Sadly Craig Hyde passed away at a CAMS Road Race held 8 December 2012. Subsequent to this a Coroners hearing was held at the end of April with the final findings having been received in August.
We have not copied you to the entire report due to its sensitive nature, however the Coroner has requested that we draw the circumstances of the death to our members, the below are extracts from the Coroner Report
- There was no evidence that the loss of control of the Suzuki by Craig Hyde was anything other than a racing error and no responsibility for this misjudgement can be attributed. Craig Hyde was physically fit, experienced and correctly licenced motorcyclist. In all respects it was appropriate for him to have been participating in the motorcycle race on that day. Craig Hyde knew the risks associated with his chosen hobby and accepted those risks knowing the possible consequences.
- There is no evidence that track or weather conditions caused the loss of control. The track and/or tyre temperature may have been causative or contributory factors but these are similarly risks which are assumed by those participating.
- Criticisms have been made of the management by CAMS of the event, the Coroner accepted some of those criticisms and note an acceptance by those involved to the effect that management, particularly of the post crash reactions could have been better. However, the Coroner was unable to link any such management shortcoming to the circumstances which resulted in the death of Craig Hyde.
- There was not evidence that there we any failures by St John Ambulance in either the time it took for their attendance at the crash scene or in the quality of the care provided by St John Ambulance officers. It is clear from the autopsy report that the injuries received by Craig Hyde in the crash were, in the prevailing circumstances non-survivable.
Also of note was, it is always appropriate for bona fides concerns in relation to the control and management of events which result in serious or fatal consequences to be drawn to the attention of a Coroner. There ought to be no criticism of any individual acting as a ‘whistle blower’ until the concerns expressed have been the subject of independent scrutiny. It is only by an appropriate review of the circumstances of a death that steps can be taken to avoid a repetition.