Viewing 31 posts - 1 through 31 (of 31 total)
  • Hit and run on the BBC website
  • eddiebaby
    Free Member
    drlex
    Free Member

    Leicester Mercury has a little more (and also reasonably measured comments beneath, at time of reading). Hope that the Police trace the driver and that the rider recovers – apparently her head fell on her “lucky rucksack.”

    TiRed
    Full Member

    As the victim of a hit and run, I think they’ll do everything they can to catch the driver. They have exactly 24 hrs to come forward from the time of the accident. If they have any sense they will have done so by now. Mine was caught and she was only spared a prison sentence on account of having a young child (who basically grassed her up when they came calling 😯 ).

    Fresh Goods Friday 696: The Middling Edition

    Fresh Goods Friday 696: The Middlin...
    Latest Singletrack Videos
    DezB
    Free Member

    Quality reporting “Witnesses said the cyclist was not wearing any high-visibility clothing”

    Incredible. Witnesses didn’t say the car edged forward twice before realising there was someone lying the road!

    amedias
    Free Member

    Quality reporting “Witnesses said the cyclist was not wearing any high-visibility clothing”

    Indeed, regardless of the details of the actual collision that has no bearing on the driver leaving the scene, or are they implying that if the rider was wearing hi-vis the driver might not have left the scene? 🙄

    PeterPoddy
    Free Member

    If anyone ever does that to me they’d better hope that I’m left unconscious because I’ve got a photographic memory for registration plates, a one second glance and I’ve memorised it.

    Scumbag.

    HoratioHufnagel
    Free Member

    Seems as a cyclist you’re either invisible or dressed in hi-viz these days, no normal levels of visibility exist.

    PJM1974
    Free Member

    I sincerely hope that this thread doesn’t descend into victim blaming.

    The driver edged forward twice at the cyclist lying in the road before driving away without stopping to check for injury. That fact alone makes this a hit and run. The best possible outcome is that the driver is identified and made to appear in court to explain their actions.

    daniel_owen_uk
    Free Member

    Interesting that the driver decided to change where they were going! Straight on… no wait, just hit someone better take a right!

    scrumfled
    Free Member

    No excusing leaving the scene….

    …interesting to look at the traffic lights though.

    jam-bo
    Full Member

    …interesting to look at the traffic lights though.

    the video on the mercury link show a different angle with the lights changing to green as the car approached.

    epicsteve
    Free Member

    Hope the polie catch the driver – possibly they might have been drunk, hence leaving the scene. The cyclist obviously wasn’t doing herself any favours if she did ride through a red light at night without lights etc.

    It’s not uncommon to see someone on some shite bike riding on the road at night without lights and wearing dark clothing. Given how cheap lights can be bought it does make you wonder what value they place on their own lives.

    montgomery
    Free Member

    There are some people behind the wheel who shouldn’t be, right enough. I was standing on the pavement talking with a mate by a junction on Tuesday, when an old woman pulled out at walking speed and piled head on into the parked car opposite, trashing the rear door. She calmly reversed, put a bit more lock on it – and drove away like nothing had happened! I took the number and gave it to the damaged car’s owner when he came back shortly, along with my phone number. I really don’t want people like that on the road; if they can’t avoid a parked car at 5mph, what will they be like coming up behind me at 30mph when I’m on my bike?

    Bez
    Full Member

    It’s not uncommon to see someone on some shite bike riding on the road at night without lights and wearing dark clothing.

    Indeed, which is something that can be accounted for. Most of the paperboys round our way ride without lights, as do loads of the students near work, so in the darker months it’s not hard to keep an eye out for them. In any case streetlit areas they’re perfectly visible; speaking from behind a steering wheel I think it’s unreasonable to say that unlit people aren’t adequately visible under streetlighting. They may not be optimally visible and they may not be adequately legal, but they’re adequately visible if you’re adequately looking.

    This incident was clearly under decent street lighting, too, and there’s a significant time between the cyclist entering the junction and the driver applying the brakes, so regardless of the victim allegedly not having lights it should be a reasonable expectation that they would have been seen. Sadly it won’t work like that in the minds of most observers, who won’t agree with the above argument that street lighting manages to make things adequately visible.

    The driver edged forward twice at the cyclist lying in the road before driving away without stopping to check for injury.

    Looks to me like they immediately panic and try to engage reverse, failing twice and then finding it.

    HoratioHufnagel
    Free Member

    It’s not uncommon to see someone on some shite bike riding on the road at night without lights and wearing dark clothing.

    Is this not similar situation to someone crossing the road, especially in the above case where they are perpendicular to the cars motion?

    epicsteve
    Free Member

    so regardless of the victim allegedly not having lights it should be a reasonable expectation that they would have been seen

    Seems very, very, very stupid to leave your safety to a “reasonable expectation” instead of just coughing a few quid on a set of lights and some batteries. It’s certainly not a “reasonable expectation” that every driver is going to be sober and/or particularly observant. Jumping a red light also reduces any “reasonable expectation” somewhat as well.

    The problem with situations like this one is it’s not a case of biker good/car bad – it looks like they’re both idiots and both contributed significantly to causing the accident.

    epicsteve
    Free Member

    Is this not similar situation to someone crossing the road, especially in the above case where they are perpendicular to the cars motion?

    It’s perhaps similar to someone in dark clothing jumping out in front of a car at night. If the car driver is sober, competent and has sufficient distance then they should also be able to stop. Might be best not to jump out in front of the car in the first place though.

    reggiegasket
    Free Member

    it’s only a matter of time until cars have GPS trackers. The tech is ready.

    tomnavman
    Free Member

    Not trying to defend not having lights but… Would lights have made much / any difference? The car is side on to the bike.

    epicsteve
    Free Member

    Not trying to defend not having lights but… Would lights have made much / any difference? The car is side on to the bike.

    Depends on the lights I suppose as not all of them through off much light to the side. Not jumping the red light would definitely have helped though.

    Bez
    Full Member

    Seems very, very, very stupid to leave your safety to a “reasonable expectation” instead of just coughing a few quid on a set of lights and some batteries.

    I’m not disagreeing with that.

    It’s certainly not a “reasonable expectation” that every driver is going to be sober and/or particularly observant.

    I’m not disagreeing with that either.

    I don’t mean “expectation” in the sense of assuming that everyone will meet a certain level of competence and care. What I mean is that anyone who doesn’t meet that level of competence and care should be considered to have fallen below what is expected in terms of competence and care.

    When you approach a junction it should be a reasonable expectation to check for anyone entering it from another direction even if you have a green light that expectation is pretty well recognised) and I’d argue it should also be a reasonable expectation that you should be able to see any road user—with or without lights—under street lighting (that expectation is somewhat less common).

    epicsteve
    Free Member

    it’s only a matter of time until cars have GPS trackers. The tech is ready.

    I reckon a lot of cars down here in London are not registered to the people who now own them and are being driven without insurance, tax and possibly even a valid license. Given how much of our traffic enforcement is based on cameras etc. then the chances of getting stopped are reasonably low (and the chances of a successful prosecution being even lower) then I suspect there are quite a few drivers out there that will bolt after any accident, whether its their fault or not.

    epicsteve
    Free Member

    I don’t mean “expectation” in the sense of assuming that everyone will meet a certain level of competence and care. What I mean is that anyone who doesn’t meet that level of competence and care should be considered to have fallen below what is expected in terms of competence and care.

    When you approach a junction it should be a reasonable expectation to check for anyone entering it from another direction even if you have a green light that expectation is pretty well recognised) and I’d argue it should also be a reasonable expectation that you should be able to see any road user—with or without lights—under street lighting (that expectation is somewhat less common).

    Personally I think that driver should have had time to stop without hitting the cyclist. If they hadn’t done a runner it wouldn’t even have come up though, because the cyclist would have got 100% of the blame for the incident due to the lack of lights and jumping the red light.

    whitestone
    Free Member

    This is what the Highway Code has to say about traffic lights, in particular a green light:

    GREEN means you may go on if the way is clear. Take special care if you intend to turn left or right and give way to pedestrians who are crossing

    I think it could be made clearer if it was changed (changes in bold) to:

    GREEN means you may go on if the way is clear and it is safe to do so. Take special care if you intend to turn left or right. Give way to pedestrians or other vulnerable road users who are crossing

    epicsteve
    Free Member

    “GREEN means you may go on if the way is clear and it is safe to do so. Take special care if you intend to turn left or right. Give way to pedestrians or other vulnerable road users who are crossing”

    So your interpretation of the highway code is that cyclist always has right of way, even if they have a red light and other road users have green…? Not that the cyclist was crossing the road- they were on the road.

    Pretty weak – although I still agree that the driver should have been able to stop before hitting the suicidal cyclist.

    chakaping
    Free Member

    Bit weird that neither of them appeared to notice the other, or at least try to take any evasive action.

    whitestone
    Free Member

    No, there are some lights where unless you are fit and able it’s all but impossible as a pedestrian to cross in time. What happens if the junction is so big that even though you cross the stop line when the lights are on green in your favour they then turn turn green for the road crossing yours before you’ve cleared the junction?

    The current wording covers this – you shouldn’t set off across a light controlled junction if the way isn’t clear.

    Bez
    Full Member

    Bit weird that neither of them appeared to notice the other, or at least try to take any evasive action.

    Yeah. It’s 4am if the CCTV clock is correct, and many of the cycling fatalities at that sort of time of day have featured at least one party having consumed drugs and/or alcohol; it wouldn’t be surprising if that was the case here.

    DezB
    Free Member

    Does it really matter if the cyclist “deserved” it or not? Leaving someone writhing in the road in pain is the story here. That sort of person may even run into a cyclist on purpose for all we know. Pure scum.

    whitestone
    Free Member

    Indeed. Regardless of blame/fault, the driver will(should) be prosecuted for leaving the scene of an accident.

    epicsteve
    Free Member

    Indeed. Regardless of blame/fault, the driver will(should) be prosecuted for leaving the scene of an accident.

    Definitely. I suspect there is a very good chance there are other factors in them doing a runner as well – maybe been drinking or other issues with their legality to drive.

    At that time of night it could have been a while before anyone else arrived on the scene so not stopping to check the cyclist and call for help could have tragic consequences.

Viewing 31 posts - 1 through 31 (of 31 total)

The topic ‘Hit and run on the BBC website’ is closed to new replies.