https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-45497026

Good last sentence from the Beeb to give a bit of context

Hmm, have you seen the video of it.  She stepped out into the road without looking, and it was as much her walking into the cyclist as the cyclist riding into her.

Wanton and furious driving innit. IANAL

Why are they still reporting it as ‘she was struck by the cyclist’? – the video shows she ran straight into his path, and it was more that she collided with him, than he collided with her.

I suppose that wouldn’t provoke as much outrage.

Its the hit and run bit that is interesting. Just WHY would you do that if you are innocent?

Maybe he was concussed, perhaps he feared the lynch-mob branding him a “killer e-biker”?

Its the hit and run bit that is interesting. Just WHY would you do that if you are innocent?

Exactly. No smoke without fire.

<insert Simpsons mob picture here>

Vid link?

Just WHY would you do that if you are innocent?

He didnt exactly hit and run. After she walked out in front of him he was around for at least another min or two.

The abandoning of the bike is odd but then as squadra says perhaps concussion. Certainly unlikely to be thinking completely straight.

unfortunately the Sun but shows her suddenly running out. Not sure I would have been able to dodge her.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/7136632/cctv-video-dalston-hit-run-bike-crash/

I’m not a lawyer, but surely his defense will be that he has no recollection of the events, bolstered by a medical expert testifying that somebody suffering a concussion would be confused and might wander off without understanding what happened. The onus is on the prosecution to prove their case, but the video is really the only solid evidence and it shows the woman walking out in front of him without looking.

the video shows she ran straight into his path

Yeah, but notice the story almost immediately compares this to the Charlie Alliston case. Like the press have been waiting for another one like that. This is the nearest they’ve got, so if they include references to that story, people will get the ‘evil cyclists’ thing in their mind again.

^^^I think that video has been cut. I seem to remember seeing it without the actual impact being edited out.

anyone link to footage?

I think that video has been cut.

I am fairly certain saw a different one before but from a quick search that was the only one I could find. Think it is still clear enough who is to blame. Perhaps he can be done for leaving the scene or something but to try and blame him for the accident is nuts.

Hard to say from the video but there is another cyclist who goes through the crossing just before she runs out, and it does appear he is going considerably faster than the previous cyclist, so I think speed could be a factor here.  This will be particularly the case if the bike turns out to be chipped, which I’m sure is being investigated…

From that footage, it looks like she wanted to get run over

anyone link to footage?

Picture a woman, carrying some shopping, doing a little jog out into a wide road without looking. A cyclist, has nowhere to go and no time to brake, collides with her. That’s about it. I’m sure there are people who see a different video from me.

I’m afraid it won’t help anyone if ‘we’ blame the victim.

Any Cyclist has a responsibility to be riding at a speed commensurate with the prevailing conditions.

That means slow enough that he can stop if something happens. Given the scenario in the video linked above he should have been going slow enough to stop if a pedestrian suddenly ran in front of him – just the same as a car driver.

I assume then Jag, you can accurately estimate the distance to the pavement with your mark 1 eyeball, calculate the speed of someone running out in front of you thus how long it would take them to go from point a to point b on their vector and how long it would take you to brake.

I’m totally sure you could do that. Do you do that to everyone on the street? Like some kind of terminator?

Do you travel at 5mph everywhere? Just in case a suicidal person steps out in front of a blind corner?

I assume train drivers who kill them were going to fast for the conditions as well?

So by that then anywhere there is a pavement max speed of any vehicle/horse/thing should be approx. say…5mph just in case?

There does have to be some responsibility to be sensible in public places!!

I’m afraid it won’t help anyone if ‘we’ blame the victim.

just the same as a car driver.

…Who would also have hit her. Maybe she was relying on hearing a car coming when she made her dash…

No opinions on here “help” anyone, in case you hadn’t noticed.

<p>

Picture a woman, carrying some shopping, doing a little jog out into a wide road without looking. A cyclist, has nowhere to go and no time to brake, collides with her. That’s about it. I’m sure there are people who see a different video from me.

</p><p></p><p>

</p><p><em class=”bbcode-em”>I’m afraid it won’t help anyone if ‘we’ blame the victim.</p><p>just the same as a car driver.</p><p>…Who would also have hit her. Maybe she was relying on hearing a car coming when she made her dash…</p><p>No opinions on here “help” anyone, in case you hadn’t noticed.

</p><p>Amazing how objective you can be when it suits you. I wonder…</p><p>

Picture a woman, carrying some shopping, doing a little jog out into a wide road without looking. A driver, has nowhere to go and no time to brake, collides with her. That’s about it. I’m sure there are people who see a different video from me.

</p><p></p><p>Would this pass the acid test?</p>

Ah… heard this one the radio… “women killed by cyclist”… I think “woman killed in incident with man on eBike”… seems more accurate.

I’m totally sure you could do that. Do you do that to everyone on the street? Like some kind of terminator?

No but it is the kind of thing that would be shown in the hazard perception test.

As my instructor said, the only things you can rely upon are that green lights can only turn red and a waiting pedestrians are going to cross, you just can’t rely on when.

So by that then anywhere there is a pavement max speed of any vehicle/horse/thing should be approx. say…5mph just in case?

That would be reductio ad absurdum, but if that was a 30mph limit you wouldn’t do 30 in your car would you, so it stands to reason that the slower cyclist in front was probably doing a more appropriate speed for a busy street with inattentive pedestrians everywhere.

^^^^ This

What’s up squirlieking? P key stuck?

That would be reductio ad absurdum, but if that was a 30mph limit you wouldn’t do 30 in your car would you, so it stands to reason that the slower cyclist in front was probably doing a more appropriate speed for a busy street with inattentive pedestrians everywhere.

So, surely if the cyclist has a duty of care to cycle at an appropriate speed, there should also be a duty of care on the pedestrian to not just run out into the road without seeing what was there first?

If the pedestrian had been walking, which would probably be a more appropriate speed given the inattentive road users everywhere, she likely would not have careered into the cyclist.

I used to cycle down Southall high st on the way home from work and it didn’t matter what speed I cycled at or how many lights I had on, I’d still get people just step off the kerb into my path without looking at all.
I’d probably have to swerve round 2 a week and be able to carry on my way, with an emergency stop perhaps once a week. Sometimes you could see what was about to happen and shout a warning, but not always.

so it stands to reason that the slower cyclist in front was probably doing a more appropriate speed for a busy street with inattentive pedestrians everywhere.

No, it only means that the first cyclist was travelling slower. You have no other comparative vehicles to make your judgement.

Be my guest though and forensically analyse the video to estimate the speed. I somehow doubt the cyclist was travelling faster than the general traffic flow.

Should have been travelling faster, then he’d have missed her.

/s

R.I.P.

Didnt think the cyclist had been charged other than failure to report.

That would be reductio ad absurdum, but if that was a 30mph limit you wouldn’t do 30 in your car would you

Its seems to have clear line of sight. No parked cars to hide people. So wouldnt rule it out. His speed whilst faster than the other cyclist looks not dissimilar to that of the vehicles on the other side.

If she had walked out he might have stood a chance of reacting but someone running out gives little time to respond.

it stands to reason that the slower cyclist in front was probably doing a more appropriate speed for a busy street with inattentive pedestrians everywhere.

That’s a rubbish statement to make. The cyclist in front may have been travelling for a speed that meant they didnt work up a sweat. Just because someone is not going fast on a bike it doesnt mean they are doing so as it’s not safe to do so.

The ebike didnt look to be going excessively fast when I saw the video but I am sure someone will be able to calculate the speed. It is likely that he was going at the motor cut out speed because it’s easy to do so compared to the person in front who was probably just casually cycling a long without wanting to get all sweaty. As soon as you go faster than that the effort gets a lot harder, but that said pretty much anyone can cycle over 15mph.

As I said in the other thread about this I really cannot see how you can blame the cyclist for this given the video. He may well have been travelling faster than the bike in front but does that automatically mean he was travelling dangerously? I doubt the other cyclist could have stopped in time and someone on a proper road bike would have been able to travel much faster.

It is shame the woman died but ultimately she ran out into the road and it could have been two dead people if the cyclist had landed badly. Unless it is proven that the ebike was illegally travelling over the motor cut out limit and still on power then the fact it’s an ebike is pretty irrelevant. Yes the bike weighs a bit more but what if it was a big 20 stone rugby doing 25mph on a road bike or someone on a heavy cargo bike?

“A bystander is seen pleading with the cyclist to stay but he ignores his protests and continues to walk down the street”

Or saying “are you ok mate, maybe wait for an ambo to get you checked over?” seeing as he had a bleeding head wound…

He was riding further out in the road so would have had a chance with the unusual zombie pedestrian that steps off the pavement, but in this case she decide to break into a run to compensate.

If you cycle nearer to the pavement you would have to ride at ridiculously slow speeds to avoid the chance of hitting one of these zombie pedestrians that just steps off the curb.

It would be interesting if there were a spate of cases of proscecuting cyclists for hitting pedestrians jumping off the pavements because all the regular cyclists will then insist on riding in the middle of the road to give them time to react, and sod the cycle lanes.

A cyclist was killed in Reading not long ago by someone crossing without looking. No charges were brought.

Did it make headline news in the national media?

[ rhetorical question ]

DezB blame the forum and not working on older versions of chrome. Now to the point, would you be defending a motorist in the same circumstances?

No, it only means that the first cyclist was travelling slower. You have no other comparative vehicles to make your judgement.

Be my guest though and forensically analyse the video to estimate the speed. I somehow doubt the cyclist was travelling faster than the general traffic flow.

Maybe it’s working in H&S for a while that wired my brain up to be a bit less black and white. Things can be someones fault, but that doesn’t mean other people weren’t contributing factors.

Write down a list of everything that contributed to the accident (i.e. a list of everything that had to happen for the accident to occur).

1) Pedestrian runs out into the road

2) Cyclist was traveling down the road

(you could drill this down indefinitely, should she have been wearing a helmet, should she have had an extra weetabix and run a bit quicker, he should have had a normal bike, but we’ll stop here).

So how do you prevent the same accident happening again,

a) you tell pedestrians not to run into the road

b) you tell road users to keep their speed down in busy areas

Now you can’t 100% rely on either to work, we know pedestrians run out into the road, so it makes sense to slow down and assume they’re about to do something stupid. We know vehicles and their drivers aren’t perfect, so we don’t run into the road. If you assume that both strategies are 90% effective (9/10 pedestrians reconsider running into the road, and 9/10 road users slow down) then you get 99% less crashes rather than just 90% less (or 75% rather than 50%, or 64% rather than 40%, whatever numbers you chose).

Same logic as would be applied to designing an oil refinery, you can make it statistically so that it will only blow up once in 100,000 years (yes, we calculate the probability of each credible failure, then rank it’s consequences, and reduce that probability to an acceptable level) , then we draw a circle round it and tell people not to live there just in case (Bhopal if you want to google a horror story of when this didn’t happen).

The speed might have be a contributing factor, but the primary root cause ends up being the pedestrian running out in the road without looking.

Now if the cyclist was breaking the speed limit, sure, another root cause. If not, it’s a contributing factor and not one the cyclist should be punished for. You can’t predict whether someone is going to run out in front of you, so acceptable speed below the defined limit in that scenario becomes a qualitative measure – weather can be defined more as it effects breaking distance, so it’s easier to define and make accusations of negligence when weather is involved. If any is at fault, it’s whoever set the speed limit in a busy urban environment.