Tri Talk HomepageTri Talk EventsTri Talk ForumsBlogsTri Talk TrainingTri TradeTriPlayerWikiTeam Tri Talk
Killer cyclist on trial for manslaughter
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ... 10, 11, 12  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    TriTalk.co.uk Forum Index -> General
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
SGreg




Joined: 30 Jun 2010
Posts: 1084
Location: High Peak

PostPosted: Thu Aug 24, 2017 8:07 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Jorgan wrote:
SGreg wrote:
hammerer wrote:
Jorgan wrote:
The husband was just on R4 on the way into work. Anyone else hear it?
I still can't help thinking that if she'd walked out in front of a cyclist with brakes, and had still died, would we have seen anything like this coverage.

What happens if you're on your tri bars on an open road and someone walks out in front of you, you have two brakes, but can't use them in time. Who's at fault then?


Riding a race bike designed with the sole purpose of going a fast as possible with no access to the brakes.


With two "Spears" strapped to the front!


Yep, but not illegal afaik.


Obviously we all agree but after hearing this chaps prosecution team, you can just see how its going to be twisted in court!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
explorerJC




Joined: 20 Oct 2005
Posts: 15880
Location: Farthingstone

PostPosted: Thu Aug 24, 2017 8:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Jorgan wrote:
hammerer wrote:

Riding a race bike designed with the sole purpose of going a fast as possible with no access to the brakes.


But you do have access, it's merely a case of reaction time. Much like riding on the bar tops, and reaching for the levers. You can anticipate some dangers/hazards, but a person (or a dog) stepping off the pavement without looking? We've probably all had someone step into the road in front of us.

With the advent of electric cars, this type of accident is going to get more commonplace.


reducing the risk is all part of road craft...it doesn't stop someone from stepping out, but in an area that this is likely it makes sense to be prepared...
_________________
www.appliedtri.co.uk Tri and Du coaching

www.naturalrunningform.co.uk Natural Running Form Coach

2018 Training Camps http://www.appliedtri.co.uk/training-camps/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
hammerer
Site Admin



Joined: 19 Nov 2007
Posts: 16586
Location: Right Next Door To Hell

PostPosted: Thu Aug 24, 2017 8:26 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

SGreg wrote:
Jorgan wrote:
SGreg wrote:
hammerer wrote:
Jorgan wrote:
The husband was just on R4 on the way into work. Anyone else hear it?
I still can't help thinking that if she'd walked out in front of a cyclist with brakes, and had still died, would we have seen anything like this coverage.

What happens if you're on your tri bars on an open road and someone walks out in front of you, you have two brakes, but can't use them in time. Who's at fault then?


Riding a race bike designed with the sole purpose of going a fast as possible with no access to the brakes.


With two "Spears" strapped to the front!


Yep, but not illegal afaik.


Obviously we all agree but after hearing this chaps prosecution team, you can just see how its going to be twisted in court!


You could almost guarantee that as a cyclist involved in a collision whilst on a TT bike that this is where the focus would be of the press and prosecution, much like the "bike like used in the olympics designed for high speed racing on a velodrome" angle. When you say I was riding on the hoods because it was a built up area, they'll counter that "But Sir you were riding a bike built for high speed racing in an area with high pedestrian activity." Not a daily mail reader in the country that wouldn't have you swinging from a rope by the morning.
_________________
Blog
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
explorerJC




Joined: 20 Oct 2005
Posts: 15880
Location: Farthingstone

PostPosted: Thu Aug 24, 2017 8:28 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

hammerer wrote:
SGreg wrote:
Jorgan wrote:
SGreg wrote:
hammerer wrote:
Jorgan wrote:
The husband was just on R4 on the way into work. Anyone else hear it?
I still can't help thinking that if she'd walked out in front of a cyclist with brakes, and had still died, would we have seen anything like this coverage.

What happens if you're on your tri bars on an open road and someone walks out in front of you, you have two brakes, but can't use them in time. Who's at fault then?


Riding a race bike designed with the sole purpose of going a fast as possible with no access to the brakes.


With two "Spears" strapped to the front!


Yep, but not illegal afaik.


Obviously we all agree but after hearing this chaps prosecution team, you can just see how its going to be twisted in court!


You could almost guarantee that as a cyclist involved in a collision whilst on a TT bike that this is where the focus would be of the press and prosecution, much like the "bike like used in the olympics designed for high speed racing on a velodrome" angle. When you say I was riding on the hoods because it was a built up area, they'll counter that "But Sir you were riding a bike built for high speed racing in an area with high pedestrian activity." Not a daily mail reader in the country that wouldn't have you swinging from a rope by the morning.


still better than one that doesn't comply with the law i suppose...
_________________
www.appliedtri.co.uk Tri and Du coaching

www.naturalrunningform.co.uk Natural Running Form Coach

2018 Training Camps http://www.appliedtri.co.uk/training-camps/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Jorgan




Joined: 12 Nov 2007
Posts: 17748
Location: alles was ich bin, alles was ich war

PostPosted: Thu Aug 24, 2017 8:36 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

This is why motorbikes ride around with their 2-billion-Lux retina burning beams on.
_________________
26 Years since it all began....
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
hammerer
Site Admin



Joined: 19 Nov 2007
Posts: 16586
Location: Right Next Door To Hell

PostPosted: Thu Aug 24, 2017 8:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

explorerJC wrote:
hammerer wrote:
SGreg wrote:
Jorgan wrote:
SGreg wrote:
hammerer wrote:
Jorgan wrote:
The husband was just on R4 on the way into work. Anyone else hear it?
I still can't help thinking that if she'd walked out in front of a cyclist with brakes, and had still died, would we have seen anything like this coverage.

What happens if you're on your tri bars on an open road and someone walks out in front of you, you have two brakes, but can't use them in time. Who's at fault then?


Riding a race bike designed with the sole purpose of going a fast as possible with no access to the brakes.


With two "Spears" strapped to the front!


Yep, but not illegal afaik.


Obviously we all agree but after hearing this chaps prosecution team, you can just see how its going to be twisted in court!


You could almost guarantee that as a cyclist involved in a collision whilst on a TT bike that this is where the focus would be of the press and prosecution, much like the "bike like used in the olympics designed for high speed racing on a velodrome" angle. When you say I was riding on the hoods because it was a built up area, they'll counter that "But Sir you were riding a bike built for high speed racing in an area with high pedestrian activity." Not a daily mail reader in the country that wouldn't have you swinging from a rope by the morning.


still better than one that doesn't comply with the law i suppose...


It sure is, can't defend that.
_________________
Blog
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Symes




Joined: 25 Jul 2006
Posts: 1353
Location: P!ssed off land

PostPosted: Thu Aug 24, 2017 8:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Jorgan wrote:
With the advent of electric cars, this type of accident is going to get more commonplace.


Had this conversation last week after someone pushed their pram out in front of me. Was on the hoods and sixth-sensed it was going to happen, her excuse was "I didn't hear you", I suggested she could have looked as well but that seemed to confuse her.

She won't have a hope in the future on that basis
_________________
1st place Falcon Lodge 3rd Year 800m; 1st place Santa Run

Stronger mind and muscles than joints, what a b@stard
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
stenard




Joined: 04 Sep 2013
Posts: 1863

PostPosted: Thu Aug 24, 2017 8:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Jorgan wrote:
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/no-remorse-death-crash-cyclist-11043406

It's just standard sensationalist reporting. He does seem a fairly unpleasant character, but that's fairly irrelevant to be honest. His social media/forum posts after the event clearly were not clever or sensible, but to be honest, from the ones quoted, he didn't actually seem to say anything particularly harsh. It seemed more an explanation of events and facts.

Mainly he said that it was her fault. The cycling QC has quite clearly said the prosecution argument that he could have stopped with a front brake is not accurate or fair, so he's probably right there was nothing he could have done. And he said she didnt deserve it, which is probably him being very kind and generous in his own mind.

It's obviously a tragic set of circumstances, but I have a real issue with the CPS bringing this kind of case in the first place. When you have people deliberately speeding in cars/motorbikes through residential areas getting fines and driving bans for similar outcomes, for the judge to be indicating she is thinking of a custodial sentence is just flabbergasting.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Jorgan




Joined: 12 Nov 2007
Posts: 17748
Location: alles was ich bin, alles was ich war

PostPosted: Thu Aug 24, 2017 8:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

If anything, I think he's been found guilty of being a tw*t.
_________________
26 Years since it all began....
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
stenard




Joined: 04 Sep 2013
Posts: 1863

PostPosted: Thu Aug 24, 2017 8:57 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Jorgan wrote:
If anything, I think he's been found guilty of being a tw*t.

Quite. Unfortunately, that makes a mockery of our legal and justice system, as that's not against the law.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
explorerJC




Joined: 20 Oct 2005
Posts: 15880
Location: Farthingstone

PostPosted: Thu Aug 24, 2017 9:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

stenard wrote:
Jorgan wrote:
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/no-remorse-death-crash-cyclist-11043406

It's just standard sensationalist reporting. He does seem a fairly unpleasant character, but that's fairly irrelevant to be honest. His social media/forum posts after the event clearly were not clever or sensible, but to be honest, from the ones quoted, he didn't actually seem to say anything particularly harsh. It seemed more an explanation of events and facts.

Mainly he said that it was her fault. The cycling QC has quite clearly said the prosecution argument that he could have stopped with a front brake is not accurate or fair, so he's probably right there was nothing he could have done. And he said she didnt deserve it, which is probably him being very kind and generous in his own mind.

It's obviously a tragic set of circumstances, but I have a real issue with the CPS bringing this kind of case in the first place. When you have people deliberately speeding in cars/motorbikes through residential areas getting fines and driving bans for similar outcomes, for the judge to be indicating she is thinking of a custodial sentence is just flabbergasting.


that the CPS brought the case this way shows how political the system now is -
although, to be fair, it may always have been the case, but it was just political in a different direction. The CPS too are as much the victims of social media and operate accordingly...

that his defence didn't ridicule the braking distance was a nonsense...not sure if he would get an appeal...

that our new liberal left justice system dismisses individual responsibility is, quite frankly, scary...

that a teenager hasn't fully determined his world view is hardly surprising...

that he posts some carp on line is simply dull and disappointing...
_________________
www.appliedtri.co.uk Tri and Du coaching

www.naturalrunningform.co.uk Natural Running Form Coach

2018 Training Camps http://www.appliedtri.co.uk/training-camps/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
ed_m




Joined: 15 May 2003
Posts: 8171
Location: coventry

PostPosted: Thu Aug 24, 2017 9:17 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Jorgan wrote:
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/no-remorse-death-crash-cyclist-11043406


yeh the guy was a bit of a tool..... but the media reporting of this is off the scale compared to motorist vs pedestrian deaths.

interesting that the husband is pressing for death by dangerous / careless to include bikes..... all the evidence suggests this is would make it easier to get out of & more lenient sentencing (if similar car based trials are anything to go by!)... would be better off pushing everyone down the manslaughter route if you want to hold everyone accountable to the same degree (but hey that would be way more effort).
_________________
Failures are finger posts on the road to achievement [C.S. Lewis]
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger
stenard




Joined: 04 Sep 2013
Posts: 1863

PostPosted: Thu Aug 24, 2017 9:22 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

explorerJC wrote:

that his defence didn't ridicule the braking distance was a nonsense...not sure if he would get an appeal...

If I were the defendant and was made aware of that QC's blog post, I would certainly be lodging an appeal on the grounds of ineffective counsel/representation.

How they didnt tear the "expert evidence" to shreds, when it was based on a police mountain bikes stopping distance is outrageous. His was riding an illegal bike because his bike didnt have a basic front brake, not because he wasnt riding a police mountain bike. They should have been testing the stopping distances with the lowest quality legal brake fitting. Otherwise, the precedent set by that "expert evidence" is that unless your stopping distance is as good as a police mountain bike, you are at risk of being accused of riding "furiously" as your brakes arent good enough to warrant riding fast*.

*and "fast" here is below the lowest public street speed limits that exist in London at 20mph.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tony Stark




Joined: 26 Apr 2007
Posts: 2480
Location: Milton Keynes

PostPosted: Thu Aug 24, 2017 9:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

My take-homes from this:
Seems like pedestrians can act like lemmings without criticism or legal obligation (although they may die or be seriously injured in the process).

I can legally ride my BMX on the road with only one brake, as saddle is lower than 635mm (will have to presume that this means the highest point of the saddle).

As a cyclist, if I am involved in any accident then I am partially responsible, regardless of fault, and if my bike, lights and reflectors do not meet required mandatory and arbitrary advisory standards, and I am not wearing an EN/BS standard helmet and hi-vis clothing then there is a good chance I will be considered to have contributed to the accident and any injuries to myself.

Hopefully the unedited cam footage of the case will come out soon and we can judge for ourselves.

Pretty sure this isn't over yet - sentencing, appeals, civil suits on both sides etc. etc.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
SloggingScotsman




Joined: 18 Jul 2006
Posts: 2966

PostPosted: Thu Aug 24, 2017 9:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I feel moved to chime in here.

First of all apologies to those of you that this post will undoubtedly upset, but it is my genuine held opinion. Remember until spinal stenosis kicked in, and I lost 'balance' on a bike I haven't gained the confidence to 'get back out there' on a bike yet, satisfying myself on turbo or in the gym. But I have done my fair share of fast training for tris and dus, on both road and mountain bikes.

Clearly pedestrians and cars are a big problem in the way that they can 'interact' inconsideately with us, as noted above on this thread.

But.....

1. Sometimes when we are in 'training mode' we can be a bit focused on our time. And can become blind to those around us. Over the past couple of months one cyclist who is clearly in training nearly knocked on old man over in front of me on a bridleway and the cyclist swore at the man. A few weeks later he swore at me as I walked past him and he at speed had to swerve of the tarmac onto the grass. I had the right of way and there was room for him to pass, but I guess at his speed he wanted more room as he whizzed past, swearing at me.

2. Any of you who have witnesses a fresh crop of Oxford students get on their bikes, and try to cycle around town, sometime falling off in the middle of the road as they try 'hands free' or 'adjust their sunglasses' might just think 'and these are our future leaders!" I have witnessed a few near accidents due to cyclist stupidity.

Perhaps it is because of things like this that help drive public opinion to be anti cyclist.

Not saying that it is right or wrong, just noting how it is and one reason why.
_________________
Trump elected.
We vote to Brexit..but something happens so it doesn’t.
Trump re-elected in 2020..99%
Something real bad happens to US during Trumps 2nd term..75%
Michelle Obama president in 2024...65%
In the next 10 years ww3 will start..47%.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    TriTalk.co.uk Forum Index -> General All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ... 10, 11, 12  Next
Page 5 of 12
  Share
 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum





Home | About TT | Privacy Policy | Terms and Conditions | Advertising | Contact TT
Copyright ©2003-2015 TriTalk®.co.uk. All rights reserved.