Cyclist on illegal bike who killed a pedestrian on manslaughter charged 'blamed victim'

[beorhthelm]

the defendant says he called out twice to warn her, yet couldn't slow down sufficiently? certainly doesn't sound like she walked off the kerb randomly giving him no time to react, so the roadworthiness of the bike (and attitude to risk) seems to damn him.

 

[Albumen]

That's what I always thought from my dimly-remembered boyhood cycling days. Presumably having back brakes only would slow you down more slowly?

Dependant on how tight your breaks are. If tight and new you'd grind to a halt or most likely do a nifty skid to a halt, then wave to the ladies.

 

[Billy the Fish]

[MENTION=435]Stat Brother[/MENTION] is spot on here, I can't believe anyone is arguing with him!?!?!?

If I run someone over in my car and that car is proved not to be roadworthy then I will be put up in front of a judge and nobody would question it. It doesn't matter if the pedestrian wasn't paying attention or stepped out in the road without looking, it's up to the driver to watch out for hazards. If he can prove in court that he was paying attention and it couldn't have been avoided then fair enough, but anyone who rides a bike will know that front brakes make a huge difference to your stopping distance so that ship has failed I'm afraid.

 

[Carrot Cruncher]

We desperately need to bring back those 'scare the living shit out of you' public information films. As we're a nation glued to our phones, we need one where someone is staring at their phone and steps into the road without looking and immediately gets ploughed into by a vehicle. I've seen too many near misses for people not looking where they're going.

Let's be honest, how many of you over the age of 35 have got a frisbee from an electricity sub station or got a kite out of a pylon? It's because we were scared rigid by the good old public information film.

 

[Stat Brother]

We desperately need to bring back those 'scare the living shit out of you' public information films. As we're a nation glued to our phones, we need one where someone is staring at their phone and steps into the road without looking and immediately gets ploughed into by a vehicle. I've seen too many near misses for people not looking where they're going.

Let's be honest, how many of you over the age of 35 have got a frisbee from an electricity sub station or got a kite out of a pylon? It's because we were scared rigid by the good old public information film.

i personally haven't been on a farm for 40 years.

 

[Motogull]

Hopefully there is some cctv footage to help the court. Its a horrible story, but sadly inevitable. What I post next is pure speculation.

Without proper brakes he was going to hit someone sooner or later and by being glued to her smart phone she was going to come a cropper to some degree sooner or later too.

We are taught when at primary school never to step into a road unless we have checked.

Maybe the time has come to follow Russia's lead and have all road users travel with dash cams. Maybe even take it further and have movement detectors on smartphones so that it asks a user to confirm they are neither walking nor driving while using. That way, if there is an accident, the phone history will show they took the conscious decision to say 'no'.

 

[Bob'n'weave]

No doubt about the law on this in regard to using a 'vehicle' that is fit for use on public highways. Brakes and a bell are high on the list of requirements for cycles, so you can warn people in your way to move, if they don't, then thats what the anchors are for. Back brake first, then front so you don't go over the top is standard practice. He will be lucky to escape jail for this imo.

(On this note, iv'e always thought it strange that many kids bikes only have a front brake. Asking for trouble?)

 

[Triggaaar]

Let him off with a fine for a shit bike (which we've all had in the past when we were young).

Non of us had a bike that fast without brakes. And so what if we did? That's like a drunk driver killing someone and saying we've all driven over the limit before so let them off.

If this was a car driver who was using a mobile phone at the time of the accident, NSC would have melted with outrage.

If this guy had a legal bike, would she have lived? If not, then I would imagine he's not guilty, but if so (or maybe), then surely he's at least partly culpable?

 

[ArcticBlue]

Stating the obv here but there are not winners in the case.

Illegal or not riding at a reported 18 mph on busy roads without a front brake is dumb. A rough guide for braking pressure on a 2 wheeler is 75% front to 25% rear if you want to make a quick stop. The front wheel/brake is more effective than the back due to the position of the rider and the momentum shift towards the front of the bike when braking. The additional control that a front brake provides is invaluable in these types of situation.

Ultimately the pedestrian has caused this mess but the cyclist could have been in a better position to prevent it by having a front brake. Seems like a tough one for the jury.

 

[Triggaaar]

What if the circumstances of the accident had been exactly the same but it had been the cyclist that came off, hit the concrete and suffered the catastrophic brain injury. Would she have been charged with manslaughter?

That's a fair question, and she would be partly to blame, as she had stepped onto a road without looking sufficiently. The question is, is it reasonable to think their actions (the killer) would result in the death of another? I think that's certainly reasonable in the case of someone riding a fast bike at speed without a front brake. Less so in the case of a pedestrian, who isn't so likely to kill someone.

Charlie Alliston had enough time to call out to her, perhaps he would have been better off using that time to perform an emergency stop.

I think this is an important part of the case. If he had time to call to her (twice I think), he could have slowed down a lot more if his bike had been legal. And I imagine it's very unlikely she'd have died if he had slowed down a lot.

That might not have been enough to stop this fatality

It probably would have, IMO.

He can't, he hates cyclists. Difficult to back down!

Stat Bro hates cyclists? That's a new one on me.

The media absolutely love it when a cyclist kills a pedestrian

Yeah, did you get the party invite too?

the defendant says he called out twice to warn her, yet couldn't slow down sufficiently? certainly doesn't sound like she walked off the kerb randomly giving him no time to react, so the roadworthiness of the bike (and attitude to risk) seems to damn him.

Agreed.

[MENTION=435]Stat Brother[/MENTION] is spot on here, I can't believe anyone is arguing with him!?!?!?

If I run someone over in my car and that car is proved not to be roadworthy then I will be put up in front of a judge and nobody would question it. It doesn't matter if the pedestrian wasn't paying attention or stepped out in the road without looking, it's up to the driver to watch out for hazards.

Well I think it does make some difference whether she was looking or not, but I agree that if he was driving a car without adequate brakes, no one would even be having a debate about this, we'd all be saying he's guilty.

 

[Spiros]

the defendant says he called out twice to warn her, yet couldn't slow down sufficiently? certainly doesn't sound like she walked off the kerb randomly giving him no time to react, so the roadworthiness of the bike (and attitude to risk) seems to damn him.

To me this is proof that his bike wasn't fit to be on the road and that the lack of front brakes meant he couldn't stop (or slow down) in enough time to avoid a heavy collision. Or he saw her stepping out and thought he should just carry on and shout her out of the way without even trying to stop himself.

A few years ago I was cycling down Western Road when a girl stepped out in front of me without looking. I was probably doing about 15mph and she was too close for me to shout anything but I still had enough time to get some pull on the front brakes which meant I was going slower when I hit her which is why I don't buy his 'there was no time to brake but I shouted twice' line. Consequently we were both just a bit shaken up .

 

[Boys 9d]

Perhaps my memory is failing, bikes are different now or I didn't travel very fast. In my teens, 60 years ago. I used a fixed wheel bike (with front brake) and remember making emergency stops by stopping pedalling. I probably fell off but would have done so if I had hit whatever I stopped for. Yes, I did decend hills and used my legs on the pedals to control my speed. Somebody previously wrote that racing cyclists continue past the finish line and slow down gradually. I agree, they have no need of an emergency stop. Similarly, do runners in competitions stop "dead" at the finish line or continue and slow down gradually?

 

[Stat Brother]

Perhaps my memory is failing, bikes are different now or I didn't travel very fast. In my teens, 50 years ago. I used a fixed wheel bike (with front brake) and remember making emergency stops by stopping pedalling. I probably fell off but would have done so if I had hit whatever I stopped for. Yes, I did decend hills and used my legs on the pedals to control my speed. Somebody previously wrote that racing cyclists continue past the finish line and slow down gradually. I agree, they have no need of an emergency stop. Similarly, do runners in competitions stop "dead" at the finish line or continue and slow down gradually?

You can't effectively stop a bike solely by locking up the back wheel.

It'll slow, it'll be difficult to control, it'll eventually stop.

Unlike a front brake stop which can be almost instant.
Sure the bike will stop but the rider won't causing x amount of personal damage, but I'll hazard a guess this rider in question would now have taken that all day long.

 

[Uter]

If this was a car driver who was using a mobile phone at the time of the accident, NSC would have melted with outrage.

I am not so sure. I think, sadly, we have just become so accustomed to hearing about fatal accidents caused by drivers disregard for the law that we just shrug our shoulders and barely give it a moments thought. I read in the Argus today about a young driver arrested on suspicion of causing death by dangerous driving after killing his passenger in a crash. I doubt there will be a thread on that or much outrage for a life needlessly lost.

 

[GT49er]

the defendant says he called out twice to warn her, yet couldn't slow down sufficiently? certainly doesn't sound like she walked off the kerb randomly giving him no time to react, so the roadworthiness of the bike (and attitude to risk) seems to damn him.

Calling out twice - and riding the sort of bike he was riding - one wonders whether the calls were along the lines of, "Get our of my way" and "Get out of my f**king way!" in the expectation that the pedestrian would shift her arse and jump to it - only she didn't? Just wondering, like; some cyclists are like that (although many aren't like that at all).

 

[Albumen]

Non of us had a bike that fast without brakes. And so what if we did? That's like a drunk driver killing someone and saying we've all driven over the limit before so let them off.

If this was a car driver who was using a mobile phone at the time of the accident, NSC would have melted with outrage.

If this guy had a legal bike, would she have lived? If not, then I would imagine he's not guilty, but if so (or maybe), then surely he's at least partly culpable?

1) He had back brakes.
2) It wasn't a 2 tonne car and there was no mobile phone.
3) It was just a kid on a bike trying to swerve past a pedestrian that hadn't looked (as I read it).

You want ifs? If she hadn't walked out into the road and walked back into him she'd be alive. If with extra brakes he hit her at 5 rather than 10mph would she have died? No idea, no-one has.
It was an accident, both were to blame. The kid is going to be scarred for life, let him suffer with that.

 

[Albumen]

Calling out twice - and riding the sort of bike he was riding - one wonders whether the calls were along the lines of, "Get our of my way" and "Get out of my f**king way!" in the expectation that the pedestrian would shift her arse and jump to it - only she didn't? Just wondering, like; some cyclists are like that (although many aren't like that at all).

One wonders whether he shouted the national bleedin anthem? Anyone could make things up.

 

[Albumen]

You can't effectively stop a bike solely by locking up the back wheel.

It'll slow, it'll be difficult to control, it'll eventually stop.

Unlike a front brake stop which can be almost instant.
Sure the bike will stop but the rider won't causing x amount of personal damage, but I'll hazard a guess this rider in question would now have taken that all day long.

 

[GT49er]

One wonders whether he shouted the national bleedin anthem? Anyone could make things up.

On the other hand, it is a very reasonable assumption that he did not declaim the National Anthem. And he certainly wouldn't have had time to make one up.

 

[Albumen]

On the other hand, it is a very reasonable assumption that he did not declaim the National Anthem. And he certainly wouldn't have had time to make one up.

If he had a front brake though . . . ?