Cycling Fatality Inquiry Poor journalism-Blame the cyclist

OldSkoolKona

I haven't seen it posted on here, but the inquiry in to the death of Scottish cyclist Jason MacIntyre is currently being held.

One thing that got me, and is relevant to us commuters, is the sloppy journalism that is implying blame on the cyclist's part. It is all part of this push towards negative public opinion against cyclists, which puts us all under unnecessary risk from motorists.

Two examples below:

- From the Press and Journal (known for its previous form on reporting about cyclists) the headline screams "Cyclist was wearing dark clothing" What, it was a clear dry day with good visibility!?!

- On the BBC site, the headline reads "Cyclist was travelling at speed", implying that cycling at 30mph is somehow to blame.

I really get wound up by this blame the victim culture that prevades in reporting collisions involving cyclists, normally along the lines of "the victim wasn't wearing a helmet" when the evidence states that that wouldn't have been much protection against that HGV" or the comments sections that accompany online news articles

My thoughts go out to Jason's widow, I can't begin to think how difficult this must be.

Wallace1492

Completely agree, the previous post on the BBC actually does highlight that he was not wearing a helmet, although it is mentioned that this would not have mattered.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/hig ... 541531.stm

There is too much emphasis on blaming cyclists. Why when there is a car crash, is the colour of the car not brought into question?

On saying that however, when I am on my bike, my intention is to be seen, and I do wear high viz jacket, cap and gloves. I do try and do all I can to make myself seen.

il_principe

And the beeb have helpfully added under a photo of him: "Mr MacIntyre was not wearing a helmet at the time of the accident." He was involved in a collision with a van FFS.

OldSkoolKona wrote:

My thoughts go out to Jason's widow, I can't begin to think how difficult this must be.

+1

Christophe3967

It is depressing that such a sad story still receives the usual negative bias in its reporting.

Despite his evidence, I'd guess that the driver was distracted and didn't signal his intention to turn right, possibly only realising that he was at his turning at the last minute. Had he been indicating, I find it hard to believe that an experienced cyclist would not have eased up, given the difficulty that many drivers have judging the speed of oncoming cyclists.

Stone Glider

As his widow pointed out at the trial, the "dark clothing" he was wearing included a tabard bearing the Scottish Saltire, his entitlement as a Scottish Champion. It is profoundly sad that such can be presented as some form of negative feature consistent with blaming the victim. The adversarial nature of the British legal system sometimes throws up advocacy which makes me want to throw up

My sympathy is with the widow and her family.

OldSkoolKona

Verdict delivered on this today:

Jason MacIntyre inquiry sheriff in helmet call - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/hig ... 692359.stm

Usual victim blaming:

Sheriff Douglas Small has recommended all cyclists wear high visibility clothing and a helmet.

But he conceded head gear would not have prevented Mr MacIntyre's death.

In making his recommendations, Sheriff Small said: "That although Jason MacIntyre's death could not have been avoided by him wearing a helmet at the time of the accident all cyclists, including cyclists in training, should wear a helmet when on public roads."

:roll:

cjcp

Better to read the judgment than that article.

I like the words, "had driven with greater care". Did he drive with *any* care?

They should at least set out the circumstances of the accident, time of day, whether it was sunny etc if they're going to report that brighter clothing may have helped. Hopeless article.

Wallace1492

It is hopeless article from the BBC. It does not delve into the details of the findings, but dwells on the helmet and brighter clothing.

How hard is it to see a cyclist if you are paying attention!!

Robstar24

i see the article mentions his widow would like a traffic island installed where he was hit to slow down traffic.

just wait for the daily mail et al to get up in arms about this latest chapter in the apparent 'war on motorists'

Radioactiveman

High Visibility clothing? What a load of Bolox

I could be wearing a dayglow mankini with an orange flashing beacon and all the near misses I have had could not have been prevented.

They all boil down to the fact people dont look,the only thing that has saved me from being hit is my pre-empting actions of stupidity by other road users before they commit them.

il_principe

Also not sure quite how a White and Blue scottish cycling is classed as dark clothing...


:roll:

OldSkoolKona

Radioactiveman wrote:

I could be wearing a dayglow mankini with an orange flashing beacon and all the near misses I have had could not have been prevented.

:shock:
Now that would be a sight...

Aguila

Presumably they will also be seeking to ban brown and black horses from the road too. They NEVER seem to wear helmets either these days.

shouldbeinbed

I've not read the articles but I'm sure the Judge will have advised hat pedestrians wearing dark clothes will be banned from crossing the road even if they are wearing a helmet and all motorists without air bags in their cars are of course be required to wear helmets too.

deepest sympathy to his loved ones.

mcj78

Yeah, I read that article earlier & was pretty dismayed that they chose to run a headline highlighting the Sheriff's throwaway comment on helmet use when the pathologist commented it wouldn't have made any difference anyway - especially when the driver had previously admitted careless driving... :roll:

mybreakfastconsisted

Since you are more likely to suffer a head injury in a pub than whilst cycling, can we expect the sheriff to insist on plastic helmets being handed out at every Wetherspods?

westenddee

Very poor reporting, particulary regardin the helmet issue. My thoughts are with his family.

How hard is it to see a cyclist in daylight? Are all cars "hi-vis"?

If you own a gun and it accidentally goes off in your hands, killing someone, would you get a small fine and your firearms licence returned in six months?

Drivers (I'm one, like most cyclists) need to recognise they are driving a lethal weapon and the justice system needs to recognise this, not treat cyclists and pedestrians as some sort of temporary inconvenience.

I'm still waitng for a sherriff / judge to comment on the ridiculous think windscreen pillars that make driving many modern cars seem like peering through a letter box. Apparently its a safety improvement. How many times have we had cars pulling out from side roads completely oblivious to us?

Safe and pleasant pedalling folks.

OldSkoolKona

A good article from road.cc on the inquiry:

There are some clarifications on what was actually said, which really highlights how the reporters then turned the focus. Also the Sheriff had no need to make a comment about helmets as it was shown not to be material to the case.

One good comment left there, hits the nail on the head.

The judge may have the opinion that Jason's death might have been avoided if he'd been dressed differently, but it *definitely* would have been avoided if he hadn't been hit by a guy driving a van.