A lorry driver who caused the death of a former weekly editor by careless driving has been ordered to carry out 120 hours of community service.
John Connor, left, a former editor of the Solihull News who went on to become a prominent motoring journalist, was killed in a collision on the M4 in Berkshire earlier this year.
Lorry driver Anthony Rourke, of Heckmondwike, West Yorkshire, pleaded guilty to causing death by careless driving at a hearing at Reading Crown Court last month.
In a further hearing earlier this month, the 55-year-old was sentenced to 120 hours community service.
Judge Peter Ross said Rourke had misjudged the speed of John’s vehicle on a dangerous stretch of road between junctions 5 and 4B of the M4 near Langley.
Prosecutor Jane Davies described the junction as a ‘black spot’ where numerous accidents had happened.
John, 75, was on his way home from covering a car launch event in Spain when the accident occurred on 16 January.
His Nissan Qashqai was crushed between Rourke’s lorry and a Mercedes-Benz Tractor Unit in front. He was pronounced dead at the scene.
Sign up for our free daily email bulletin
Follow HTFP on Twitter
Got a story? Email the Editor at
Only 120 hours! Is that how much a human life is worth these days. That’s pathetic. I would have liked to know the reasons behind such a seemingly pathetic judgement.
Report this comment
I agree with Hacked, but on a sliding scale what would be right penalty? The 120 hours, six months’ prison, 18 months, six years, ten years, 15, life? It’s the old chestnut – ask 20 people and they’ll all have different opinions.
Report this comment
Apparently the judge considered it was only a “momentary” inattention – it was 11 seconds in a large lorry going at considerable speed – personally I think that is considerably more than momentary. Additionally how can a supposedly very experienced lorry driver misjudge speed so badly? The reasons behind why it took the lorry driver so long to react were never raised and the fact it is apparently an accident black spot was conveniently used to justify the sentence. A sentence which served as a warning to others who are not paying full attention whilst driving(and there are plenty of those these days) would hopefully have acted as a deterrent. This sentence does not do that.
Report this comment
This was an avoidable death. There were matrix warnings displayed, the visibility was good, the lorry driver failed to heed these warnings:- this is more than ‘momentary inattention’.
I am afraid that the courts will look to save taxpayers’ money when a life is lost yet feel fit to send journalists to prison for phone hacking at massive cost! One does not need to be an expert in road safety to know there are more careless and reckless drivers spreading misery then a few dishonest journalists so which category requires the greater deterrent and will lead to greater public good?
Report this comment