Cyclist to blame for his death
thelawnet
Posts: 719
Basically the cyclist, Ganesan Selvaraj, was killed by an oncoming car on the A287 between Hindhead and Haslemere on December 5 last year, per this story:
http://www.getsurrey.co.uk/news/s/20628 ... sh_cyclist
You can see the road on Google maps - http://tinyurl.com/324dzfr, it's basically a single carriageway country road .
Now inquest time, and that means 'blame the cyclist'.
Headline reads:
'Cyclist killed in late-night crash 'had no lights on bike''
http://www.getsurrey.co.uk/news/s/20744 ... ts_on_bike
In fact 'The 27-year-old was wearing a miner’s lamp on his head, but Woking Coroner’s Court heard the batteries were "severely depleted" and probably insufficient to illuminate him to oncoming traffic.
The inquest was also told that a high-visibility jacket, which he had bought the day before to make sure motorists could see him'
So there were ligjhts.
Anyway, 'Surrey coroner Michael Burgess said he was satisfied the death had been an accident and expressed his condolences to Mr Selvaraj’s family and best friend.'
No explanation of how a car and a bicycle going the opposite direction should end up collding with each other, presumably the car was overtaking, as there's no reason why a bike would be on the wrong side of the road, otherwise they would have mentioned it in the story. In fact there's no mention in the inquest story of the fact that the car was going the opposite direction at all....
Anyway, if you are a motorist in an accident with a cyclist providing you are not drunk, it will be deemed 'an accident'.
OTOH, a cyclist will be blamed for:
* no helmet (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/ ... elmet.html)
* no lights (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/wilt ... 612858.stm)
* not having enough experience (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... -cent.html)
* having three rear lights, but 'not bright enough' (http://road.cc/content/news/19515-set-u ... ists-death)
* riding on the road instead of the cycle path/pavement
* not wearing high-viz clothing, even in broad daylight (cf. the article above, where the cyclist WAS wearing high-viz, but still got blamed) (http://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/opinions/FAIMACINTYRE.html which also repeats that you're to blame if you don't wear a helmet, even when it would have been completely useless)
* using cycle paths (http://www.bikeradar.com/road/news/arti ... eaks-14093)
* being on the pavement (http://www.irwinmitchell.com/news/Pages ... 7,500.aspx)
* listening to music (http://icnorthwales.icnetwork.co.uk/new ... _page.html - this one is classic 'Cyclist killed by his stereo' . starting 'SAFETY campaigners issued a warning last night after a cyclist rode into the path of a car while listening to music on his personal stereo.' In fact he was ploughed into from behind by an overtaking motorist "An inquest heard heavy metal fan, John Anthony Jones, may have been distracted when he was hit by a Nissan Micra near Abergele." "He was riding along from Abergele on November 11, 2005, when the Micra came up behind him on a straight stretch of road.")
There are more reasons of course why you will be to blame, if none of those work
http://www.getsurrey.co.uk/news/s/20628 ... sh_cyclist
You can see the road on Google maps - http://tinyurl.com/324dzfr, it's basically a single carriageway country road .
Now inquest time, and that means 'blame the cyclist'.
Headline reads:
'Cyclist killed in late-night crash 'had no lights on bike''
http://www.getsurrey.co.uk/news/s/20744 ... ts_on_bike
In fact 'The 27-year-old was wearing a miner’s lamp on his head, but Woking Coroner’s Court heard the batteries were "severely depleted" and probably insufficient to illuminate him to oncoming traffic.
The inquest was also told that a high-visibility jacket, which he had bought the day before to make sure motorists could see him'
So there were ligjhts.
Anyway, 'Surrey coroner Michael Burgess said he was satisfied the death had been an accident and expressed his condolences to Mr Selvaraj’s family and best friend.'
No explanation of how a car and a bicycle going the opposite direction should end up collding with each other, presumably the car was overtaking, as there's no reason why a bike would be on the wrong side of the road, otherwise they would have mentioned it in the story. In fact there's no mention in the inquest story of the fact that the car was going the opposite direction at all....
Anyway, if you are a motorist in an accident with a cyclist providing you are not drunk, it will be deemed 'an accident'.
OTOH, a cyclist will be blamed for:
* no helmet (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/ ... elmet.html)
* no lights (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/wilt ... 612858.stm)
* not having enough experience (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... -cent.html)
* having three rear lights, but 'not bright enough' (http://road.cc/content/news/19515-set-u ... ists-death)
* riding on the road instead of the cycle path/pavement
* not wearing high-viz clothing, even in broad daylight (cf. the article above, where the cyclist WAS wearing high-viz, but still got blamed) (http://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/opinions/FAIMACINTYRE.html which also repeats that you're to blame if you don't wear a helmet, even when it would have been completely useless)
* using cycle paths (http://www.bikeradar.com/road/news/arti ... eaks-14093)
* being on the pavement (http://www.irwinmitchell.com/news/Pages ... 7,500.aspx)
* listening to music (http://icnorthwales.icnetwork.co.uk/new ... _page.html - this one is classic 'Cyclist killed by his stereo' . starting 'SAFETY campaigners issued a warning last night after a cyclist rode into the path of a car while listening to music on his personal stereo.' In fact he was ploughed into from behind by an overtaking motorist "An inquest heard heavy metal fan, John Anthony Jones, may have been distracted when he was hit by a Nissan Micra near Abergele." "He was riding along from Abergele on November 11, 2005, when the Micra came up behind him on a straight stretch of road.")
There are more reasons of course why you will be to blame, if none of those work
0
Comments
-
What is your view point here? Was the driver to blame?0
-
no idea who was to blame, just a little disappointing that instead of explaining why two vehicles travelling in opposite directions end up in a collision, the focus is on the bike's inadequate lighting.
No need to look at helmets or lights or anything else - if the car and bike had been on their respective sides of the road, no collision could have occurred.
But obviously it's more the done thing to look for fault with the dead cyclist.0 -
What is wrong with the inquest daring to mention the fact that the cyclist was not riding in accodance with the law - ie he had inadequate lighting on.Want to know the Spen666 behind the posts?
Then read MY BLOG @ http://www.pebennett.com
Twittering @spen_6660 -
thelawnet wrote:Basically the cyclist, Ganesan Selvaraj, was killed by an oncoming car on the A287 between Hindhead and Haslemere on December 5 last year, per this story:
http://www.getsurrey.co.uk/news/s/20628 ... sh_cyclist
That is a very sad story.
I don't think that this is part of an anti-cycling conspiracy though. The coroner has looked at the circumstances and published his findings.
If the guy didn't have lights front and back then people are going to have trouble seeing him; helmet lights are an extra I think, not a replacement.
I feel for them all; I think that it is a terrible story all round.
George0
