A DRIVER who caused the death of a motorcyclist and his pillion passenger denies dangerous driving following the fatal crash near Worcester.

Gary Lillis appeared in the witness box at Worcester Crown Court yesterday (Thursday) following the deaths of Dean Turvey and his partner Emma Aldridge on the A44.

The 62-year-old of Hopton Drive, Kidderminster, admits two counts of causing death by careless driving but denies two counts or causing death by dangerous driving following the crash at around 1.40pm on October 15, 2017.

The retired teacher had been taking a right turn in his Citroen from the A44 at Cotheridge into Otherton Lane when he struck the motorcycle going on the opposite direction.

It has been agreed between prosecution and defence that Lillis would have had between seven and eight seconds from the junction to see a vehicle coming in the opposite direction.

Lillis said he had been travelling from Kidderminster to Castle Morton and had a full clean driving licence at the time of the crash.

He said he drove past Laycocks Garden Centre but that that his own recollection of what happened in the crash was ‘quite patchy’.

“I have been involved in a very serious accident with fatalities unfortunately. I have been in quite a lot of shock since” he told the jury when examined by his barrister, Harry Bowyer.

He said the first he knew of the motorcycle was when his wife shouted ‘oh Gary!”

He told the jury ‘it was my fault’ and that the motorcycle had right of way. Lillis also spoke of the police interview, telling the panel: “I was devastated. I was in tears.”

Lillis said he had pleaded guilty to causing death by careless driving at the first opportunity at the magistrates court last September.

“Did you see the motorcycle at all before your wife brought it to your attention?” said Mr Bowyer.

Lillis replied: “No I didn’t I’m sorry to say.”

Michael Hall, prosecuting, questioned the defendant about how many times he had looked before making the manoeuvre. Lillis said he could not recall but said it must have been at least twice. He had not seen a car behind the bike as it came over the brow of a hill when he looked the first time but saw the car when he looked again the second time as he was beginning to turn into the lane.

Mr Hall said: “Your evidence is you looked twice and on both occasions you missed the big dark bike everyone else saw?”

Lillis said he did not know why he had not seen it. Mr Hall said another driver behind him had seen Lillis crossing into the opposite carriageway before the manoeuvre but the defendant said he had no recollection of this.

After the crash the car was found in third gear and Mr Hall asked if the vehicle would have been responsive in that gear as he turned into the lane and Lillis answered ‘quite responsive yes’. He said he was not travelling fast when he turned.

Mr Hall said: “How did you miss it Mr Lillis if you looked up that road?”

“I don’t know how I missed it, I really don’t” said the defendant.

Mr Hall said: “Did you not see it because you didn’t look?”

Lillis replied: “I looked up the road. I saw the car.”

My Hall told the defendant: “No one saw you indicate Mr Lillis. Is that because you only realised the turning was yours at the last minute?”

Lillis said he had ‘no idea’. He was also asked if he had relied on his peripheral vision to see the motorcycle ‘everyone else saw’.

“I don’t know” said Lillis.

Closing speeches will follow and the case will now be summed up by the judge.

The trial continues.