170mph death crash video biker escapes jail
Suspended sentence for man caught filming speeding antics prior to fatal accident
The view from Bowden's video camera
|
A CORNISH BIKER who filmed himself riding his 1000cc sports machine at speeds in excess of 156mph, prior to a fatal accident involving a fellow motorcyclist, has been given a suspended jail sentence.
This morning's BBC News reports how Fred Bowden, 42, videoed himself and friend Andrew Prowse while riding at speeds of more than 156mph in Cornwall in July 2008.
Later that day Mr Prowse was killed instantly when he collided with a car at Tolvaddon. Police say the incident was caught on Bowden's tank-mounted video camera.
Bowden was given a 51 week prison sentence, suspended for two years, and a three year ban.
Discuss this story
Idiot had it coming - I feel sorry for the people he hit, leading to his head and legs being torn off. One less twat on our roads - tosser! Even I'd baulk at a comment like that. Agree he was doing a daft maneouvre, but we've all been there. Death is too harsh a lesson to learn from.
Posted: 12/06/2009 at 23:09
bah nevermind cant get the link working heres the link to copy and paste http://www.yourfilehost.com/media.php?cat=video&file=09240613_headloose.wmv
Posted: 13/06/2009 at 00:28
Idiot had it coming - I feel sorry for the people he hit, leading to his head and legs being torn off. One less twat on our roads - tosser! Even I'd baulk at a comment like that. Agree he was doing a daft maneouvre, but we've all been there. Death is too harsh a lesson to learn from.
Agreed...what a dreadful thing to say. That's like saying people in McDonalds deserve to die of fatness. What a goon.
Posted: 13/06/2009 at 12:35
Idiot had it coming - I feel sorry for the people he hit, leading to his head and legs being torn off. One less twat on our roads - tosser!
Fuck off and die troll.
RIP Andrew Prowse.
Posted: 13/06/2009 at 14:55
Am I missing something here? A car driver moved out to overtake without using it's mirrors!! and caused a death FFS Take yourself outside a point it at your head Shooter. 
Posted: 14/06/2009 at 05:44
Am I missing something here?
I think so. A car driver moved out to overtake without using it's mirrors!!
Where did you get that idea from? IF the car driver did pull out to overtake how do you know they did not use their mirrors? At @156 mph the bike would be travelling at 230 ft/second so would have been a tiny dot in the mirrors when the driver looked anyway. and caused a death FFS
The cause of the riders death was the choice they made to ride that fast on public roads in the first place.
Posted: 14/06/2009 at 08:33
we have all been there riding quick when we shouldnt but the death off this lad is the last thing from anyones mind .
Perhaps that is the problem. Some people don't think enough about the consequences of their actions. If you choose to risk your (and others) lives by behaving recklessly you should accept that the outcome might not be what you expected. I'm sorry for the stress he may have caused the innocent driver of the vehicle he clipped and the camper van he went under. I'm sorry for the anguish he has caused his family and friends. But I don't particularly care that he has died. He chose to do what he did. I'm not responsible for his behaviour nor am I grieving over his demise.
Posted: 14/06/2009 at 08:43
Did you even look at the video? The 156mph referred to wasn't the speed he was doing when the accident happened.
Posted: 14/06/2009 at 08:57
Did you even look at the video? The 156mph referred to wasn't the speed he was doing when the accident happened.
No, he was doing between 80 - 100mph (based on the indicated of speed of his mate and allowing for overreading). How can you tell that the car driver didn't use his mirrors? Did you see that the car was indicating to pull out, because it was? Did you also notice how the car at the very front had moved left and slowed to allow the overtake? You probably won't see any of this, because you are biased in your view. The biker carried out a daft manoeuvre, with horrific results, but he put himself in that position. I have great sympathy for him and his family, but facts are facts. The trial was for the survivor's speeding escapades. Given that there was a death, the police will have used this video in their decision on whether to prosecute the driver of the car or not. Clearly they believe that the blame lies with the rider who died and not the car driver and I agree. Whilst witnesses (independent or not) will have their own take on what happened and acounts can vary hugely, a video just shows what happened, with no axe to grind, so is truly independent. FJS is right and amazingly the point was made courteusly.
Posted: 14/06/2009 at 09:24
Did you even look at the video? The 156mph referred to wasn't the speed he was doing when the accident happened.
I didn't know there was a video. Found it now. OK. I think, from the short bit at end of the clip, that it is obvious that they were both accelerating into a closing gap (again) - the now dead rider had already undertaken his mate at quite a clip and was pulling smartly away from the camera bike - at 120 ish (170ft/sec)? In a 60 limit. Riders that think 'buzzing' passing traffic is appropriate are always leaving themselves no room for error if the vehicle they are passing too close moves across the lane. His lack of thought led him into being clipped by the overtaking car as he was way too close to the vehicle he was passing and his closing speed gave him no room for manoeuvre. I can't see that the riders death is any more than stupidity on his part. I doubt the car driver would have seen the bikes coming on the slight left curving road off the roundabout had he looked early or as they buzzed the Mondeo as he(?) pulled out to overtake. The bikes, with their rubbish positioning for an overtake, were possibly in the car mirrors blind spot too. The driver may also have been 'chancing it' just as the riders were. Happens - and we know it. If you think that there is nothing wrong in riding like that and that the outcome shown is the last thing on your mind when you are doing so - you are fooling yourselves.
Posted: 14/06/2009 at 09:32
Did you even look at the video? The 156mph referred to wasn't the speed he was doing when the accident happened.
I didn't know there was a video. Found it now. OK. I think, from the short bit at end of the clip, that it is obvious that they were both accelerating into a closing gap (again) - the now dead rider had already undertaken his mate at quite a clip and was pulling smartly away from the camera bike - at 120 ish (170ft/sec)? In a 60 limit. Riders that think 'buzzing' passing traffic is appropriate are always leaving themselves no room for error if the vehicle they are passing too close moves across the lane. His lack of thought led him into being clipped by the overtaking car as he was way too close to the vehicle he was passing and his closing speed gave him no room for manoeuvre. I can't see that the riders death is any more than stupidity on his part. I doubt the car driver would have seen the bikes coming on the slight left curving road off the roundabout had he looked early or as they buzzed the Mondeo as he(?) pulled out to overtake. The bikes, with their rubbish positioning for an overtake, were possibly in the car mirrors blind spot too. The driver may also have been 'chancing it' just as the riders were. Happens - and we know it. If you think that there is nothing wrong in riding like that and that the outcome shown is the last thing on your mind when you are doing so - you are fooling yourselves.
+1,...sad death as they all are, and with considerable collateral damage to others....family etc...the speeds they were riding at before the smash were fucking stupid. if they'd gone on a track day they could have riden that fast and still be alive....but on the road?! mental.
Posted: 14/06/2009 at 10:24
Did you even look at the video? The 156mph referred to wasn't the speed he was doing when the accident happened.
I was simply stating a fact, not particularly picking on anyone. Riders that think 'buzzing' passing traffic is appropriate are always leaving themselves no room for error if the vehicle they are passing too close moves across the lane. His lack of thought led him into being clipped by the overtaking car as he was way too close to the vehicle he was passing and his closing speed gave him no room for manoeuvre. I can't see that the riders death is any more than stupidity on his part. If you think that there is nothing wrong in riding like that and that the outcome shown is the last thing on your mind when you are doing so - you are fooling yourselves. I'm not defending the biker, he rode like an idiot and manouvers of that kind are an accident waiting to happen.
Posted: 14/06/2009 at 12:20
Am I missing something here?
I think so. A car driver moved out to overtake without using it's mirrors!!
Where did you get that idea from? IF the car driver did pull out to overtake how do you know they did not use their mirrors? At @156 mph the bike would be travelling at 230 ft/second so would have been a tiny dot in the mirrors when the driver looked anyway. The overtake was probably considered before the bike was on top of the car, and quite proabbaly when the bike was in clear view overtaking a car already. Therefore there was a failure of the car to take the necessary care and action prior to overtaking. We can not know the exact speed of the bike, but we can know it's position prior to the the vehicle carrying out what should have been MSM. and caused a death FFS
The cause of the riders death was the choice they made to ride that fast on public roads in the first place. Speed does not kill, this death would not have occured if the car overtaking had not. The bike would have just gone past without incident. (I agree that it would probably have found another place to crash further up the road  but that is no tthe debate here)
Posted: 14/06/2009 at 15:52
Hedonist, I can't work out which of the above is your comment, but this isn't much of a comment: "this death would not have occured if the car overtaking had not. The bike would have just gone past without incident" Why do bikes get special treatment in your world? Why should they be allowed to overtake a line of fast moving traffic (btw this isn't filtering, so don't bother with that argument). The car was the one with the right to overtake. He indicated (which suggests he looked in his mirrors) to make his intention clear. The car at the very front moved left and slowed to allow the overtake. Whereas the biker, chose to biltz a line of cars at between 80 - 100 mph, which whilst we all do it, isn't riding with due care for other road users. The biker was at fault for the accident, the result was tragic, but if anyone tried to put the blame for this at the car drivers feet it would be laughed out of court. As one of my staff dealt with the insurance claim (note the past tense aspect), then I know quite a bit more about this than you do and have also seen a the video in stills and on a cinema size screen to allow us to scrutinise the detail.
Posted: 14/06/2009 at 16:00
Wouldn't imagine that would have been a pleasant experience. Reading about it has certainly made me think twice about Getting a "faster" bike.
Posted: 14/06/2009 at 16:07
Hedonist, I can't work out which of the above is your comment, but this isn't much of a comment: "this death would not have occured if the car overtaking had not. The bike would have just gone past without incident" Why do bikes get special treatment in your world? Why should they be allowed to overtake a line of fast moving traffic (btw this isn't filtering, so don't bother with that argument). The car was the one with the right to overtake. He indicated (which suggests he looked in his mirrors) to make his intention clear. The car at the very front moved left and slowed to allow the overtake. Whereas the biker, chose to biltz a line of cars at between 80 - 100 mph, which whilst we all do it, isn't riding with due care for other road users. The biker was at fault for the accident, the result was tragic, but if anyone tried to put the blame for this at the car drivers feet it would be laughed out of court. As one of my staff dealt with the insurance claim (note the past tense aspect), then I know quite a bit more about this than you do and have also seen a the video in stills and on a cinema size screen to allow us to scrutinise the detail.
Fair enough, and I have not defended the speed or the riders actions. I was trying to point out on the evidence I had the overtaking car was contributing to the accident, and that it had not done enough.
Put it another way, in my experience of driving and riding most RTA/RTC are caused by a failure to look adequately not by speed. Speed becames an enhancing factor in the result, and is often not the cause. When SMIDSY becomes an admission of driving without due care and attention maybe those sorts of accidents will be reduced. HTH
Posted: 14/06/2009 at 16:26
The thing is, whilst speed is rarely (if ever) considered to be the primary cause of an accident, it can be a contributory factor. Look at it this way, there were 2 cars in this incident - Car A at the very front and Car B the one who was trying to overtake. Car B had exited a roundabout and was second in a queue of traffic behind Car A. Car A was not accelerating hard and was clearly holding Car B up. Car A then moves left and slows down to allow Car B to overtake. Car B has precedence over the queue of traffic behind him, although he should still check his mirrirs and ensure the overtake is safe. Car B indicated to demonstrate his intentions, checked his mirrors (not explicitly clear, but the indication would suggest this from forensic testing after other incidents). The bike was hidden behind other cars and was accelerating hard - speedo readings on his mates bike suggest speed to be between 80 - 100mph. This speed contributed to the accident, had he been going slower (or within the speed limit) he may not have been in this position. Even looking in your mirrors at such close quarters and with other traffic masking the bike it is highly unlikely that Car B's driver would see the bike. I'm no angel and ride over the top on roads at times, but I do try to pick and choose these and that was not the place to try it, easily said with hindsight, but still true. The bike then collides with the rear of Car B attempting to overtake both vehicles, which is not riding with care for other road users. SMIDSYS are effectively an admission of guilt with insurance, whether the police prosecute is their choice, but punishing after the fact doesn't stop it happening in the first place; after all people never believe it will happen to them.
Posted: 14/06/2009 at 17:07
Specialist team who deal with fatals and major injuries, they're a pretty hardy bunch. Long term dealing with fatals makes you a miserable fucker ....  ( well thats my excuse  )
Posted: 14/06/2009 at 20:05
Long term dealing with fatals makes you a miserable fucker ....
( well thats my excuse) I leave them alone in their darkened area of the office. If I'm honest, they scare me
Posted: 14/06/2009 at 20:15
I'm glad I watched the video, even though i didn't want to. . . . shows how easy it is to become a statistic. It was a piss poor overtake, but as been said i do it every ride out. I think i'm aware of whats happening, but that could easily happen to me. Lesson learned, RIP kwacker dude
Posted: 15/06/2009 at 12:23
Have now watched video. Honestly can't see wot he was doing. The car seemed to be well in position a long time before Biker got there.it doesn't look like car pulled out at last minute,as I thought Was the case.bike had only been accelerating for 2 or 3 car lengths. Just stupid waste of life,don't see how driver could be held in any way Responsible. Maybe if he hadn't known camera was on him he wouldn't have gone for hero manuver
Posted: 15/06/2009 at 15:45
I'm pleased they released the video, feel very sorry for the family he left behind but if this make you think twice then its done its job. we all make mistakes
Posted: 15/06/2009 at 15:56
we all make mistakes
How much of riding at 100+mph in a 60 limit, overtaking into the path of an oncoming vehicle over hatched road markings a 'mistake'? I'd say that was pretty much all deliberate.
Posted: 15/06/2009 at 17:16
we all make mistakes
How much of riding at 100+mph in a 60 limit, overtaking into the path of an oncoming vehicle over hatched road markings a 'mistake'?
I'd say that was pretty much all deliberate.
And I would agree.
Posted: 15/06/2009 at 17:47
From the video I cannot be sure that the car driver did indicate that he wanted to pass, and I'm also not sure of what the lines on the road mean (can you overtake with those lines? The most similar ones I have ever seen mean that you cannot overtake-they are continuous and these one don't look continuous). At 1.42 I just see the car step out when the bike is already on top of him, so I don't think that the Kwack rider even intended to pass both cars (at once), but just got there way too fast and tried to move over, just hit the car and unfortunately he died. Deliberate? In my opinion the bikes were riding too fast, but still the car should have double or triple checked before moving over. It also seems that he was in a bit of a "hurry". Also, if somebody is already passing you, don't you have to wait? If any of them both had been a tad more carefull, there wouldn't be an accident. Now for who's to blame, I don't think it really makes a different to the kwack driver. He and his family won't have him back!
Posted: 15/06/2009 at 18:01
I'm also not sure of what the lines on the road mean (can you overtake with those lines? The most similar ones I have ever seen mean that you cannot overtake-they are continuous and these one don't look continuous).
Do you have a driving licence?
Posted: 15/06/2009 at 18:11
From wot I recall,the car is already In position(or very nearly) as the bike enters the screen. I'm presuming the rider was alongside his mate for a period Of time.albeit short. Crazy shit
Posted: 15/06/2009 at 18:17
still a mistake, poor observation and moment of madness, we have all done it.
Hardly 'a moment of madness' - the film is filled with idiotic maneuvours.
Posted: 15/06/2009 at 18:21
From the video I cannot be sure that the car driver did indicate that he wanted to pass, and I'm also not sure of what the lines on the road mean (can you overtake with those lines? The most similar ones I have ever seen mean that you cannot overtake-they are continuous and these one don't look continuous). At 1.42 I just see the car step out when the bike is already on top of him, so I don't think that the Kwack rider even intended to pass both cars (at once), but just got there way too fast and tried to move over, just hit the car and unfortunately he died. Deliberate? In my opinion the bikes were riding too fast, but still the car should have double or triple checked before moving over. It also seems that he was in a bit of a "hurry". Also, if somebody is already passing you, don't you have to wait? If any of them both had been a tad more carefull, there wouldn't be an accident. Now for who's to blame, I don't think it really makes a different to the kwack driver. He and his family won't have him back!
You can't even watch a video and see what happened correctly, nor do you know what road markings mean. That should fill your family with confidence every time you go out for a ride
Posted: 15/06/2009 at 18:41
I think in some cases you rely on people not going too fast. Sometimes when you are pulling out of a junction you see that something is coming, but use your judgement to decide that you do have plenty of time to do it. This judgement is obviously based on an estimation of how fast the vehicle approaching is. If that vehicle is going twice the speed limit, then it's very difficult to know this and adjust your estimations. You can't always assume everything is going twice the speed limit, it doesn't work like that. If you do go twice (or more) the limit then you do put your life on the line, and make yourself very vulnerable to other people's incorrect judgement. Saying 'the car pulled out on me' doesn't always cut it when you were going twice as fast as the third party could reasonably be expected to know you were travelling at.
Posted: 16/06/2009 at 12:46
I blame the driver who was being overtaken by both car and bike for driving Miss Daisy. I bet it was a cotton bud head who should've turned their licence in 20 years previously. Although I disagree with a video of someone's untimely death being posted on the internet for all to see and some to get al high and mighty about or gloat over( which some people surely will, non bikers only I hope) if it makes one of us think twice before making the same mistake it can't be all bad. One more point I'd like to make is that it wasn't so long ago that a rider was SENT TO JAIL for doing a much lower speed when nobody got hurt. Sentenced on what could potentially happen. The law really is an ass and there's no continuity whatsoever! I've done the video thing and although I have 20 years riding under my belt and I'm pretty level headed as a rule I did some things that I'd normally think better of, My mate completely took his brain out and rode like an absolute twat until I stopped, turned off the camera and gave him an almighty bollocking when he turned around and came back. My advice is don't strap a video camera to your bike and put yourself under the pressure to puton a show. It's a recipe for disaster, think about it, don't you find it uncanny that loads of target fixation type accidents are captured on film, says to me that people are riding outside their limits because they want to look good on telly. I'm glad that I didn't video the death of this fellow bike enthusiast (lets not forget that) because I'd feel pretty bloody responsible! As for all the comments slagging him off, I think you're a bunch of cunts for that. I'm sure he didn't want to traumatise anyone involved in the accident, leave his friends and family devastated, cost the taxpayer a million quid, fail to draw his pension or have a bunch of holier than thou pricks entertaining themselves watching him spread himself over half of Cornwall and calling him all the names under the sun, feeling superior. I'm bloody sure you wouldn't appreciate it so as far as I'm concerned if you haven't got something constructive to say that may prevent a repeat of this tragedy SHUT THE FUCK UP.
Posted: 16/06/2009 at 13:30
See more comments...
|
|
