Forum menu
People here are to quick to defend his actions and condemn the driver .
Please point out where I'm defending the rider. I condemn the driver because he caused the crash by not looking properly.
This man was very much responsible for his own demise and to claim otherwise is ridicules .
So the police were wrong to prosecute and the court was wrong to convict the driver of causing his death? I'm so glad we have such an expert on our forum to point out to us that everybody involved in the judicial system is ridiculous.
People saying this would still have happened at 60.
If he had set off when he did and ridden sensibly with in the speed limits he would not have been in that crash, FACT .
Because he wouldn't have made it to that junction at the point the unobservant driver was pulling across it? Because that's the only was in which that is a fact. Are you seriously claiming that if the biker had been doing 60 and been in the same position he was when the driver started his turn that the collision wouldn't have happened?
People here are to quick to defend his actions and condemn the driver .
Because I can only imagine this is how they behave on the roads.
About 2 people have tried to defend the Motorcyclist, the rest agree that both were equally to blame the car driver was the ultimate part of the incident but the court can't prosecute the dead.
About 2 people have tried to defend the Motorcyclist
...and have been quite rightly shot down.
People here are to quick to defend his actions and condemn the driver .
It would still have been the driver's fault for driving into a space he hadn't checked was clear.
Do you not read what you write .
If this chap rode like this regularly , he regularly put others life at risk.
If this chap rode like this regularly , he regularly put others life at risk.
Yup, we've got that one too.
How is that defending the rider?
Yup, we've got that one too.
Not everyone does though sadly,
And as you are a paramedic I am sure you see first hand the results of reckless driving.
And when people try to defend such driving it really winds me up.
Go on then, who do you think is defending the riding? Who exactly are you trying to have an argument with?
On the contrary, it seems an awful lot like you're defending the driving of the driver who pulled into a space he hadn't checked was clear. Strangely enough, if you check the police classification of reasons for KSI collisions, a lot more involved failure to observe than excessive speed.
Not everyone does though sadly,
And as you are a paramedic I am sure you see first hand the results of reckless driving.
About 2 people who haven't favoured well, you're blaming the wrong people.
I see results of many a foolish thing, people overtaking where they shouldn't, people pulling out when it's not clear, people talking on their phones, falling asleep and yes speeding.
People saying this would still have happened at 60.
If he had set off when he did and ridden sensibly with in the speed limits he would not have been in that crash, FACT .
True, he may not have had [i]that[/i] accident, but statistically as a motorcyclist he was much more likely to have a serious accident compared to other other road users (28 x), and the likelihood of that accident being fatal were much higher.
From a 2004 survey on motorcycle accidents ([url= http://speedcamerareport.co.uk/dft_motorcycle_accidents.pdf ]Clarke[/url]), right of way violation accidents accounted for 38% (681) of all motorcyclist casualties and that road users [u][i][b]other[/b][/i][/u] than the injured motorcyclists are usually the cause.
I believe that it was the fault of all involved do you.
If the rider had been adhering to the speed limit I would have held the driver entirely at fault .
His mother said herself that he went to fast, like it was no big deal.
The driver made a genuine mistake, the sort many make everyday. The rider took a deliberate calculated risk which would involve coming up against a driver mistake, which backfired.
He deliberately took his own life (and others) in his hands for a cheap thrill.
For that I have no sympathy .
Anyone who expects to not come up against a careless driver , never mind gambling on that fact is foolish to say the least.
Frustrating this..
As Drac says. Almost nobody is defending the biker's riding. People who ride like that are in a small minority and sadly for them and their families the result is what we see on the video. However an awful lot of people drive like the driver in the video and seek to excuse themselves by laying the blame entirely on others. That is not acceptable driving by the bloke in the car. They are both responsible for this and only one of them died. You don't seem to appreciate this.
I do appreciate this, but that is sadly what happens when leather meets steel .
More reason to ride defensively On the roads and save the thrills for the track.
Yes. But also, on the road. Pay attention to what you are doing, look where you are going and consider the consequences of steering a ton of steel in a public place. Do not be complacent about driving a car.
errr.... OP: thanks for posting, kind of. I recognised the face. Came from the same small North Norfolk market town. Used to race him round the town clock on our nifty fifties. Anyway,that means nothing and is not of any importance. Very brave mother, and I am sure it will get its message across to at least 1 person and avoid at least 1 accident, which is a good thing.
A year or so ago there was a lad killed at the Balloch junction in Inverness. He was going 30-40mph when a car pulled out on him. This accident reminded me of this and if it never happened I'd probably be agreeing with the folk that you stand a far better chance of survival at junctions if you pass at the speed limit or under the limit. I do speed in the car and on the bike but having been put in an ambulance after getting knocked off the road bike because of a careless driver not even stopping at the junction before pulling out, and being slammed into by a car undertaking another car that I was a passenger in (approx 35mph) I really fear passing junctions even at the speed limit. After the road bike ambulance accident, it shook me up for a good few years passing all sorts of junctions. Even little dirt tracks in the middle of the countryside where you could see that there was nobody around. You still fear the worst in the first year after it happens and convince yourself that a rabbit or something will run out of nowhere. You gradually gain the confidence back but it takes years. 15 years or so on I still feel the negative thoughts inside when approaching junctions. So to watch this and see someone approaching a junction (from my point of view after having slammed a car and being slammed sideways by a car) that the chap probably never experienced an incident at a junction of this type in the past. His riding makes me feel like he may have had the attitude of 'you wait for me,you give way for me, I'm in the right' because of never experiencing anything like that before (obviously at far slower speeds!)
I think he's just gradually gained confidence over his 22? years of biking and never found out early enough that 'being in the right' isn't, and will never be your ticket to immortality.
Maybe a few smaller incidents might have saved him.
I believe that it was the fault of all involved do you.
If that was aimed at me, then you should probably try reading the whole thread. Earlier I wrote:
As I wrote above, the biker was riding way too fast, but it was the driver who most directly caused the collision - for those who've missed the point, this video points out that both parties did something wrong.
If you pause the video at the moment he passes the last car. The car that hits him is barely a spec in the distance.
The impact is 4 seconds later.
This mans action contributed greatly to his own death .
Guys, can we stop this self opinionated high-horse riding?
Thanks, knew you could all see sense.
So long as you're riding your high horse under the speed limit you'll be fine.
People who ride like that are in a small minority
What, people who make mistakes? Who get complacent?
No. We all do it.
That's why they are there cougar , accept if you are one of the gifted few who feel exempt.
If you pause the video at the moment he passes the last car. The car that hits him is barely a spec in the distance.
Yeah but that's not the perspective a human eye gives, you can't use that as the focus point is very different.
It's great to know that singletrack holds a zero tolerance view towards bunny girls but is sympathetic towards dangerous riding and a flagrant disregard for speed limits .
I wonder if bunny girls kill more people than people who feel above the speed laws .
You can have your high horse back cougar in case you see someone sporting a little fluffy tail .
Get a grip
If you pause the video at the moment he passes the last car. The car that hits him is barely a spec in the distance.
It's a wide angle lens. Makes stuff look miles away
It's great to know that singletrack holds a zero tolerance view towards bunny girls but is sympathetic towards dangerous riding and a flagrant disregard for speed limits .
[img] 
[/img]
jeez, is chip still digging? Will somebody take the spade off that man.
Chip, I have read pretty much all of this thread, I dont think anyone apart from Weeksey has defended the guys speed. He contributed to his untimely end. But it was the mistake by the car driver that killed him.
I did state that after a rideout yesterday his speed was excessive. Although his fairing would make that easier.
I'm still not saying I wouldn't or don't do it but I was analysing when out what similar scenarios I found myself in. If I had the oncoming car he should have seen, I'd have backed off. Other than that, meh, I did worse yesterday.
See, even weeksy isn't full on defending the biker.
and even Weeksey seems to see the problem he's just not prepared to slate him for it.
Lets just put this one to bed though:
If you pause the video at the moment he passes the last car. The car that hits him is barely a spec in the distance.
The impact is 4 seconds later.
I posted [url= http://goo.gl/maps/3TXSY ]this[/url] earlier from the perspective of the biker just before he passes the car, with the lorry at about where the car is when it makes the turn. [url= http://goo.gl/maps/8RlY4 ]This[/url] is from where the car is when it makes the turn - the lorry in the distance here is a second or two further back from where the bike passes the car (apologies that I can't get vehicles at just the right distance - unfortunately the traffic didn't cooperate when the google camera car was there).
Or of course you could always take the expert evidence presented at the court case from those people who have far more information and know far more about this than you or me, that not only should the bike (and car it overtook) have been clearly visible for 7s before the collision (before in fact the car entered the right turn lane), but that drivers behind the one who caused the collision had seen the bike.
It's great to know that singletrack holds a zero tolerance view towards bunny girls but is sympathetic towards dangerous riding and a flagrant disregard for speed limits .
Well, it's nothing if not a consistent disregard of the facts.
It's only shitty fate that put the two of them together where it did. The speed of the bike is irrelevant because he would have been just as dead at 50 or 60 as he would at 97, argueing he would have been five seconds later if he'd stopped to blow his nose is pointless. Respect his mum's point of view, take more care on the road and sleep easier for making the world a better place.
Take more care = sensible speed.
The driver who caused the accident wasn't speeding, as far as I know.
The speed of the bike is irrelevant because he would have been just as dead at 50 or 60 as he would at 97,
Half the speed means a lot more time to react, if you want to give yourself a chance slow down. This is not excusing anything the driver did, the driver caused the accident. Stuff like this happens so be prepared for it - again this is not saying it was the riders fault just that he took away his options of reaction time & stopping distance.
Anyone know why they tell kids not to run in school?
Two simple science lessons:
Walk into a brick wall at progressively faster speeds, does it
a) Hurt more as you get faster
b) Hurt less as you get faster
Have a friend try to punch you in the face at progressively faster speeds, are you
a) Able to move out of the way faster at low speeds or
b) Able to move out of the way faster at high speeds.
Someone posted a picture on the internet ,but (conveniently) I cant find it at the mo but I think it was some argumentative prove the point forum.
The picture shows the junction from the cars view turning right ,well maybe a bit further back but its not half a mile ,and the distance maximum you can actually see up the road ,theres a lorry parked there and its a tiny little spec, hardly visible at all, from what the blurb said the time to this object is 4 seconds at the speed given give or take some . whatever figure between that speck and the car turning lane.
I don't actually know if the driver saw the bike or not but if you can only just see an HGV at that distance what hope in hell do you stand of seeing a bike moving at nearly twice the NSL
As a motorcyclist and as i got older I tend to back off near junctions ,you never know who's seen you and who hasn't
looking at that google maps link and the road layout of that junction, the rider was totally reckless approaching at those speeds with that amount of traffic. Even without the situation that killed him he could have just as easily been in trouble with cars turning right and traffic passing on the inside.
Totally reckless is a massive over-exaggeration IMO.
Slightly foolish with massive consquences in hindsight... but totally reckless is laughable IMO.
9999 out of 10000 he'd do that and have 0 consequences....
Travelling 37mph over the speed limit IS classified as reckless in a court of law. If caught on camera he would have lost his license and had a hefty penalty. Unfortunately for him, he like a lot of the Power Ranger crew did not think it was reckless and he has paid the ultimate penalty. I hope for your own sake you re-evaluate your behaviours when on the public road.
If he had survived but killed the motorist in the car or perhaps even someone walking on the verge or pavement would that be reckless?
both could have happened ,but before someone pipes up "but they didn't" the same could be said if he was doing 50- 60 as it has many times in the 15 or so pages of this thread
I don't actually know if the driver saw the bike or not
You would if you'd read any of the previous 14 pages. The driver confessed to seeing neither the bike nor the oncoming car it'd just passed.