Cyclist arrest after Camden tourist death

LDNTrailRider

A 27-year-old cyclist has been arrested after the death of a tourist who was knocked down by a pedal bike in London.

Scotland Yard said the man was arrested on suspicion of involuntary manslaughter and bailed.

Marian Anderson, 56, from Denmark, was hit while crossing a road in Camden on 21 February. She died in hospital from head injuries on 1 March.

Police said she was with her daughter, who is in her mid-20s, at the time. The cyclist involved stopped at the scene.

The incident happened in Lidlington Place, at the junction with Eversholt Street.

Ms Anderson was taken by ambulance to University College Hospital before being moved to the National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery in London, where she later died.

The man was arrested on Friday after attending a police station in central London, Metropolitan Police officers said.

The arrest was on suspicion of involuntary manslaughter by recklessness and negligence.

He was bailed until a date in May pending further inquiries.

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

Anyone know any more about this?

lost_in_thought

Wow, really?

What would the arrest have been for if she'd been hit by a car?

Chicane-UK

If it was a car and they had been driving with "recklessness and negligence", I think it would have been death by dangerous driving... section 1 one of the Road Traffic Act. Carries a fairly substantial sentance.

DonDaddyD

lost_in_thought wrote:

Wow, really?

What would the arrest have been for if she'd been hit by a car?

I would have thought the same thing. Assuming the same events happened with the only change being a car instead of a bike. Or the equivalent driving offence.

There is however, not enough information to form an opinion beyond speculation.

Clever Pun

Chicane, you'd hope so but more like due care and attention or careless driving seems more the things these days

PBo

beeb report is fairly neutral/factual - but wonder how the Fail/times etc will spin it?

DonDaddyD

Arrested for and subsequently the actual sentenced can be completely different once all available evidence has been gathered and the person has been tried. Surely?

I think the biggest indicator is that they've done something worthy of being arrested.

Mrs DDD is sitting behind me. She said something about being arrested on the grounds of recklessness and/or negligence but it may not be called that.... she hasn't read the thread so is going on the info I've given her - she told me to say that last bit...

Aidy

Report here seems to have a little more detail.

And I think this is where it happened.

shouldbeinbed

lost_in_thought wrote:

Wow, really?

What would the arrest have been for if she'd been hit by a car?

it wouldn't have had the same gravitas and terrible sound as manslaughter though whatever the charge or subsequent indictment was/is.


I've just spent the week in and around London (mainly on foot) and was really surprised at the quality of the riding I saw through the day and the evening commute. There were a few RLJ tossers and virtually no one on the pavements even where it was quiet enough to do so. The pedestrians were a miserable unfriendly bunch of self abusers and the Taxi's seem to risk a permanent crash by driving so close to the car in front - much more so than I remember from my last visit a year or so before the CC came in.

amnezia

Any accident that results in the death of a person is likely to result in some kind of arrest.

Note that is does not say the cyclist has been charged, just arrested on suspicion of involuntary manslaughter. In other words they are still investigating.

lost_in_thought

shouldbeinbed wrote:

lost_in_thought wrote:

Wow, really?

What would the arrest have been for if she'd been hit by a car?

it wouldn't have had the same gravitas and terrible sound as manslaughter though whatever the charge or subsequent indictment was/is.

That's what I thought, but haven't the legal knowledge to have a proper opinion.

amnezia wrote:

Any accident that results in the death of a person is likely to result in some kind of arrest.

Note that is does not say the cyclist has been charged, just arrested on suspicion of involuntary manslaughter. In other words they are still investigating.

Ah, see that makes it better. Does the 'on suspicion of' mean that they can be charged with that?

I seem to recall reading that the sentencing options (probably the wrong term) available for drivers who have caused a death with their car were rather limited, does the same apply for cyclists?

gabriel959

it wasnt a hit and run either, would be interested in knowing more about how it happened, did the pedestrian crossed the road without looking? Was the cyclist going too fast?

DonDaddyD

gabriel959 wrote:

Was the cyclist going too fast?

What is too fast for a bicycle?

Yes we can say beyond the cyclists ability to handle a bike but that is purely a subjective circumstance only applicable to each individual. I.e. my too fast may be slow to you.

Hypothetically the speed limits 30mph and the cyclist hits a pedestrian who step out at 20mph. Was the cyclist going too fast?

Should the cyclist have been going slower? I'm of the thought that there is too slow to be riding on the road safely - but then that's an ability/confidence thing. Braking distances are different for different bikes and while you are prepared to stop and can stop even in cars there are cases where you simply cannot stop in time.

MadammeMarie

gabriel959 wrote:

it wasnt a hit and run either, would be interested in knowing more about how it happened, did the pedestrian crossed the road without looking? Was the cyclist going too fast?

According to the Gazette, they are still trying to establish that. God help us if the idiot jumped the red light! :roll:

Eau Rouge

Had she been hit by a car or HGV driver we'd have been reassured by a line in the report telling us the driver was not injured. It doesn't say that about the cyclist.
Does the beeb have stories on all the other road users that died yesterday?

As I understand it, the police need a reason to arrest people but they will want to do some investigating before they decide if that person should be charged with anything, so almost all arrests are on suspicion of having done something. You can later be charged with a different offence if thats how the investigation goes.

hamstrich

Most importantly, was the cyclist wearing a helmet? If not then he surely must be guilty.

deptfordmarmoset

My condolences to Marian Anderson's family, particularly to the daughter who was there when her mother was knocked down, and to her friends.

Though the cyclist will probably have the death on his conscience for the rest of his life, and though cyclists might experience some of the press' meanest backlashes after this (thankfully very rare) accident, we shouldn't lose sight of the real victim.

LDNTrailRider

deptfordmarmoset wrote:

My condolences to Marian Anderson's family, particularly to the daughter who was there when her mother was knocked down, and to her friends.

Though the cyclist will probably have the death on his conscience for the rest of his life, and though cyclists might experience some of the press' meanest backlashes after this (thankfully very rare) accident, we shouldn't lose sight of the real victim.

+1. Many condolences to the family.

Having used that junction on a daily basis last year, I noted that a lot of 'cyclists' mounted the pavement to bypass the traffic lights there. However, any explanation is purely speculation at this stage.

Clever Pun

DonDaddyD wrote:

gabriel959 wrote:

Was the cyclist going too fast?

What is too fast for a bicycle?

Yes we can say beyond the cyclists ability to handle a bike but that is purely a subjective circumstance only applicable to each individual. I.e. my too fast may be slow to you.

Hypothetically the speed limits 30mph and the cyclist hits a pedestrian who step out at 20mph. Was the cyclist going too fast?

Should the cyclist have been going slower? I'm of the thought that there is too slow to be riding on the road safely - but then that's an ability/confidence thing. Braking distances are different for different bikes and while you are prepared to stop and can stop even in cars there are cases where you simply cannot stop in time.

it's not always about outright speed it's about the speed given the conditions

10mph can quite easily be too fast given certain conditions

The Chingford Skinhead

Clever Pun wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

gabriel959 wrote:

Was the cyclist going too fast?

What is too fast for a bicycle?

Yes we can say beyond the cyclists ability to handle a bike but that is purely a subjective circumstance only applicable to each individual. I.e. my too fast may be slow to you.

Hypothetically the speed limits 30mph and the cyclist hits a pedestrian who step out at 20mph. Was the cyclist going too fast?

Should the cyclist have been going slower? I'm of the thought that there is too slow to be riding on the road safely - but then that's an ability/confidence thing. Braking distances are different for different bikes and while you are prepared to stop and can stop even in cars there are cases where you simply cannot stop in time.

it's not always about outright speed it's about the speed given the conditions

10mph can quite easily be too fast given certain conditions

+1. The use of 'speed limit' is misleading. It is the maximum speed. All traffic has an obligation to travel at a speed appropriate for the conditions. In heavily populated streets you need to go slower.

The Chingford Skinhead

Eau Rouge wrote:

Had she been hit by a car or HGV driver we'd have been reassured by a line in the report telling us the driver was not injured. It doesn't say that about the cyclist.
Does the beeb have stories on all the other road users that died yesterday?

As I understand it, the police need a reason to arrest people but they will want to do some investigating before they decide if that person should be charged with anything, so almost all arrests are on suspicion of having done something. You can later be charged with a different offence if thats how the investigation goes.

BBC London has failed to report any cyclist death involving a HGV for the last two years. Yet, the first death caused by a cyclist in quite some time somehow makes the news. That is not to excuse the cyclist (if in the wrong) or to take anything away from the victim (condolensces) but it does suggest something very wrong about the editorial policy of BBC news.

spen666

The Chingford Skinhead wrote:

....

BBC London has failed to report any cyclist death involving a HGV for the last two years. Yet, the first death caused by a cyclist in quite some time somehow makes the news. ....

That's not suprising.

Things that happen too regularly are not deemed newsworthy

spen666

An arrest is not to be taken as anything other than a technical action.

to arrest someone, police only have to have reasonable grounds to suspect they have committed an offence. That is a far lower test than that needed to charge someone and far less than needed to convict someone



In the article in the newspaper linked early in this thread, there is a very interesting quote

Sergeant Steve Mulcahy, of the Alperton Collision Investigation Unit, said: "It is a very rare and strange thing that has happened. It is a real tragedy. It is quite a busy junction and we want to see if any witnesses saw the incident.

"We don't know the situation and we don't know whether the cyclist went through a red light or whether the mother and daughter crossed when they should not have.

"She was conscious after being hit but was obviously in a lot of pain. Her injuries were not immediately deemed life threatening but sadly she died just over a week later."

The police Aare saying they do not know how accident happened

Headhuunter

spen666 wrote:

The Chingford Skinhead wrote:

....

BBC London has failed to report any cyclist death involving a HGV for the last two years. Yet, the first death caused by a cyclist in quite some time somehow makes the news. ....

That's not suprising.

Things that happen too regularly are not deemed newsworthy

Yeah, it's a case of "man bites dog" news (dog bites man being a regular occurence and not deemed newsworthy). The article mentions that pedestrians sometimes rely heavily on listening (ie not looking) before crossing roads. Ain't that the truth!