Looks like the results of the inquest are out. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-47396799

That’s some institutional victim blaming shit right there

I’m confused. So the coroner had no evidence of what he was wearing or his equipment? But then proceeded to say:

Dr Boss said the incident should provide a “catalyst” for better safety rules, making six recommendations – including calling for a review of local road intersections.
She also recommended that Australia consider making it mandatory for all cyclists to have flashing rear lights when riding at night.

To answer my own question, there’s more detail on another website:

An investigation found that while Mr Hall’s rear light, which was operated by a dynamo and did not flash, was compliant with road safety laws, it would have been difficult for the driver to see.

It also found that the continuous light could have been misinterpreted by a driver for the static red reflectors on the road’s guideposts.

The design of the road and its shoulder rendered it unsuitable for cyclists, particularly at night, the investigators said.

The inquest heard that Mr Hall had been wearing dark clothing with reflective panels, although the items were not dealt with in accordance with normal police procedures for retaining evidence so their reflective properties could not be tested.

Experienced drivers in Oz usually discover that kangaroos don’t wear reflective clothing or carry lights even though they are often on the road.

And drive accordingly at night.

There are no winners here.

Endurance cycling has lost a legend.

A mother’s lost a son.

Again a horrible accident but the reporting makes no sense.

He was struck by the car traveling at approx 100kph, 62mph.

But

“Police testified that Mr Bobb had been distracted by a parked car as he turned on to the highway, and had no time to avoid the collision”

I suppose it all depends on the junction, slipway?

Experienced drivers in Oz usually discover that kangaroos don’t wear reflective clothing or carry lights even though they are often on the road.

And drive accordingly at night.

I don’t know if things have changed since I drove around Australia (94) but playing count the dead roos was a game to pass away the hours. Crossing the Nullarbor I think that my record spot for one day was upward of 30. Driving accordingly appeared to have more to do with fitting bigger bull bars.

as said no winners…..

full coroner’s report here: https://courts.act.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0007/1324555/Hall.pdf

edit also a detailed not press syndicated day by day of inquest here

https://cycle.org.au/index.php/articles/the-big-issues/mike-hall-inquest/169-day-1-of-the-mike-hall-coronial-inquest

I actually live just a little way from where this happened. It is always sobering to drive along the road. There are still flowers and tributes tied to the fences and trees at the site of the accident. The nearby city of Canberra is very switched on to cyclists. Encountering big groups of riders out along the roads is commonplace. This particular road, however, where the accident happened is fast, narrow, straight and pretty scary. Even in a car, the passing, oncoming traffic is too close for comfort. The highway that it is part of has a long reputation for being a high accident zone. I have never, ever seen a cyclist out along that road. It is a pretty valley though – and I often daydream about a long, memorial cycle loop winding through it.

The full inquest report seems quite comprehensive, and the BBC summary obviously doesn’t go into all the detail. There are a number of witness statements from drivers, some of whom reported that they could clearly see Mike Hall. Others reported they didn’t identify him until they were very close. The coroner does note there is a valid argument that the driver was negligent, but the circumstances of the case mean there could be no indictable offence.

For night riding I always like to have a couple of rear lights, one steady and one flashing, to try and make me stand out as much as possible.

The design of the road and its shoulder rendered it unsuitable for cyclists, particularly at night, the investigators said.

Well that’s completely factually incorrect isn’t it. It’s suitable for cyclists if there are no vehicles on it.

I’ve read it and it’s pretty clear to me the AFP did a shockingly poor job and thus a Coronors court is trying to opine based on half information. Frankly you don’t need to be Einstein to work out that Mike was appropriately lit, riding legally on a highway when some utter loon drove over him. Fundamentally it’s no great surprise that the outcome is such and the Police should have been widely criticised for doing such a shocking job. RIP Mike, every interaction I had was positive and I admired his skills, attitude and persona. I’m not even angry any more as having lived in NZ and ridden a lot in Oz and NZ I’m not surprised.

I don’t know if things have changed since I drove around Australia (94) but playing count the dead roos was a game to pass away the hours.

I think I went 3 years without seeing a single one.

Well that’s completely factually incorrect isn’t it. It’s suitable for cyclists if there are no vehicles on it.

Well yes but as its a road it should be suitable for mixed use. If the coronor can recommend improvements to the physical infrastructure then they should.

Well that’s completely factually incorrect isn’t it. It’s suitable for cyclists if there are no vehicles on it.

And further to that, it could be interpreted as being unsuitable for motor vehicles.

It’s a sad outcome. Especially when you have someone as experienced as Mike Hall, who I’m sure was riding appropriately, and with top of the line kit. To suggest the driver has not committed an offence for killing somebody, who they have zero evidence acted unlawfully in any way. What exactly warrants a conviction? Surely the fact that somebody died is enough to suggest that their driving may not have been adequate?

There is a serious imbalance in attitudes on these issues. We really need to work out how to remove that bias when dealing with them.

Well yes but as its a road it should be suitable for mixed use

Well yes, that is what I said.

What exactly warrants a conviction?

The coroner lists the reasons why no charges were brought in the report linked above. One reason was the failure of the police to preserve evidence. He acknowledges that it can be argued the driver was negligent.

Frankly you don’t need to be Einstein to work out that Mike was appropriately lit, riding legally on a highway when some utter loon drove over him.

Not sure if that’s a serious point or not…? You have absolutely no idea if any of those things are true.

It also found that the continuous light could have been misinterpreted by a driver for the static red reflectors on the road’s guideposts.

Funny how no-one complains about similar lights on motorbikes and cars.

Have to say, tragic as this was, and shocking as the handling of evidence by the Police, having read the more detailed reports of the coroner’s decision, this is one of the fairer and least victim blaming reports I’ve seen after such an incident.

The coroner’s report makes a number of recommendations in several areas intended to improve safety for cyclists. Maybe the Police have got the driver off the hook. Witnesses contradict how well lit Mike Hall was – maybe his light failed, maybe his reflectives didn’t work from the angle the driver came from. We’ll never know. A poster up there who knows the road has said how dangerous they think it is to cycle on.

Making black and white statements sat behind a keyboard on the other side of the world to try and second guess the coroner who had as much evidence as was available just seems pointless posturing.

Let’s hope, for the sake of his family, friends and his memory, that out of this tragedy those coroner’s recommendations are implemented and reduce the chances of it happening again

Funny how no-one complains about similar lights on motorbikes and cars.

On the one hand I agree with you, but they’re also usually larger and moving significantly faster.

It’s not hard to imagine a dim bike light and a dark rider blending into an endless line of red roadside reflectors.

Making black and white statements sat behind a keyboard on the other side of the world to try and second guess the coroner who had as much evidence as was available just seems pointless posturing.

Is it pointless? I can see where people are coming from on both sides. However, we see these cases time and time again.

The guy claimed not to know what he had hit until after the fact. It doesn’t matter what you’re dressed in, whether you’re head to toe in black, non-reflective clothing, you will see them once you’re close enough. I was surprised by an approaching runner the other day, coming towards me in dark clothing and with no light, pretty much the middle of nowhere on a major trunk road and very little shoulder. I still seen them from 100 yards away despite the headlights of approaching traffic.

And yet here we have suggestions that perhaps he should have had a flashing light. Maybe it would have helped, I’m a firm believer myself that a flashing light is important to ensure you’re not just seen, but seen as a cyclist, and thus potentially travelling much slower in the road than the rest of the traffic. But a solid light is pretty much standard on a dynamo, and recommended by many who don’t necessarily share my opinion on flashing lights. It is what bikes come with when you purchase them. If you were in a car and not seen by a juggernaut, who subsequently crashed into, and killed you. No court in the land would utter the words ‘maybe you should have had a flashing light?’

Whilst I partially agree, that this doesn’t look to be the worst handling of a case by any stretch of the imagination, the overall message it sends is not a positive one.

It basically says, cycling on the roads is dangerous, light yourself up like a Christmas tree, you might well get killed anyway, just try to be brighter…

And I think that is something that needs talked about.

It’s not hard to imagine a dim bike light and a dark rider blending into an endless line of red roadside reflectors.

Having never experienced that, I do actually find it hard to imagine.
The only time I’ve not seen a cyclist was because of windscreen pillar blindspot. I was still going slow enough to stop though. Even in the dark, on unlit roads, I’ve seen cyclists in black, without lights. I really do find it hard to imagine someone blending in enough to be completely invisible.
Not a point I’m here to argue about, it’s just how my experience and my imagination are.