Should cyclist go to jail for riding a fixie?

Cyclist kills pedestrian, authorities say if he were riding a bike with "proper brakes", he could have stopped in time. What do you think?


http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-london-40927791

Views: 980

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by TonyP on August 14, 2017 at 4:20pm

Around these parts a pedestrian has the right of way, so I guess that he's the one at fault, brakes or not.

Permalink Reply by Jim Reho on August 14, 2017 at 4:32pm

I think that under the proper fact situation, given what I read about the law in the UK, the prosecution has a valid argument.  There is no doubt that, at least most of the time, brakes can stop a bike considerably faster than skidding or any other method used with fixies.  Brakes are there for a reason, and they are required under the law (at least in front) by most municipalities.  A trier of fact could definitely find that the violation of law committed by the offender was a proximate cause of the woman's fatal injury.  What kind of jail time that involves in the UK, I don't know.  

Plus, although it may not be strictly relevant in a legal sense, there is the fact that the guy who killed the woman is the jerk of the century, if not the millennium.  He seems to have been way more concerned about how his bike was doing than how the woman he hit was doing.  His callous attitude alone ought to be a crime.  

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4788488/Cyclist-rode-woman-...

Just one cyclist like that does more harm to the cause of cycling than a thousand cyclists who try to be courteous and ride safely.  I mean, this creep is making international news.  It pretty near makes me despair.  Maybe I'll start handing out candy bars to drivers at intersections, or cleaning their windows for free.

Permalink Reply by V W on August 15, 2017 at 1:54am

It's illegal to crash into and kill someone no matter what you're riding. That a vehicle is not street legal would tend to show more culpability, and more recklessness on the part of the driver.

Permalink Reply by TonyP on August 15, 2017 at 3:25am

Vehicular manslaughter.

Permalink Reply by Jaik S. on August 15, 2017 at 6:45am

I was out on the 606 at dusk a few days ago. There's a group of Fixie riders that were treating it as if it was a race track. I love riding a fixie, though I haven't had one for a few years...but also, just be responsible and considerate. It's only a matter of time before the first one hits someone and the group of them come crashing down on top. 

Permalink Reply by Jaik S. on August 23, 2017 at 7:43am
Permalink Reply by Yasmeen on August 24, 2017 at 2:42am

Update on the case:

"Alliston, aged 20, was convicted at the Old Bailey of causing bodily harm through wanton or furious driving, contrary to the Offences Against the Person Act 1861.

He was acquitted of manslaughter in connection with the 44-year-old’s death, but has been warned by Judge Wendy Joseph QC that he may well face a jail term when he is sentenced next month."

http://road.cc/content/news/228180-husband-woman-killed-cyclist-cal...

Of course, I don't know all of the details of the case but it does bother me that he had time to yell out to her a few times, could see she wasn't getting the message but still crashed into her. If you are in a congested area, going 20 mph concerns me because we all know the reality - cars don't see us, pedestrians can be in their own world. I'll defend a cyclist with all my heart but in this case, I worry this wasn't responsible riding. 

Permalink Reply by TonyP on August 24, 2017 at 3:50am

You worry that this wasn't responsible riding! He ran into a pedestrian that he clearly saw.

Defending this guy isn't any different than a motorist defending a driver that left crossed a cyclist who had the right of way. If we, as cyclists, want to be treated fairly, we must honestly acknowledge when a cyclist is in the wrong. 

Defending a cyclist in the wrong does nothing to help us as a whole in the eyes of non-cyclists, but acknowledging that said cyclist is at fault shows the non cycling public that we, as a whole, do not consider ourselves privileged.

When I pull up to a stop sign and yield the right of way to an automobile and don't know if the auto is going to take the right of way that is his\hers, or show confusion that I yielded said right of way, it is because of cyclists who ride as if they are the only ones who matter, such as the clown involved in that accident. Or should I say crash, as many want it called when it is a car\bike accident.

An automobile that hits a pedestrian is in the wrong, so if we, as cyclists, want to be considered a vehicle when riding in traffic, we must be willing to take the blame when in the wrong. 

Permalink Reply by Yasmeen on August 24, 2017 at 3:54am

I'm definitely not defending him. 

Permalink Reply by TonyP on August 24, 2017 at 4:06am

I apologize that I misinterpreted your worry.

But I do stand by everything I wrote when it comes to treatment of cyclists in traffic.

Permalink Reply by Yasmeen on August 24, 2017 at 4:12am

Agreed. We are not without responsibility. 

Permalink Reply by David Henri on August 24, 2017 at 5:31am

Just the other day, commuting into the loop, at Milwaukee and Kinzie, I say an older guy, my age, around 55 or 60, riding a fixie with no brakes, into the loop.  I didn't say anything but my mind was in overdrive.  Seriously, no brakes in the loop?  With pedestrians all over the place, plugged in and tuned out.  It's just waiting to crash sooner or later.  It isn't cool.

RSS

Groups

© 2008-2016   The Chainlink Community, L.L.C.   Powered by

Disclaimer  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service