Four years jail...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/hampshire/7270751.stm

I can understand what she did was daft, but then the cyclist went
through a red light, as so many seem wont to do. Six of one and half
a dozen of the other, surely?

 

On Fri, 29 Feb 2008 09:15:49 -0800 (PST), "TOG@Toil"

Glad I'm not the only one thinking that. She shouldn't have been on
the phone/speeding but if the bloke had obeyed the traffic laws he
wouldn't be dead.

 

Out fucking rageous.
I don't GAF she was using her phone and the speed wasn't over the top.
The **** got what he was looking for.

 

Sure, but are you prepared to carry out the death sentence on her? Six
of one ...

 

Are you arguing that she should be killed as well? That seems
excessive to me.

best wishes
james

 

But an understandable feeling of revenge under the circumstances.

 

Neither expected the unexpected. "Through a red light", is a bit lacking
in detail no? Cyclists seem to routinely do it round here when turning
left at lights. The sentence does seem OTT, but I would be interested to
hear more of the evidence from eye witnesses. Was he turning left, and
she hit him more as a result of veering whilst texting than by his
manoeuvre?

--
+----------------------------------------------------------------+
| Pete Fisher at Home: |
| Voxan Roadster Gilera Nordwest * 2 Yamaha WR250Z |
| Gilera GFR * 2 Moto Morini 2C/375 Morini 350 "Forgotten Error" |
+----------------------------------------------------------------+

 

Indeed. There is a basic presumption that the cyclist is innocent in
most road cases. Other half knocked a chap off his cycle a year or
two back - she had parked up in a side street, in a marked bay, looked
in her mirror and then started to open the door, Cyclist chappie
coming up fast and too close to the parked cars hit the opening door
and in the process *bent the door frame*, which would indicate he was
moving some. But she was held 100% responsible by the insurers.

 

Removal of traffic lights and barriers could reduce accidents etc
according to this:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/feb/29/guardiancolumnists

 

Highway code rule 239 says, among other things :

you MUST ensure you do not hit anyone when you open your door. Check for
cyclists or other traffic.

Hence the 100% responsibility.

Pete

 

She looked in the mirror and still didn't see him?
He was going too fast? What speed would that be?
Too close to the parked cars? In a side street? How far away can you
get?
"Bent the door frame". If you hit the door nearer the outer edge, you
probably put quite a bit of leverage on the frame.

Based on my similar experience, as a cyclist.

 

We had this discussion regarding texting while driving some time ago here; I
am very much against that sort of behaviour (and that incident shows
why-you're ) but I still think the verdict is a harsh. The rider went
through a red light and wasn't even wearing a helmet, that's really tempting
fate, unless you're in a Range Rover (where you tempt other people's fates).
Fair enough, she is responsible for the death of a person, but the way the
incident is presented, the accident happened mainly because of his rather
than her stupidity. It'd be a different story if she were speeding at the
same time.

I still think that texting while driving is wrong and worthy of punishment.


Geo

 

<snip own reply>

Bad form and all that...

I should have read the entire item before stating my opinion, but I had
already read it somewhere else and there was no mention of speeding there. I
still think the rider had it coming, but under these circumstnances I don't
find the sentence absurd.


Geo

 

As always, your speed should allow you to stop in the distance you can
see to be clear. In the door-zone, this means the number of cars ahead
with empty road-side seats.

 

She was speeding, from the article "The 25-year-old from Hythe, Hampshire,
was driving at 45mph in a 30mph zone." I too don't like the tone in which
the item is presented but for entirely the opposite reasons you give, the
cyclist going through a red light part could very well have been arriving
at a light as it was changing, cyclists take longer to build up speed,
to clear junctions and can often get caught in dangerous situations due to
the timing of lights. As well as motorbikes, I ride bicycles and I am
never more aware of my vulnerability in traffic than on a pushbike, enough
to dissuade me from riding due to pushy aggressive moronic car drivers.

His stupidity (if any) pales into insignificance compared with hers.

 

http://www.bobkestrut.com/images/bibendum3.jpg

 

They routinely do it in London when going straight on.

 

I think they were correct, actually.

 

Agreed.

Paging Mike Horton!

 

Had that been the case, you can be sure it would have been presented in
court.

Oh yes.