wrote:
> leedorney | 6 hours ago
> 1 like
>
> Sarah Torgerson is CLASS BITCH of huge proportions...

....says Simon Misogyny.

On 31/10/2023 11:16 am, Spike wrote:

> Simon Misogyny <swldxer1958@gmail.com> wrote:

>> chrisonatrike replied to Left_is_for_Losers | 2 hours ago
>> 2 likes
>>
>> Of course that's pragmatic, especially as drivers in the UK aren't
>> trained, tested and licenced.
>
>> Ah - I forgot, it's not a licence to operate dangerous machinery in a
>> public space, it's a one-off right (sic) of passage. And if you break the
>> conditions you'll rightly be told "do this again, and we'll be forced to
>> tell you not to do it again!"
>
>> As you were!
>
> It could be worse, like the untrained, untested, unlicensed cyclists riding
> unregistered, untested, and untaxed killer machines...

....especially along FOOTways and in PEDESTRIAN-ONLY areas, let alone
straight through RED traffic lights and the wrong way in ONE-WAY streets.

[Emphases for the benefit of Mr Misogyny.]

On 31/10/2023 11:21 am, Simon Mason wrote:
> Avatar
> Bungle_52 replied to Left_is_for_Losers | 2 hours ago
> 2 likes
>
> I agree to a large extent. I don't confront drivers any more and I've stopped hitting wing (sic) mirrors, I just submit the footage. In an ideal world this should be enough but the response from the police is so patchy and inconsistent that submitting footage is no guarantee of action and in many cases the driver "gets away with it" and may not even realise they have done anything wrong.
>
> Under these circumstances it is at least understandable that some cyclists feel the need to make their feelings known to the driver. If only the police would be more proactive and consistent with submiited footage it would not be necessary

Who do you think you are?

If "think" is the right word, of course.

Are drivers symmetrically entitled to point out where you are going
wrong (in their opinion, which is all that you are proposing to do)?

On 31/10/2023 11:28 am, Simon Mason wrote:
> What the heck is wrong with people? I mean come on. She should be banned from driving for 5 years and then have to pay for at least 20 lessons and pay for and pass the driving tests again.
>
> No, she should never be allowed to drive again. This a second conviction for dangerous driving. I find this aspect of the sentencing worse than the lack of custodial sentence, which is bad enough.

Please point out - if possible - where can be found the legal provisions
to which you are referring (if any).

adamrice replied to BalladOfStruth | 19 hours ago
0 likes

Because there is literally no other way for a person to get around. Barring her from driving a car would be an immense hardship.

/sarcasm.