Skip to content

Discuss This Rider killed braking for a speed camera General news

You are in... Forums > Discuss This > General news > Rider killed braking for a speed camera

This is a discussion topic

This discussion topic is linked to an article on this site. You can navigate to the article by clicking on the article name in the first post.

Go to most recent reply




Steve Farrell  says:

Rider killed braking for a speed camera

A motorcyclist was killed after braking too hard for a speed camera, a coroner said. Timothy Rowsell, 64, was doing at least 78mph on a Suzuki GSX-R1000 as he approached the speed camera van on a 50mph road. The camera operator, the only eyewitness to the crash, said she saw smoke coming from the bike’s tyres before Rowsell, a married father-of-two, fell...

Reply to this Topic  
  • Posted 4 years ago (26 August 2011 14:18)

Post a message in General news

Fields marked with an asterisk * are required


Please note. You cannot submit more than 4000 characters as a message.

Upload image(s) from your computer (up to 3 images)


Terms of use

Use of our community areas and forums is subject to important terms of use. By joining our community and using the features you agree to be bound by these terms. See terms of use below. 



Dec 03

Posts: 317

hairyMuppet says:


Murder? Do you have evidence to back up that allegation?  You do know that "murder" has a very specific meaning, don't you?

And as for "If that van wasent there he would still be alive"; please, use your brain.  It could have been any hazard (tractor, open gate, broken down plumber van, off-duty cop vehicle) and the guy could have panic-braked with the same result.

It's still a tragedy and if the van was parked somewhere "odd" then as @Sora says, something is up with the guidelines.  The partnership did not state that the van was parked safely, merely in accordance with the guidlines.  Are these guidelines in the public domain I wonder?  They should be.

Reply to this Topic


Sep 09

Posts: 712

If you cant loose 28mph on the brakes

... of a superbike like a gsxr1000 ... you dont deserve to ride it. its a shame people have to end up in the sky to prove many people cant handle what they get. the fact there was a cop van monitoring illegal speeders and he was breaking the law is inconsequential to the fact he was breaking laws and then put himself into a situation HE SHOULD be able to handle. sorry... i know a lot of people think im some kind of Nazi but I agree a lot with speed camera's in 40 and 30 zones and this will only bolster their requirement to be there in the first place... WISE UP, RIDE SAFE!

Reply to this Topic


Sep 06

Posts: 7

winton50 says:

Know the road

I live a couple of miles down the road from the site.

Just to put a couple of things straight. The van was parked in a place that it often parks, alongside a busy dual carriageway but off the road. Leading to the site the road is straight, there are no corners but there is a flyover which I believe the rider was on at the time of the accident.

There is a 50MPH limit along the road which has been in operation for a few years with trials to reduce this to 40. There are static cameras also along this stretch.

Despite the fact that this is a busy road, (often there's no run off or hard shoulder for immobile vehicles to pull off onto) people still feel a need to exceed the speed limit between the cameras and as the road leaves town it has a busy junction which is joined by shoppers from the nearby superstores and shopping centres.

The area is dangerous. The footballer Aaron Flahavan was killed at roughly the same spot and a couple of miles up the road a recovery truck driver was also killed as was an air hostess. The limit is there for a very good reason.

my understanding is that the biker was travelling over the flyover at the time. You can't see the speedcamera (which is parked about half a mile up the road) until you crest the rise.

It's a tempting road. Riding my own 750 Gixer along there it is difficult to keep to the limit, but you have to be aware, as with any road that there are dangers and ride within yourself. The fact that there was a cameravan there is irrelevant. I've seen broken down cars, cyclists, tractors and even once a drunk wandering along the road. Once someone sat at the top of the flyover and threatened to throw themselves off and there were police and counsellors trying to persuade him not to jump.

If you can't see far enough to make sure you can stop safely then you need to slow down. If not for your sake then for the sake of the person you hit.

Reply to this Topic


May 10

Posts: 427

X2Glider says:

It's Always Someone Elses Fault

Isn't it?  Sorry it happened to him.  But...

Fact:   He made a choice to brake excessively rather than continue through at the speed he had been traveling.  The parked van didn't force the rider to grab a handful of brake.

Fact:  The rider fucked up.

It could have been anything on the side of the road that made him brake in a panic.  An unattended child, a child's ball, a dog, a pothole, a bird in a short skirt.  If it were.  Would it have been someone elses fault other than the rider?  According to some posters it would be.

He was unattentive, speeding 28 over the limit and performed a maneuver beyond his abilities.  No one else's fault but his own.

Reply to this Topic


Mar 10

Posts: 32

cetdac says:

Why 50mph?

Well thats awful and condolences to his family.

The question I often have is why we have such needless speed limits? Dual carriageways with a 50mph limit?

Motorways restricted to 70mph?

It does seem the do gooders nanny state are making everyone so fed up with no risk whatsoever that people do speed quite often safely and not recklessly at all - other than being seen by the over protective do gooders as excessive.

I am fed up with a minority of these people telling us, the majority how to live our lives. If the road is clear, dry, good visibility and not in citys why are we being so restricted?

Its enough to make people go mad!

Reply to this Topic


Nov 10

Posts: 296

COZ69 says:


' please, use your brain. It could have been any hazard (tractor, open gate, broken down plumber van, off-duty cop vehicle)'

But there wasent any of the above there was a police van and the fact is how ever you look at it,because of the greedy police hes dead.and yes he was speeding but come on who dosent?!!! 78mph isent fast on a duel carriageway.

good user name by the way really suites you! used your brain for that one pal!

Reply to this Topic


Dec 03

Posts: 317

hairyMuppet says:


To follow your logic - the police van was there, it was the the fault of the police. If it had been a tractor, it would be the fault of the farmer.  If it had beena stpped plumber's van, it would be the fault of the plumber.  And so on.  It is never the fault of the rider?

78mph is fast on a dual carriageway, it's 8mph over the maxmimum legal speed (18mph over if towing, 28mph over if driving a heavy goods vehcile). 78mph is not fast on a race track, but a dual carriageway is not a race track si it?  I make no claims about being an angel (I have points) but I am not going to moan about them.  I knew what the limit was (or should have known) and I broke it.  End of discussion.

It's a tragedy that this rider is dead, but the police did not cause him to brake excessively and lose control.  That was all caused by the rider himself.  By the time he saw the van, the odds are good they were clocking him already, if he had come off the throttle he would still be alive and would simply have had to take responsibility for his own actions.

I agree that some speed limits in this country seem to be nuts and may be there for nothing more than filling the coffers of the Exchequer (that's where the fines end up, not with the police) but that does not absolve someone from reponsibility should they decide to break the posted limit.  @winton50 has also pointed out that this is a dangerous stretch of road.  Do you know any different?

Reply to this Topic


Apr 11

Posts: 17

snapple says:

Police Fault

Regardless of whether he was speeding or not, had the camera van not been there he would still be alive period. This is NOT a dangerous stretch of road I'm not sure what winton50 is on about, I use it twice daily have done for years and never seen an accident there. The only times people crash on this carriageway is because they drive too close to each other and don't pay attention especially when people see a police camera or one of the gatsos going the other way into town and decide to brake from 60-70 down to about 40 "just to be sure".... A tragedy that should have been avoided, I'm sure all the people saying it's his fault he f*cked up would be singing a different tune if it was their father/friend brother/sister. Incidentally I've not seen the camera van either side of the carriageway since the accident.... funny that seeing as it's tourist season and accident "had nothing to do with the van being there".

Reply to this Topic


Mar 10

Posts: 1032

bmwgs says:

all i can say its i will do 80 on dual carriageway and will sit at 70 with my girl on the back. 70 is  not fast on a dual carriaeway  and is only dangers if other drives at doing say 40 in a 70 in a car.

he should of just got the point but if he was only about 5mhp over the speed limet tthen he my not of got any.


Reply to this Topic


Mar 10

Posts: 159


I don't know what happened here, it's a great shame though.  It's made me think of something else though.  A while ago I was riding around oxfordshire, and it seemed nearly all roads had become 50mph.  So while while pootling along at 50mph and getting passed by Audiman (they never seem to get them do they!), there were plenty of signs of the  type 'speed a factor in 90% of accidents' (or similar wording, might have the number wrong, but I'm sure you've seen them).  This made me wonder - was it 60mph that was too fast, or were the accidents involving one or more parties doing over 60?  Or excessivly over 60?  Or what?  It also reminded me of a road near where I was brought up which seemed to have a fatality a week (cars and bikes), but as far as I know the limit is still 60mph there.  I think that one issue is because it's done at a local level, there doesn't seem to be any consistancy in placement of the cameras/vans/limits.  And it made me wonder if the justification or logic and/or reasoning for these things is published anywhere?  If not, I think it should be, so I wonder if anyone knows the rules about this sort of thing?

Reply to this Topic

Compare Insurance

Save money by comparing quotes. It's quick and easy

Motorcycles for sale


It's only £13.99 to advertise your motorcycle on MCN

Sell your Motorcycle

Motorcycle pricing tool

New! Find used bike prices