|
| Author |
Message |
Marko1962
Joined: 03 Mar 2008
Posts: 233
Location: North Cheshire
 |
|
|
1892
Joined: 30 Sep 2004
Posts: 1241
Location: Wishing I was on my bike
|
 Posted Wed Jul 9, 2008 5:39 pm |
I agree 17mph on the pavement as stated in the article is plain stupid gives all cyclists a bad name. If they had stepped out in front of him on the road it would have been an accident but on the pavement there just isn't any excuse.
|
|
|
jmeadows
Joined: 25 Nov 2007
Posts: 225
Location: aintree
|
Posted Wed Jul 9, 2008 5:55 pm |
disgusting isnt it?
great britain eh? criminals dream......
kill someone and get away with it but dare you rob a bank? then you will get 20 years, all government cares about is money
never hurts your eyes to look on the bright side of life... |
|
|
fast as fupp
Joined: 06 Jul 2007
Posts: 1103
Location: sunny birkenhead
|
Posted Wed Jul 9, 2008 6:03 pm |
it was a mtb'er - says it all 
*runs and hides*
|
|
|
Monty Dog
Joined: 14 Dec 2006
Posts: 10421
Location: Fleet, UK
|
Posted Wed Jul 9, 2008 6:09 pm |
Sadly, this story will run and run as the media will relish the opportunity to demand that cyclists have insurance, need licensing, pay tax etc etc - I can see the headlines in the Daily Mail already.....
Make mine an Italian, with Campagnolo on the side.. |
|
|
ricadus
Joined: 20 Apr 2004
Posts: 2381
Location: Londinium
|
Posted Wed Jul 9, 2008 6:28 pm |
I agree, Monty. It's interesting what the news reports omit and how that flavours the story. What most of the reports don't say is this:
| Quote: | The court heard that he could have swerved to avoid the girl but told police he thought a shout would be enough to avoid the collision.
Howard was cycling on the road when he approached the group but the court heard conflicting evidence about whether he mounted the kerb at any point during the incident. |
It's sounds like he made a bad judgment that had tragic consequences -- he was foolish in not taking evasive action -- and yet the media seem also to be using the family's opinion in order to portray him as yet another anti-social psycho-cyclist as part of a wider road use agenda.
The family weren't able to prove in court he was actually on the pavement, yet the BBC and ITN quote the mother's opinion on that aspect, so now we all believe he was riding on the pavement, whatever the truth of the matter.
Tour de France |
|
|
victor ludorum
Joined: 03 Jul 2008
Posts: 308
Location: London, UK
|
Posted Wed Jul 9, 2008 7:42 pm |
There has been no clear reporting on this but, as I understand it, the balance of witness statements implied that he started on the road but ended up at/on the pavement during/after hitting the girl.
As he approached he announced his presence (albeit aggressively) to the group and did not slow down. Ms Bennett stepped into the road, and then stepped off the road and then back onto the road. In attempting, belatedly, to avoid hitting her he picked the wrong direction and struck her. she then struck her head on the kerb and died as a result of her injuries.
It appears he was stupid and needlessly aggressive, but there is no reason to suggest that he intended to cause harm. (I can't imagine why anyone would want to deliberately ride a bicycle at pedestrians).
This is a terrible tragedy, poor quality reporting renders it a farce.
|
|
|
andrewc3142
Joined: 13 Mar 2007
Posts: 424
|
Posted Wed Jul 9, 2008 7:55 pm |
He doesn't seem to be the politest of cyclists, but as pointed out above, it doesn't seem at all clear from the reports I've read what the actual circumstances are. Very sad indeed and perhaps the penalty should have been harsher but there doesn't appear to have been any intent.
What I do know is that this will run longer and create more comment than if it had been a car. The ROSPA site shows in 2004 there were 671 pedestrian fatalities and 6,807 serious injuries, plus over 27,000 less serious injuries. It doesn't say how this breaks down into those involving a car and those involving a cycle but I'd be wiling to hazard a guess as to the approximate split.
|
|
|
Rob Sallnow
Joined: 05 Nov 2002
Posts: 6270
Location: Plymuff
|
Posted Wed Jul 9, 2008 7:56 pm |
| victor ludorum wrote: | | (I can't imagine why anyone would want to deliberately ride a bicycle at pedestrians).. |
I can....obviously not to collide with them but to intimidate or to embellish the possibility of an accident because they were not looking. Motorists do this a lot at mini-roundabouts.
Either way cycling at '17 mph' beside or through gaps in groups of pedestrians is downright dangerous.
I'd rather walk than use Shimano |
|
|
doubleclanger
Joined: 23 Jan 2007
Posts: 47
Location:
|
Posted Wed Jul 9, 2008 7:56 pm |
If he'd been in his car and killed a slightly tipsy teenager who was walking in the road, would the case have attracted any national publicity whatsoever?
Would he have been less vilified if he hadn't shouted a warning?
Would the group have stayed in the road if he'd been driving a truck?
|
|
|
Rob Sallnow
Joined: 05 Nov 2002
Posts: 6270
Location: Plymuff
|
Posted Wed Jul 9, 2008 8:00 pm |
| andrewc3142 wrote: | He doesn't seem to be the politest of cyclists, but as pointed out above, it doesn't seem at all clear from the reports I've read what the actual circumstances are. Very sad indeed and perhaps the penalty should have been harsher but there doesn't appear to have been any intent.
What I do know is that this will run longer and create more comment than if it had been a car. The ROSPA site shows in 2004 there were 671 pedestrian fatalities and 6,807 serious injuries, plus over 27,000 less serious injuries. It doesn't say how this breaks down into those involving a car and those involving a cycle but I'd be wiling to hazard a guess as to the approximate split. |
I seem to recall a post on one of the forums I read that the number of cycle related deaths of pedestrians on pavements in 5 years was miniscule.
I bet if the death had been caused by the same guy in a car he'd have a £200 fine and 3 points on his licence.
I'd rather walk than use Shimano |
|
|
Rob Sallnow
Joined: 05 Nov 2002
Posts: 6270
Location: Plymuff
|
Posted Wed Jul 9, 2008 9:16 pm |
Why have the BBC just got a spokesman from the AA to discuss this on the news?
I'd rather walk than use Shimano |
|
|
SteveR_100Milers
Joined: 23 Jul 2006
Posts: 4524
Location: Rhymney Valley
|
Posted Wed Jul 9, 2008 9:17 pm |
I guess if a court found him guilty of dangerous cycling then he is guilty, and as such a bl00dy idiot. The penalty is farcical, kill someone through your stupid actions and you deserve more than that (which lets be honest if this was a car driver hitting a cyclist we would all be outraged).
|
|
|
doubleclanger
Joined: 23 Jan 2007
Posts: 47
Location:
|
Posted Wed Jul 9, 2008 9:30 pm |
Yes, to fine somebody £2000 for taking a life is an insult to their memory. But I can't help thinking the media would have been less interested if he'd been in a car and going twice as fast.
If he'd been in a two ton 500bhp BMW, and shouting 'I'm not stopping, get out of the way', he wouldn't have been heard and would possibly not have been punished.
Thoughts are with the parents. I can't imagine how they feel. I don't imagine the offender is too happy either.
|
|
|
ricadus
Joined: 20 Apr 2004
Posts: 2381
Location: Londinium
|
Posted Wed Jul 9, 2008 9:47 pm |
| Rob Sallnow wrote: | | Why have the BBC just got a spokesman from the AA to discuss this on the news? |
Because the particulars of this tragedy have been used by the Beeb as fuel to feed an on-going editorial about road usage.
It's no longer just about the poor girl and her angry parents, but about cars vs bikes vs pedestrians, danger or safety, law & order vs anachy, them and us, etc etc -- tapping into the various emotions and opinions we all have about the hassles of being out and about on the road, interacting with other individuals, groups or tribes. It's engages us, so we watch their program or buy their newspaper.
Tour de France |
|
|
SteveR_100Milers
Joined: 23 Jul 2006
Posts: 4524
Location: Rhymney Valley
|
Posted Wed Jul 9, 2008 9:49 pm |
| doubleclanger wrote: | Yes, to fine somebody £2000 for taking a life is an insult to their memory. But I can't help thinking the media would have been less interested if he'd been in a car and going twice as fast.
If he'd been in a two ton 500bhp BMW, and shouting 'I'm not stopping, get out of the way', he wouldn't have been heard and would possibly not have been punished.
Thoughts are with the parents. I can't imagine how they feel. I don't imagine the offender is too happy either. |
I'm not sure I agree there, if the death was in the same circumstances there would be a lot of coverage, plus the driver would be in prison.
|
|
|
doubleclanger
Joined: 23 Jan 2007
Posts: 47
Location:
|
Posted Wed Jul 9, 2008 10:35 pm |
What, BMW doing 34mph mows down an unfortunate child who should have been on the pavement and it's a national a story? No way. This is all about the fact that it was, unusually, a bike and the rider was aggressive in the way he shouted his warning.
|
|
|
hodsgod
Joined: 13 Mar 2008
Posts: 201
|
Posted Wed Jul 9, 2008 11:09 pm |
It seems £2200 fine is the maximum penalty for such a crime.
The law is an ass.
|
|
|
bobpzero
Joined: 12 Apr 2008
Posts: 650
Location: northern ireland, co. antrim
|
Posted Thu Jul 10, 2008 12:00 am |
| Quote: | The law is an ass.
|
yea ilbet there will be a witch hunt out for cyclists. and what about for all the car drivers who mow down cyclists and get away with it because its not their fault its the weather conditions. but seriously 17mph on the pavement? ! hopefully it will never be repeated, thats said hopefully.
|
|
|
jthef
Joined: 24 Jun 2008
Posts: 43
Location: Lancashire
|
Posted Thu Jul 10, 2008 12:52 am |
I would like to hear the cyclist side before making my mind up fully.
I don’t agree with cycling on the pavement baring young children but this is liable to happen more with all the new cycling tracks being put on paths.
|
|
|
|
Search
