# is there any need for these cyclist down threads?



## rootes (18 Sep 2008)

i think it goes without saying that everyone on here would wish anyone injuried a speedy recovery and hope that they themsleves are never involved 


but is there really any merit in starting threads about each incident?


----------



## Willow (18 Sep 2008)

Probably not except to remind us all that accidents happen and we are all vunerable whether drivers, passengers, pedestrians or cyclists and there is usually one obvious victim and many less obvious for whom such accidents are just as tragic - always make your peace before you leave home whatever the reason for your grumps and however you travel.


----------



## dondare (18 Sep 2008)

It seems to be a mixture of genuine concern and morbid curiosity.


----------



## domtyler (18 Sep 2008)

In the past I have known the injured cyclist or even the relatives of those who have been killed, I particularly remember the daughter of a cyclist who was killed in Greenwich park, have found this site and the threads about them or their relatives and have thanked the people who have given their sympathies and condolences or support and said that they have found some comfort from them and from the cycling community.

For me, this is reason enough to allow them to continue.


----------



## spindrift (18 Sep 2008)

I'd say yes.

1/

cyclists deaths are under-reported. Look at the attention stabbing deaths get whilst fatal RTAs don't merit a mention.

2/

The lessons learned from each incident can be very worthwhile for cyclists and drivers alike

3/

Pressure can be brough to bear on authorities to improve road layouts and improve safety


----------



## dondare (18 Sep 2008)

Two points:- Occasionally the injured/dead cyclist is a forum member. 

Cyclists make up less than 5% of road accident fatalities, the roads should (and could) be made a lot safer for everyone.


----------



## rootes (18 Sep 2008)

my initial post wasn't either in favour or not of these threads - just interested in the merits as s rel new member of this forum

would have to say that contact relatives to say thanks for support would be useful - but it seems that no lessons can be learnt as no formal incident report is ever published to learn from and seemily post on here are a little biased againts drivers etc

the presure to improve i doubt would come from these threads.. as there are formal process to undertake such works - though seem to require and incident (no such thing as accidents) to get any changes

Regards
Si


----------



## BentMikey (18 Sep 2008)

Any bias against drivers would be fairly obvious given that this is a cycling forum. You do know that only around 17% of cyclist/motor vehicle collisions are the fault of the cyclist according to one study, right? The vast majority of the time it *is* the driver who is to blame.


----------



## Origamist (18 Sep 2008)

BentMikey said:


> Any bias against drivers would be fairly obvious given that this is a cycling forum. You do know that only around 17% of cyclist/motor vehicle collisions are the fault of the cyclist according to one study, right? The vast majority of the time it *is* the driver who is to blame.



Which study?


----------



## rootes (18 Sep 2008)

BentMikey said:


> Any bias against drivers would be fairly obvious given that this is a cycling forum. You do know that only around 17% of cyclist/motor vehicle collisions are the fault of the cyclist according to one study, right? The vast majority of the time it *is* the driver who is to blame.




well i'm a driver and a cyclist... which I suppose in general terms makes me a road user.. i suppose we are all road users it is just the mode of road use and thus the bias that changes depending on that mode at the time


----------



## Blackandblue (18 Sep 2008)

I'd say it is worthwhile to have these threads.

It raises awareness. If only amongst fellow cyclists.

Messages of condolence are another good reason.

I'd hope it's not purely morbid curiosity. For me, I'm interested to learn of the facts in the hope that I may avoid a similar situation. Or pass on advice to fellow cyclists (or indeed road users) to try and make the roads a safer place.

I also like to hear that the cyclist is making a good recovery. Sadly that is not always the case.


----------



## BentMikey (18 Sep 2008)

rootes said:


> well i'm a driver and a cyclist... which I suppose in general terms makes me a road user..




I hate to break it to you, but most of us on here are both drivers and cyclists.

Doesn't change the fact that such collisions are nearly always the driver's fault. As for any bias, I don't think it's that bad. Look at the castigation Handsome Joe rightly got for hitting a car mirror on the other topic.


----------



## porridge (18 Sep 2008)

Actually I don't know want to say whether they're good or bad, but with the accident my wife had yesterday and reading the 2 deaths reported today, it has made me examine my safety, I cycle along a very busy and fast stretch of the A41, there is actually a poorly maintained cycle route that i've avaoided, but im now thinking I should take the safer option.


----------



## Crackle (18 Sep 2008)

Dom's explanation is good enough for me.

Personally it's a lot of sympathy and sadness along with some morbid curiousity.

Also I want to know what happened to re-assure myself that that wouldn't happen to me because I ride differently or to think 'shoot' that could've happened to me I must watch for that in future.


----------



## LLB (18 Sep 2008)

We discourage this type of thread on the m/cycle forum I mod on unless they are members of the site or public figures where there is general public interest.

This guy was a member there and was killed last saturday on his return from a french trip. He did get a RIP thread, but we would have removed it if it hadn't been posted by his best mate.

We know that we partake in a pastime which has associated risks, but Morbid posting of this type of thread serves only to reinforce the notion that they are greater than they really are.

Why post about someone who you don't know, have never met, has no public presence (apart from the accident being reported), and has no association with the forum.

Makes the poster seem very insincere about anything they post about when they do it all the time.....

Reports on the outcome of an inquest is relevant, but not the incident itself as little evidence is forthcoming from any initial newspaper report.


----------



## rootes (18 Sep 2008)

BentMikey said:


> I hate to break it to you, but most of us on here are both drivers and cyclists.



I never made out that the majority were not..

the point was people view (and therefore bias) and comments related to their current mode of transport raher than a road user in general even if in general they use both


----------



## spindrift (18 Sep 2008)

rootes said:


> I never made out that the majority were not..
> 
> the point was people view (and therefore bias) and comments related to their current mode of transport raher than a road user in general even if in general they use both




No bias was posted, other than the fact that lorries involved in a disproportionate number of fatal RTAs lorry/cyclist, and that The City of London is the most dangerous place to cycle in England. As it's where I cycle the horrible event is pertinent.


----------



## spindrift (18 Sep 2008)

_For me, I'm interested to learn of the facts in the hope that I may avoid a similar situation._ 

Quite.


----------



## rootes (18 Sep 2008)

spindrift said:


> _For me, I'm interested to learn of the facts in the hope that I may avoid a similar situation._
> 
> Quite.




but does anyone ever post up the full formal incident report with recs and conclusions,

seems to be very few facts presented in these cyclist down threads.... part from 'bound to be the driver at fault' comments


i also cycle london and see cyclists everyday going up the inside of 8 wheelers and buses often after the vehicle is clearly indicating a turn left... or going round a lefthand bend - whilst hgv 's have big mirrors driving one in central london really is a pain the arse to keep and eye on everything going on


----------



## yello (18 Sep 2008)

I can't but help do a 'compare and contrast'...



porridge said:


> the accident my wife had yesterday and reading the 2 deaths reported today,_ it has made me examine my safety_





LLB said:


> We know that we partake in a pastime which has associated risks, but Morbid posting of this type of thread serves only to reinforce the notion that they are greater than they really are.



...and I'd agree with porridge (btw, I know llb was talking about motorcycling).

Personally, I think such posts serve a very real and useful purpose in reminding us all that it can happen to us. It is too easy to become complacent and whilst not overstating the risks, there are risks none-the-less.


----------



## zimzum42 (18 Sep 2008)

There is a danger that it could reinforce the idea that cycling is a dangerous activity - it's not


----------



## yello (18 Sep 2008)

rootes said:


> i also cycle london and see cyclists everyday going up the inside of 8 wheelers and buses often after the vehicle is clearly indicating a turn left... or going round a lefthand bend - whilst hgv 's have big mirrors driving one in central london really is a pain the arse to keep and eye on everything going on



Would you agree then that it serves a purpose, on a cycling forum, to post a thread saying a cyclist has been killed/injured under such circumstances?

What might strike you as an obvious, and unnecessary, risk might not be so evident to others.


----------



## John the Monkey (18 Sep 2008)

porridge said:


> A...it has made me examine my safety, I cycle along a very busy and fast stretch of the A41, there is actually a poorly maintained cycle route that i've avaoided, but im now thinking I should take the safer option.


The bus driver who hit me in August was of the opinion that I should have been on the cycle path - he wasn't a nasty bloke, but he thought if you chose to be on the road with the "real" traffic, you took your chances.

I've used that particular cyclepath since - I hate myself for it, but being hit by a bus shook my confidence some. Manchester City Council don't help, as the on road facilities (ASLs etc) disappear once the path starts, reinforcing the (incorrect) impression drivers have that the road is theirs.

Weigh it up, make your choice.


----------



## LLB (18 Sep 2008)

rootes said:


> but does anyone ever post up the full formal incident report with recs and conclusions,
> 
> seems to be very few facts presented in these cyclist down threads.... part from 'bound to be the driver at fault' comments



I did a while ago when a local cyclist got run over by a bus. I was shouted down by someone here when I suggested that the cyclist may have been partially responsible for his own demise.

As it happens, I also published the inquest report, in which it stated that the cyclist was a heroin addict, and was off his head when he cut across in front of the bus onto the pavement, and was totally oblivious to its presence when the accident happened.

The simple rule where lorries are concerned, don't get along side them at junctions under any circumstance.


----------



## rootes (18 Sep 2008)

LLB said:


> I did a while ago when a local cyclist got run over by a bus. I was shouted down by someone here when I suggested that the cyclist may have been partially responsible for his own demise.
> 
> As it happens, I also published the inquest report, in which it stated that the cyclist was a heroin addict, and was off his head when he cut across in front of the bus onto the pavement, and was totally oblivious to its presence when the accident happened.
> 
> The simple rule where lorries are concerned, don't get along side them at junctions under any circumstance.




Cool now that is more like it - proper facts!


----------



## sternwood (18 Sep 2008)

_Cool now that is more like it - proper facts!_

Unsunstantaited claims with no evidence, citing an incident that never happened you mean?


----------



## yello (18 Sep 2008)

zimzum42 said:


> There is a danger that it could reinforce the idea that cycling is a dangerous activity - it's not



I recall having a discussion with bentmicky (I think) some months back. It boiled down to a difference in a personal definition of 'dangerous'. But whether cycling is or isn't a dangerous activity is perhaps a moot point given that cyclists are killed and injured on the road.

Personally, I think it useful to be reminded of that fact and to know, in as much as is possible, the circumstances so that we might learn something from it.

If this were a chrysanthemum forum, I'd say 'cyclist down' threads are of little purpose!


----------



## rootes (18 Sep 2008)

sternwood said:


> _Cool now that is more like it - proper facts!_
> 
> Unsunstantaited claims with no evidence, citing an incident that never happened you mean?




no the cool was related to the fact that some said that they had posted up a formal incident report - what would be really cool if somone could highlight the thread where this _actually_ took place.....


----------



## sternwood (18 Sep 2008)

_seems to be very few facts presented in these cyclist down threads.... part from 'bound to be the driver at fault' comments_

Rootes, only one person said he thought the driver must be at fault, based on previous incidents it's a reasonable guess. If you use the Search feature on "Inquest" you can find plenty to justify this presumption.


We don't know the facts yet, that doesn't mean we shouldn't be able to comment and mourn a life lost in circumstances that were almost certainly avoidable.


----------



## summerdays (18 Sep 2008)

I'm in favour of them and usually read them. It is partly sympathy, a sense of it could happen to me, can I learn anything from it. It also may make you think about whether that area is an accident black spot - and hopefully the councils are also looking at that. Sometimes when I'm cycling and have a close shave ... it makes you re-evaluate how you are cycling and concentrate a little more.

And the ones involving lorries and railings are worth repeating as many times as possible until nobody thinks to go up the inside of a large vehicle on a corner.


----------



## LLB (18 Sep 2008)

yello said:


> I can't but help do a 'compare and contrast'...
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Well for an inexperienced m/cycle rider (as with an inexperienced cyclist) maneuvering, they are every bit as vulnerable when alongside a HGV as a cyclist.

I guess the difference is that someone who has gone through their bike test will have received adequate training which allows them to see the dangers of such a maneuver, and most cyclists just get on and ride and any training they have received would have been through their car test which would not cover filtering or another vehicle appearing alongside them in their own lane due to the width of a car.

I think my motorcycle training and experience has helped me a lot when it comes to cycling whereas much of my car training is just not relevant by comparison.


----------



## rootes (18 Sep 2008)

http://www.cyclechat.co.uk/forums/search.php?searchid=1021304

i will take a look at what facts are presented


and for the cases where facts are not known - people should not suggest or lead

perhaps restrict to leaving best wishes for a speedy recovery etc


----------



## sternwood (18 Sep 2008)

_And the ones involving lorries and railings are worth repeating as many times as possible until nobody thinks to go up the inside of a large vehicle on a corner._

This is a dreadfully designed website, click on "Campaigns":


*It's no accident! *
*1/4 of London cycle deaths in City*

In 2004 a quarter of London's cyclist fatalities took place in the City, despite the Square Mile making up just a thousandth of the total area of Greater London. While the rest of London sees improvements in safety due to new 20mph zones and cycle facilities, the Corporation has refused to spend money granted to it by Transport for London. It's time for change before someone else loses their life. _more_ [27/09/04] 

http://www.citycyclists.org.uk/

*Bridging the Thames* Status: ideas should be fed through as part of Opposition to Thames Gateway Bridge Map showing series of proposed cycle/foot bridges (marked in green) downriver of Tower Bridge


----------



## LLB (18 Sep 2008)

sternwood said:


> _Cool now that is more like it - proper facts!_
> 
> Unsunstantaited claims with no evidence, citing an incident that never happened you mean?



Another profile


----------



## sternwood (18 Sep 2008)

rootes said:


> http://www.cyclechat.co.uk/forums/search.php?searchid=1021304
> 
> i will take a look at what facts are presented
> 
> ...




http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23493320-details/Family+of+Cambridge+student+killed+on+bike+hit+out+at+police/article.do


Mr Carta, a bus safety examiner, said: "Vinnie was an experienced cyclist. He was on his new bike, wearing a helmet and reflective clothing. He was on a well-lit route, which he took all the time. He knew what he was doing. 
"The driver has changed his story several times. We think he was in a rush to get home, thinking he was coming up to a 60mph road, and just didn't pay attention to the road. Vinnie was flipped in the air and landed on the car.


----------



## rootes (18 Sep 2008)

sternwood said:


> http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23493320-details/Family+of+Cambridge+student+killed+on+bike+hit+out+at+police/article.do
> 
> 
> Mr Carta, a bus safety examiner, said: "Vinnie was an experienced cyclist. He was on his new bike, wearing a helmet and reflective clothing. He was on a well-lit route, which he took all the time. He knew what he was doing.
> "The driver has changed his story several times. We think he was in a rush to get home, thinking he was coming up to a 60mph road, and just didn't pay attention to the road. Vinnie was flipped in the air and landed on the car.




sorry but that is an article from the ES () not a full uncut/unedited formal incident report - 

not sure about the purpose of your post really


----------



## sternwood (18 Sep 2008)

rootes said:


> sorry but that is an article from the ES () not a full uncut/unedited formal incident report -
> 
> not sure about the purpose of your post really



You said it's not sensible to comment on deaths unless we know the full facts.

That article is a steady rebuttal of what you said.

It is impossible for a driver to collide with a cyclist if both are abiding by the HC. There is no helmet on earth that will prevent injury when hit by a car travelling at 48mph. Cyclists in London are well used to the police ignoring accidents involving cyclists, an unspoken rule seems to be that unless the cyclist is in a wheelchair or a coffin no action is taken. Well done to the parents for pursuing this, it highlights the inaction of the police in handling cycling "accidents". A cyclist abiding by the HC hit from behind is blameless. the driver changed his story several times yet you extend to him the courtesy you withold from cyclists.


_no the cool was related to the fact that some said that they had posted up a formal incident report_ 


Which we still haven't seen.


----------



## sternwood (18 Sep 2008)

Or consider this rootes:


http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/stand...ner's+plea+after+new+cyclist+death/article.do

Particularly shocking in this case is that if the driver had not broken the law by fumbling around for papers in his cab instead of paying due care and attention to the road, Emma would certainly not have been killed. He broke the law and he got away with it. There is nothing “inadvertent” about an action that is unlawful when it has resulted in someone being killed.


What's your opinion?


----------



## LLB (18 Sep 2008)

rootes said:


> sorry but that is an article from the ES () not a full uncut/unedited formal incident report -
> 
> not sure about the purpose of your post really



Who knows what goes on in his head


----------



## yenrod (18 Sep 2008)

>is there any need for these cyclist down threads? 

No.

Its just 'tabloid like' forum behaviour !


----------



## rootes (18 Sep 2008)

sorry the point is an article in the ES is not a full presentation of the facts... 

do you undertand the difference between a report in a newspaper and a formal report? seems not

so far it seems no one is actually able to present the actual facts on any of these cyclist down incidents and thus apart from morbid curiosty andgen sympathy

no one can actually learn from the threads...


----------



## sternwood (18 Sep 2008)

_sorry but that is an article from the ES_ 

Hang on, you accept with gratitude a reference to a death with zero references or substantiations, but refuse to accept a press report, comments from the coroner and the family of the person killed?

_do you undertand the difference between a report in a newspaper and a formal report? seems not_

What formal report please?


_so far it seems no one is actually able to present the actual facts on any of these cyclist down incidents_

One again, please do a search on "Inquest"


----------



## rootes (18 Sep 2008)

sternwood said:


> Or consider this rootes:
> 
> 
> http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23419578-details/Coroner's+plea+after+new+cyclist+death/article.do
> ...




do you work for the ES? glad so see that ES is no the formal system of incident reporting in this country - just awaiting their final BA 777 heathrow crash report now that they have taken over from the CAA....


----------



## sternwood (18 Sep 2008)

_do you work for the ES?_

No. It's a crap paper. My question was whether an experienced cyclist doing nothing wrong who is killed by a lorry driver rummaging for papers on the floor of his cab was well served by an inquest that decided a £300 fine and no ban was appropriate, and why you placed your faith in a "formal report" none of us have seen yet.

A partial report and evidence from the court is better than nothing.


----------



## rootes (18 Sep 2008)

sternwood said:


> What formal report please?



erm like the FULL coroners report, police incident report etc you know formal stuff not quoted bits of text in a newspaper edited for sales and news impact


----------



## rootes (18 Sep 2008)

sternwood said:


> _do you work for the ES?_
> 
> No. It's a crap paper. My question was whether an experienced cyclist doing nothing wrong who is killed by a lorry driver rummaging for papers on the floor of his cab was well served by an inquest that decided a £300 fine and no ban was appropriate.




now you change tack.... you made out that such ES articles were a full presentation of the facts of a case... they are not..

we were not even discussing the outcome of a case and whether it was justifed..


----------



## sternwood (18 Sep 2008)

_erm like the FULL coroners report, police incident report etc you know formal stuff_ 

Like this:

http://www.britishcycling.org.uk/web/site/BC/bcf/News2007/20070629_rhyl_inquest.asp

Which you would have found had you followed the suggestion I've made three times now.

What's your opinion of the piunishment doled out to Emma's killer and the Rhyl cyclists?


----------



## John the Monkey (18 Sep 2008)

rootes said:


> erm like the FULL coroners report, police incident report etc you know formal stuff not quoted bits of text in a newspaper edited for sales and news impact



which differs from the précis given by sternwood how? Enquiring minds, and all that.


----------



## sternwood (18 Sep 2008)

_you made out that such ES articles were a full presentation of the facts of a case._

No. please don't put words in my mouth. I explained that they carry more relevance to a report none of us have seen that you described as "cool".


----------



## rootes (18 Sep 2008)

sternwood said:


> and why you placed your faith in a "formal report" none of us have seen yet.
> 
> A partial report and evidence from the court is better than nothing.



quotes in a newspaper are worse than nothing as they are the skewed presentation of information done for journalistic reasons..


as for seeing a report - you have answered the point yourself if you don't know all of the facts you should not comment on an incident. end of


----------



## LLB (18 Sep 2008)

sternwood said:


> _Cool now that is more like it - proper facts!_
> 
> Unsunstantaited claims with no evidence, citing an incident that never happened you mean?



It was in the thread which you started under the member name of waveydaveygravy on C+ in August of 2005 and called *'Dead cyclists have themselves to blame- Telegraph' *

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/gloucestershire/4200154.stm

And the inquest report followed a few months later. Do you really want me to get the relevant reports from my local paper to shut you up Spindrift as this was discussed at length at the time as many will remember on here ?

Posting under multiple persona's is a good sign of trolling


----------



## sternwood (18 Sep 2008)

_quotes in a newspaper are worse than nothing as they are the skewed presentation of information done for journalistic reasons.._


Your evidence that the report is flawed please.

_you have answered the point yourself if you don't know all of the facts you should not comment on an incident. end of_

I've posted the evidence with regard to Rhyl, together with extensive quotes.

You *are* reading my posts?


----------



## sternwood (18 Sep 2008)

LLB said:


> It was in the thread which you started under the member name of waveydaveygravy on C+ in August of 2005 and called *'Dead cyclists have themselves to blame- Telegraph' *
> 
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/gloucestershire/4200154.stm
> 
> ...




The original thread cannot be read, the second link makes no mention of heroin or liability.

Lying about dead cyclists is jolly strange, if your post was directed toward me.


----------



## sternwood (18 Sep 2008)

rootes, I agree suppositions ought not be made till the facts are known.

I've posted two clear links to full inquests where the punishment is laughably mild for a driver who kills through reckless stupidity.

The evidence you asked for has been posted.


----------



## John the Monkey (18 Sep 2008)

rootes said:


> no one can actually learn from the threads...


I disagree.

You can learn that the inside of large vehicles is a bad place to be.

You can learn that drivers using their vehicles as mobile offices/homes rather than fast moving bits of heavy machinery will generally get away with doing so.

You can learn that no one else really thinks this is bad.

It's kind of depressing, but it does reinforce the need to ride as though the people around you are complete idiots with no fear of the consequences of their actions.


----------



## rootes (18 Sep 2008)

sternwood said:


> _you made out that such ES articles were a full presentation of the facts of a case._
> 
> No. please don't put words in my mouth. I explained that they carry more relevance to a report none of us have seen that you described as "cool".



can you read? I said cool as it appeared someone had in the past actually posted up a full inquest report on a thread - i.e. cool as is in cool for doing that... the seach just seems to throw up newspaper articles quoting from inquest, coroner, police reports etc ut not the actual reports themselves...


formal reports are mor elike this:

for example rule 43 report following a inquest

http://www.innerlondonnorth.co.uk/iln/uploads/rule43s/R43_Foa.pdf

a reply here:
http://www.innerlondonnorth.co.uk/iln/uploads/rule43s/R43_FoaR.pdf


you can (if you want) get full inquest report text from the relevant coroner's office 

or where a trial has taken place from formal court records..


thing is formal reports are not as snappy and news worth as a paper article..


----------



## sternwood (18 Sep 2008)

_can you read? I said cool as it appeared someone had in the past actually posted up a full inquest report on a thread_ 

Can you read? It wasn't a full inquest report at all, it was first a telegraph article that's archived and can't be read, then a claim the dead cyclist was on heroin. There's nothing about that in the report, from the BBC either.

You seem to insist on the entire transcript of the inquest if the cyclists's innocent and rely on hearsay and false claims if the cyclist may have been at fault.

Duplicitous, rather.


----------



## rootes (18 Sep 2008)

sternwood said:


> _can you read? I said cool as it appeared someone had in the past actually posted up a full inquest report on a thread_
> 
> Can you read? It wasn't a full inquest report at all, it was first a telegraph article that's archived and can't be read, then a claim the dead cyclist was on heroin. There's nothing about that in the report, from the BBC either.
> 
> ...



I think you may be mixing quotes up as it was not i that posted up the heroin info

all have been saying is that either way people should only comment if they have all the facts... I have not at any point made any judgment on a particualr case - merely on your reliance on the press for your information..

anyway safe cycling


----------

