Cyclist arrest after tourist death

UncleMonty

Never seen anything like this before

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/8577612.stm

A tourist was killed crossing the road, the cyclist was later arrested on suspicion of involuntary manslaughter by recklessness and negligence

lesz42

cyclists have killed before

stumpyjon

It would be interresting to know a few more details, like was it on pedestrian crossing, pedestrianised area etc. or did the woman just step out in front of the cyclist. I would guess there must be some particular reason as to why it was the cyclists fault (or are we also supposed to go at 5 mph in built up areas in case some one decides to step out with looking).

borntobemild

In this litigation crazy world he's likely to get his censored sued. Hope he's got some insurance and legal cover.

lesz42

maybe the rider is at fault? strange it seems we think, bike riders are free of any responsibility?



wait for more facts?

bails87

lesz42 wrote:

maybe the rider is at fault? strange it seems we think, bike riders are free of any responsibility?



wait for more facts?

Well said.

Although unfortunately the anti-bike brigade will jump on the story.

Tom Barton

Bear in mind that the article says he has only been arrested on the suspicion of... and bailed. He has not been formally charged as yet (it would seem) so it seems the police are still trying to work out exactly what has happened before they decide to charge him or not.

Its unusual for a fatality like this though when you compare the number of deaths involving motor vehicles every year (and I am well aware that there are more cars on the road than bikes) but still - lower speeds and mass generally mean less injuires. Undoubtedly this will get disproportionate coverage in the media....

cat_with_no_tail

I wouldnt think they'd have got a conviction for involuntary manslaughter by recklessness and negligence if the cyclist was quite obviously completely in the wrong.

My first thought was something like an RLJer. In which case, he deserves everything he gets. People like that are the reason poeple hate cyclists.

As stated above though, probably best not to speculate with less than complete facts.

HebdenBiker

borntobemild wrote:

In this litigation crazy world he's likely to get his censored sued. Hope he's got some insurance and legal cover.

:?: :?: :?: This is an article about a cyclist facing criminal charges, not civil litigation.

But anyway, if...IF... he caused injury, death or material loss to another through negligence or recklessness, then he would probably deserve to be "sued."

Eeeeeh. Our "litigation crazy world", eh. Y'can't even run people over without gettin' sued these days.

angry_bird

Cat With No Tail wrote:

I wouldnt think they'd have got a conviction for involuntary manslaughter by recklessness and negligence if the cyclist was quite obviously completely in the wrong.

It doesn't say they've got a conviction, he was arrested on suspision of iinvoluntary manslaughter t and has been bailed pending further enquiries, they haven't proved he was in the wrong yet and probably haven't even charged him with anything... just have to wait and see what happens

Anonymous

If it's London bike couriers, well they are nutters and dangerous on the road and the people are in high risk when they are around, they give cyclist's a bad name :x

look at this!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HLzGj10fg2g

PBo

Cat With No Tail wrote:

I wouldnt think they'd have got a conviction for involuntary manslaughter by recklessness and negligence if the cyclist was quite obviously completely in the wrong.

My first thought was something like an RLJer. In which case, he deserves everything he gets. People like that are the reason poeple hate cyclists.

As stated above though, probably best not to speculate with less than complete facts.

.....and the raison d'etre of t'interweb vanishes into a puff of smoke....