Wobblers
Euthermic
- Location
- Minkowski Space
An experienced cyclist would be going slower in an area with lots of pedestrians. If only for self preservation. If he had time to shout, he had time to reach the brakes.
Charlie Alliston case - fixie rider accused of causing pedestrian death
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
An experienced cyclist would be going slower in an area with lots of pedestrians. If only for self preservation. If he had time to shout, he had time to reach the brakes.
Wobblers
Euthermic
- Location
- Minkowski Space
[QUOTE 4921776, member: 259"]I agree with you, but the fact is he'd have been able to stop much faster if he had a front brake. He's going to be stuffed anyway. I wonder though what would've happened if he'd just been driving a car rather than a bike. Probably wouldn't have made the news at all in the Mail unless he'd had a sex change or he wore a bikini.[/QUOTE]
No, you're right, that doesn't excuse his actions in any way. He's a bell end. I've little doubt that an effective front brake would have been quite capable of stopping him and bike in that distance. I rather suspect that Alliston wouldn't have bothered using it...
No, you're right, that doesn't excuse his actions in any way. He's a bell end. I've little doubt that an effective front brake would have been quite capable of stopping him and bike in that distance. I rather suspect that Alliston wouldn't have bothered using it...
Last edited:
I agree, but does the law actually call for an effective front brake or just a brake. If he can prove that if he had a legal but ineffective front brake that he would not have stopped any sooner that may help him. If I were his QC I would be finding my own expert who can actually ride a fixed gear and prove that it can stop in less than 32ft and then do the same with an ineffective brake and stop in the same distance.
He is still a nobber though, my worry is that this sets a precedent allowing pedestrians to jump out in front of cyclists at will.
So they should be able to get him on that, but manslaughter?
I know you know this, but worth clarifying that a fixie counts as a rear brake
Involuntary manslaughter[edit]
Involuntary manslaughter arises where the accused did not intend to cause death or serious injury but caused the death of another through recklessness or criminal negligence. For these purposes, recklessness is defined as a blatant disregard for the dangers of a particular situation. An example of this would be dropping a brick off a bridge, landing on a person's head, killing him. Since the intent is not to kill the victim, but simply to drop the brick, the mens rea required for murder does not exist because the act is not aimed at any one person. But if in dropping the brick, there is a good chance of injuring someone, the person who drops it will be reckless. This form of manslaughter is also termed "unlawful act" or "constructive" manslaughter.
glasgowcyclist
Charming but somewhat feckless
- Location
- Scotland
It's covered by the Pedal Cycles Construction and Use Regs 1983 which, as Adrian has already pointed out, specifies that the brakes must be "efficient".
While looking that up, I came across this article in the Guardian from 2010:
Cycling without brakes? You're breaking the law
Lots of people argue that a skilled brakeless rider can stop faster than an inexperienced commuter with brakes, which I've always found rather disingenuous. Others claim that adding a brake in any scenario will improve the likelihood of a safe outcome should the worst happen.
But arguments over safety aside, the fact is that brakeless riders are strictly breaking the law in the UK.
Chris Juden is technical officer at the national cyclists' organisation CTC, and an expert on what is legal and illegal when it comes to cycling. He maintains a thorough and very accessible summary of cycling law online.
"A front brake is necessary on a bicycle," he said. "If you're trying to stop a bicycle, or any vehicle, as quickly as you can there will be hardly any weight on the back wheel.
"If you're slowing down gradually the back wheel's fine, but if you're slowing down in an emergency forget about the back brake."
"It takes a great deal of skill to brake with a fixed wheel like that but some people can do that," added Mr Juden. "A skilled rider with a front brake will stop in half the distance. You need a front brake to be safe."
But arguments over safety aside, the fact is that brakeless riders are strictly breaking the law in the UK.
Chris Juden is technical officer at the national cyclists' organisation CTC, and an expert on what is legal and illegal when it comes to cycling. He maintains a thorough and very accessible summary of cycling law online.
"A front brake is necessary on a bicycle," he said. "If you're trying to stop a bicycle, or any vehicle, as quickly as you can there will be hardly any weight on the back wheel.
"If you're slowing down gradually the back wheel's fine, but if you're slowing down in an emergency forget about the back brake."
"It takes a great deal of skill to brake with a fixed wheel like that but some people can do that," added Mr Juden. "A skilled rider with a front brake will stop in half the distance. You need a front brake to be safe."
Wobblers
Euthermic
- Location
- Minkowski Space
He is indeed a nobber, who has just condemned himself to boot. I don't think this'll set any precedent about pedestrians jumping in front of cyclists - people tend to try to avoid things that might hurt them after all! That's the sort of argument you hear against assumed liability. I believe that sort of argument to be false for the same reason - a cyclist is unlikely to risk life and limb on some presumed liability point (wihch, if it could be shown that the cyclist was acting recklessly, would be moot anyway).
Last edited:
iwantanewbike
Über Member
So a motorist who kills someone while driving on a mobile phone could also be guilty of this? But how many have, despite clear evidence?
growingvegetables
Guru
- Location
- Leeds
slowmotion
Quite dreadful
- Location
- lost somewhere
Pedestrians walk out into the road if they don't see cars. Bikes don't register as a potential threat to their well-being. That's reality. If you ride a bike, you plan for that, cover your brakes, ride cautiously in crowded areas and don't have an alleycat mentality. Simple really.
growingvegetables
Guru
- Location
- Leeds
Just a tiny wee FTFY.
Tin Pot
Guru
Was it a crowded area?
jefmcg
Guru
Old Street at lunchtime? It's not Oxford Street but there would be a lot of people about.
https://goo.gl/maps/MdMWFoqRNEU2
Last edited:
jefmcg
Guru
I assume he was charged with manslaughter because there is no crime "causing death by dangerous cycling"
