SF Cyclist pleads not guilty in fatal pedestrian crash
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/sns-rt-us-usa-cyclist-sanfrancis...
Lots of strangeness here, including . . .
1) The incredible amount of resources being put into the investigation/prosecution-- have we ever heard of a motorist being this thoroughly investigated when killing a pedestrian?
2) The wording about how sorry the cyclist is contrasted with the "not guilty" plea
3) The cyclist's blog post...
Views: 878
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by h' Zerocats on
-
Did anyone read the article? He was purposely trying to set some sort of record, no?
Cameron Puetz said:Yes, the "right" thing to do would have been to use the brakes (particularly the rear to avoid the flip that David mentioned) intermittently to stay at a safer speed. This crash sounds like it was a result of someone traveling too fast for conditions. 35 mph on an empty country road with good visibility is a rush, 35 on a chaotic urban street sounds terrifying.
Serge Lubomudrov said:Thank you both for your answers.
But isn't it a simple physics and common sense?
Doesn't one have brakes in the first place so one would not accelerate to 35 mph going downhill?
Unless, of course, one gets high on adrenaline and behaves with utter disregard to one's own and others' safety.
Which behavior I observe very often, unfortunately.
-
-
Did you read the article? The wording about getting an opportunity to express his remorse and sorrow was waaaaay over the top. Yes, there was an odd contrast between that and the "not guilty" plea. Why do we spend so much time here picking others' communication apart rather than actually discussing the things that affect us?
David Barish said:It looks like he made a literally fatally bad decision. Nobody should make anything out of the fact that he has pleaded not guilty. This is not inconsistent with the reports that he seems to feel some remorse. He can't plead guilty until he works out a deal with the prosecutors.
As regards the speed limit... try using your brakes on your car when going 35 mph. Not too difficult. Now try doing that on your bike, while descending... ... .l.. enough said.
I was visiting my brother in law in SF once. After a delightful day of walking up and down everywhere I asked, "how does a kid ever learn how to ride a bike here?"
-
Permalink Reply by Far'arned Retrogrumpalunkus #63 on
-
Lesson learned.
If something bad happens don't talk to anyone but your lawyer. Don't blog about it, don't make statements to the cops, don't say squat. They'll use it to hang you. This is how the world works today.
-
-
You (and everyone) should watch this, or at least listen to it while going about your morning routine or whatever:
James BlackHeron said:Lesson learned.
If something bad happens don't talk to anyone but your lawyer. Don't blog about it, don't make statements to the cops, don't say squat. They'll use it to hang you. This is how the world works today.
-
-
Yes Howard, a MILLION time YES!!!
I think I've hot-linked that exact video a hundred times into this, and many other internet forums.Also the Flex Your Rights series of videos.
Never forget that cops are under no compulsion to tell you the truth. The Supreme Court has upheld that they can tell you any story, make any fake deal to trick you, feed you any load of BS to get you to confess to a crime, to give up your rights willingly, and to cooperate in the investigation against you. They don't have to tell you the truth and can "bargain" with you on "going easy on you" in bad faith.
But if YOU lie to them they will hang you for it. Everything you say can and will be used against you in court if it helps the case against you. If you make a statement it's almost impossible to phrase it in a way that can help you and it can always be used against you. DO NOT SAY ANYTHING. Do not wave your rights to search, to privacy, to self-incrimination. And for god's sake do not LIE to them or ever change your story in the slightest degree.
Do not believe their stories about them going easy on you if you cooperate or consent to a search. The cops job is not to be prosecutor -but to be an investigator. It's the job of the prosecutor to charge you so there is no way they have the choice to "go easy on you." If they tell you this they are merely LYING to you to get you to cooperate in hanging yourself.
h' said:You (and everyone) should watch this, or at least listen to it while going about your morning routine or whatever:
James BlackHeron said:Lesson learned.
If something bad happens don't talk to anyone but your lawyer. Don't blog about it, don't make statements to the cops, don't say squat. They'll use it to hang you. This is how the world works today.
-
Permalink Reply by Jason W on
-
3 pages and no one has mentioned what the pedestrian was doing? Was he darting through the intersection against the traffic light? Not looking where he was going? I find accidents happen when 2 idiots collide, not one.
-
Permalink Reply by Anne Alt on
-
The description in the Trib article is close to the SF Chronicle article, which described a crosswalk crowded with pedestrians crossing with the walk signal.
-
-
The trib article does not say that. Read it again
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/sns-rt-us-usa-cyclist-sanfrancis...
What SF chronicle article are you talking about? I googled it, and only found this:
http://www.sfgate.com/crime/article/Bicyclist-who-ran-down-man-71-p...
which also does not say anything about whether the ped had the light or not.Did you really read that or are you just making that up?
And let's look at it logically. If the cyclist was blowing a yellow light, then how would people crossing have a walk signal? If he was REALLY late, they would have just gotten the walk signal, and you aren't entitled to plow into an intersection when it turns green, motorist or pedestrian alike.
-
Permalink Reply by Kevin C Dormant on
-
Here's the June 14th SF Chronicle article which contains the following passage:
A posting that originated from Bucchere's e-mail address soon after the accident gave the following account: "I was already way too committed to stop. ... I couldn't see a line through the crowd and I couldn't stop, so I laid it down and just plowed through the crowded crosswalk in the least-populated place I could find."
Cameron Puetz said:The article states:
Chris Bucchere, 36, is accused of speeding downhill through a red light and into an intersection crowded with pedestrians in the city's Castro District on March 29. He ended up striking Sutchi Hui, 71, who was crossing the street with his wife and died of his injuries four days later.
When cross traffic has a red light, and the crosswalk is crowded, it's resonable to infer that the pedestrians have a walk signal.
Jason said:The trib article does not say that. Read it again
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/sns-rt-us-usa-cyclist-sanfrancis...
What SF chronicle article are you talking about? I googled it, and only found this:
http://www.sfgate.com/crime/article/Bicyclist-who-ran-down-man-71-p...
which also does not say anything about whether the ped had the light or not.Did you really read that or are you just making that up?
And let's look at it logically. If the cyclist was blowing a yellow light, then how would people crossing have a walk signal? If he was REALLY late, they would have just gotten the walk signal, and you aren't entitled to plow into an intersection when it turns green, motorist or pedestrian alike.
-
Permalink Reply by David Barish on
-
After seeing the last reply I did a Google search and sampled the New York Times article. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/16/us/san-francisco-cyclist-charged-...
The article does not say the pedestrian was crossing at the green. However, it does say the cyclist was crossing at the red. Specifically, the article says, "Crossing a busy intersection when a traffic light turned red, Mr. Bucchere struck Sutchi Hui, 71, as he and his wife crossed the street. Both men tumbled some 20 feet along the street. Mr. Hui died of his injuries several days later.
News of the crash spread rapidly after people began sharing an online post on a cycling Web site that police officials believe Mr. Bucchere wrote. In the post, the writer describes the moments before the collision, saying he was “too committed” to stop at the light. “I laid it down and just plowed through the crowded crosswalk in the least-populated place I could find,” the post read. The entry goes on to detail the “river of blood on the asphalt” coming from Mr. Hui."
Going back to your analysis- if the cyclist says the crosswalk was crowded, do we assume that the pedestrians in the crosswalk had the green? Or, do we assume they were all scofflaws and crossing in the red? The way I read the cyclists own comments it appears he had the red, knew he had the red and made the decision to go anyway and attempt to minimize his damage. The poor pedestrian appears to have been walking with the green. At worst he was a lemming who was in the same position as other pedestrians. It seems more likely that he was where he was supposed to be on the road and was hit by something he should not have had to expect. He might as well have been hit by an asteroid.
-
-
Does this intersection have a ped scramble period in the program? It could be that the peds had a walk light and all the vehicular traffic had reds which the cyclist ignored.
It's all speculation though. I suppose we will find out more as the trial progresses. I doubt it will be a very long trial once t starts. Has it been scheduled yet?
-
-
Why stop there? I think it entirely possible that the 71-year-old victim was feeling suicidal, and waited for a cyclist to dart out in front of. And poor Chris . . . talk about being in the wrong place at the wrong time.
Jason said:3 pages and no one has mentioned what the pedestrian was doing? Was he darting through the intersection against the traffic light? Not looking where he was going? I find accidents happen when 2 idiots collide, not one.
- ‹ Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
Groups
-
Chicago Ride of Silence
118 members
-
Chicagoland Beer Explora…
203 members
-
Critical Mass discussion
262 members
-
Chicago Randonneurs
269 members
-
Walk Bike Transit
63 members
© 2008-2016 The Chainlink Community, L.L.C.
Powered by
