Jeremy, was she turning right into another road across the path of the cyclist? This is what it sounded like in the story.whether she was stationary for a moment before the crossing or moving very slowly,i cant see her being anything more than 10mph.
I have had a car creep up to a junction (cross roads, so not quite the same) and the driver didnt quite stop at the junction,then continued across my path when i was time trialling. I couldnt stop and he must have been going no more than 10mph. I hit the side of him and to cut a long story short, couldnt remember how to get home when one of the other time triallers fathers gave me a lift home. I felt bad for days with a compressed helmet/loss of memory.
anyways, he crossed the road, very slowly.I might have been 25-30mph at this point as it was slightly downhill and the driver blamed the sun in his eyes. The police came to my house a day or so later and said that he had been to the scene of the accident to see the position of the sun at that exact time and reported it to be nowhere near where the driver said it was. The driver was charged.
Mogrim wrote:(sorry i cant add quotes!)
"In this case to my mind TJ's friend is clearly at fault: if you can't see where you're going due to glare you should be driving at 10mph, and I find it hard to believe that driving at that speed would cause sufficient injury to lead (albeit indirectly) to death"
The arguement could be that the cyclist had no chance or made no attempt to slow down before impact. This is probably very likely.
Having been in this situation i managed to see that the driver wasnt stopping and i got to the brakes. All i managed was a skid that hardly slowed me down then i hit the side of the car.TJs story makes me feel very lucky.