An RLJ's Happy Christmas Story - Not

Pufftmw

One of our van couriers was minding his own business in traffic last night, in Aldgate. Lights are green, he's starting to cross a junction (Leman/Aldgate Hi St) heading into the City and a cyclist jumped the lights and came straight across his bow. He couldn't avoid him and the cyclist hit the deck - hard.

Police/ambulance turned up of course. There were 10 witnesses to the fact that the cyclist jumped the lights and the police had their control check the CCTV which clearly showed the guy jumping the lights into the path of our driver. Driver is still very shaken up.

Cyclist? Well, he's got a broken leg, a broken shoulder and 51 stitches. I reckon that has spoilt his Christmas but he's lucky to be alive at all.

What a bloody idiot :evil:

mudcow007

lucky to be alive by the sounds of it.

hope both parties are ok

why do people jump lights?!

sfichele

ditto - why jump the lights?

notsoblue

So the police will have their control check CCTV to confirm a suspected RLJ, but under any other circumstance will make the process akin to getting blood from a stone....

rjsterry

notsoblue wrote:

So the police will have their control check CCTV to confirm a suspected RLJ, but under any other circumstance will make the process akin to getting blood from a stone....

Or looked at another way, to check out the van driver's story, and make sure he wasn't actually the one at fault.

Pufftmw

rjsterry wrote:

notsoblue wrote:

So the police will have their control check CCTV to confirm a suspected RLJ, but under any other circumstance will make the process akin to getting blood from a stone....

Or looked at another way, to check out the van driver's story, and make sure he wasn't actually the one at fault.

Our driver was arrested immediately on suspicion of dangerous driving. With the state the cyclist was in, they were not sure if he would live & needed to take (legal) steps for procedure.

The guy was a stupid banker...






works for Deutsche Bank

notsoblue

rjsterry wrote:

notsoblue wrote:

So the police will have their control check CCTV to confirm a suspected RLJ, but under any other circumstance will make the process akin to getting blood from a stone....

Or looked at another way, to check out the van driver's story, and make sure he wasn't actually the one at fault.

Well, with 10 witnesses all claiming that the cyclist RLJ'd, and the general attitude that the Police have towards cyclists, I think your interpretation is pretty unlikely...

Having been involved in trying to get CCTV footage for myself and in a separate occasion for my sister, they make it pretty difficult to the point of it being nigh on impossible for cyclists to have access to this. The assumption is that cyclists are either to blame, or that they exhibited contributory negligence by simply being on the road.

But yeah, thats OT. Back to your regularly scheduled RLJ 2 minutes of hate

The Rookie

Police action is more dependant on result than cause, if there was any possibility this would be a fatality, then all steps are taken 'soon as' to avoid loss of evidence, it sounds like this case was one of those.

That's one cyclist who won't RLJ again 'in a hurry' (not withstanding it will be 4 months at least before he's back on his bike).

Simon

thecrofter

In my experience the PC on the spot tends to "arrest" everyone and then let the Procurator Fiscal sort out if procedings will continue. Most PC's try not to pre-judge...it's not their job.

redvee

I have sympathy for the cyclist but no sympathy for the RLJ.

spasypaddy

as a result of the police not being 'able' to get footage of my accident in august i have had to go through the motor insurers bureau and my payout is less than half what it should be whilst the guy that hit me and drove off gets away scot free.

MonkeyMonster

sad tale for both, nsb down boy.

First.Aspect

Okay, so clearly rlj cyclist is foolish.

But, (a) you wouldn't wish that sort of injury on anyone, regardless of fault
(b) just because he ran the light, we don't actually know many of the circumstances. You lot make it sound like if you "rlj", all bets are off.

Was the junction still clearing? Was the cycist following traffic but last in line? What was visibility like? Or did he appear from one side like a speeding bullet?

You'd probably be asking these sorts of questions if it was a pedestrian and I'm not sure how sympathetic you'd be to the "well, he crossed when the red man was on, so its all his fault" view.

daviesee

a) Quite correct.
b) RLJ - All bets are off.

meanredspider

First Aspect wrote:

Okay, so clearly rlj cyclist is foolish.

But, (a) you wouldn't wish that sort of injury on anyone, regardless of fault
(b) just because he ran the light, we don't actually know many of the circumstances. You lot make it sound like if you "rlj", all bets are off.

Was the junction still clearing? Was the cycist following traffic but last in line? What was visibility like? Or did he appear from one side like a speeding bullet?

You'd probably be asking these sorts of questions if it was a pedestrian and I'm not sure how sympathetic you'd be to the "well, he crossed when the red man was on, so its all his fault" view.

Apart from (a)' I don't understand any of this. Either he jumped he red light or he didn't. He did. From that point on, he's put himself at risk - it's difficult to see any mitigating circumstances. What is the point related to the junction clearing or being last in line? He passed a light at red so he shouldn't have been there. I hope he recovers quickly however.

dhope

Edit: Thought better of it :roll:

itboffin

When someone RLJ are they thinking this is really quite dangerous I could get hurt or these lights a really just for motor vehicles it's okay for me to sneak through?

mudcow007

itboffin wrote:

When someone RLJ are they thinking this is really quite dangerous I could get hurt or these lights a really just for motor vehicles it's okay for me to sneak through?

+1

RLJ is bad m'ok? but the timing on lights are all different, when one set go on red, some dont go to green for a few seconds where others will change basically straight away.

I think its this that catches people out.

i very very nearly squished a ped last night. he was running across the middle of thisroundabout an basically coming straight at me

nuts i tells ya!

Dog Breath

That's Childwall Fiveways isn't it? Always busy at the best of times. It can be difficult enough getting out on this in a car nevermind , but running across how many lanes of traffic. Many seem to live in a cartoon fantasy world where they think no one ever gets hurt, or they just jump back up after being flattened.

Stevo_666

Hopefully this will make a few people think twice before RLJ'ing - it might save a few RLJ'ers from learning the hard way that one day your luck might run out...

veronese68

Unfortunatelty a lot of people don't seem to realise that they are responsible for their own safety. They put themselves into a dangerous situation assuming other people will avoid them.
Then, if picked up on it, or hurt, they get stroppy about it.
These people are what's known as phucktards.

sfichele

I'd like to know whether this was a blatant case of RLJumping or whether he was going through on amber.

If its the former then "all bets are off" - and he's learned a very simple lesson the hard way. However, if you were struck by a twitchy, impatient car whilst going through on amber, would you be automatically assumed to be RLjumping because you are riding a bike?

Kieran_Burns

sfichele wrote:

I'd like to know whether this was a blatant case of RLJumping or whether he was going through on amber.

If its the former then "all bets are off" - and he's learned a very simple lesson the hard way. However, if you were struck by a twitchy, impatient car whilst going through on amber, would you be automatically assumed to be RLjumping because you are riding a bike?

Amber means stop. Not "oh go on then"

What are the rules regarding traffic lights?

The obligation on the motorist is to stop, unless the light is green, in which case you may proceed only if it is clear and safe to do so. If the amber light is illuminated, a vehicle must stop, unless it has already passed the white stop line or the vehicle is so close to the stop line, that coming to a halt might cause an accident. If the red light is showing, then you must stop behind the stop line in all circumstances.

mudcow007

Dog Breath wrote:

That's Childwall Fiveways isn't it? Always busy at the best of times. It can be difficult enough getting out on this in a car nevermind , but running across how many lanes of traffic. Many seem to live in a cartoon fantasy world where they think no one ever gets hurt, or they just jump back up after being flattened.

good spot, yes it is

i think its Liverpool's busiest roundabouts to be honest. the look the ped gave me aswell as i had to swerve to miss him

crazy times

sfichele

Kieran_Burns wrote:

sfichele wrote:

I'd like to know whether this was a blatant case of RLJumping or whether he was going through on amber.

If its the former then "all bets are off" - and he's learned a very simple lesson the hard way. However, if you were struck by a twitchy, impatient car whilst going through on amber, would you be automatically assumed to be RLjumping because you are riding a bike?

Amber means stop. Not "oh go on then"

What are the rules regarding traffic lights?

The obligation on the motorist is to stop, unless the light is green, in which case you may proceed only if it is clear and safe to do so. If the amber light is illuminated, a vehicle must stop, unless it has already passed the white stop line or the vehicle is so close to the stop line, that coming to a halt might cause an accident. If the red light is showing, then you must stop behind the stop line in all circumstances.

I can agree to that. But I do make the point of a twitchy driver that may have jumped the gun, and who hasn't seen you, whilst you are crossing a junction as the light was changing.

The Ors

Interesting reading this thread...

I've noticed (as a car driver) a gradual change of attitude towards traffic lights over the last few years that seems to be backed up by this thread.

Occasionally you will arrive at lights as they turn amber & think "Do I brake hard or go through?" Sometimes you choose to go through (depends etc...). In the last few years when this has happened I've often glanced in the mirror & seen someone following me. The other day I did this and there were two cars following me through.

Sit at any busy major junction in rush hour now & watch the traffic; there will still be cars coming through after your lights have gone green!

Stop on amber & glance in the mirror; bet the guy behind is glaring at you!

Amber/red used to mean "Stop!". Now they mean "Only a few more please" :roll:

Pufftmw

There was no ambiguity in this instance. Rider jumped red light, came through traffic that was stationary and straight into a filter lane that was clear. All on CCTV + witnesses.

Our driver has been in contact with the cyclist who is very apologetic. He's got to have a metal plate inserted in his leg and will be spending at least the next 2 weeks in hospital - no Christmas cheer there. Driver is still cut up about it and feels guilty about having to add to the cyclist's woes by needing to claim the cost of the windscreen that he obliterated from him.

rjsterry

The Ors wrote:

Interesting reading this thread...

I've noticed (as a car driver) a gradual change of attitude towards traffic lights over the last few years that seems to be backed up by this thread.

Occasionally you will arrive at lights as they turn amber & think "Do I brake hard or go through?" Sometimes you choose to go through (depends etc...). In the last few years when this has happened I've often glanced in the mirror & seen someone following me. The other day I did this and there were two cars following me through.

Sit at any busy major junction in rush hour now & watch the traffic; there will still be cars coming through after your lights have gone green!

Stop on amber & glance in the mirror; bet the guy behind is glaring at you!

Amber/red used to mean "Stop!". Now they mean "Only a few more please" :roll:

There is now an associated worry, when approaching an amber light which you can safely stop at, but suspect that the vehicle up your chuff will ram you if you do stop. I've had a close shave with a double decker bus giving it the full emergency stop behind me as he had assumed that I'd continue through the 'deep amber' light.

rolf_f

I once approached some lights in my car - they were amber and I knew from the sequence that they'd be red by the time I reached them. So I stopped and got rear ended by the car behind!

I then had a load of hassle with my insurers about it who were Direct Scumbagline. I'll never use them again but that's another story!

notsoblue

The Ors wrote:

Interesting reading this thread...

I've noticed (as a car driver) a gradual change of attitude towards traffic lights over the last few years that seems to be backed up by this thread.

Occasionally you will arrive at lights as they turn amber & think "Do I brake hard or go through?" Sometimes you choose to go through (depends etc...). In the last few years when this has happened I've often glanced in the mirror & seen someone following me. The other day I did this and there were two cars following me through.

Sit at any busy major junction in rush hour now & watch the traffic; there will still be cars coming through after your lights have gone green!

Stop on amber & glance in the mirror; bet the guy behind is glaring at you!

Amber/red used to mean "Stop!". Now they mean "Only a few more please" :roll:

I've noticed this too. There are certain junctions where even if you have a green light you still need to be wary of taxis gunning it through a red. Parliament square gyratory is terrible for this, happens most times I pass through it.

jonny_trousers

So there's a lesson to be learnt here folks: be extra careful when you RLJ! Useful thread this one!