Yes. Was it beyond a reasonable doubt that if he'd had a front brake he'd have avoided the collision? No way you could prove that, and no way he should have been convicted of GBH. It's a tragic accident.
Charlie Alliston case - fixie rider accused of causing pedestrian death
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
Yes. Was it beyond a reasonable doubt that if he'd had a front brake he'd have avoided the collision? No way you could prove that, and no way he should have been convicted of GBH. It's a tragic accident.
A part of making a defence of an accused's actions is to argue around how they reacted to a victim's actions, no actions exists in a vacuum of its own. That is not the same as victim blaming.
growingvegetables
Guru
- Location
- Leeds
You are Mr Loophole, AICMFP.
srw
It's a bit more complicated than that...
Either that or a lawyer who's attended all 5 days of the trial and has spotted something the judge and the jury didn't....
growingvegetables
Guru
- Location
- Leeds
I stick to my use of the phrase, written as it was, in response to this.
numbnuts
Legendary Member
- Location
- Gone over the hill and far away
Just been reading the comments in the Mail, hung, draw and quartered comes to mind.......
Yellow Fang
Legendary Member
- Location
- Reading
I see Charlie Alliston got done for 'wanton and furious driving' for a cycle collision with a woman who stepped onto the road in front of him, leading to her death. It's true, legally speaking, he should have had a front brake. He was riding a fixed wheel track bike. Otherwise I can't see that he did too much wrong. He was on the road. 18mph is not too fast.
He had his legs. Can you really say with absolute certainty that a brake compared to his legs over the distance would have made that much difference to speed?
It's such a freak accident that she was killed . If he'd been going faster, slower, had been slightly to either side, she'd have walked away. Prosecuting this freak accident as a certainty seems anti-cycling to me.
I'm not even going to start into how anti cycling juries seem to usually be,and whether this was something similar.
Arjimlad
Tights of Cydonia
- Location
- South Glos
Martin Porter's article on this nails the science. He'd not have been able to stop in a car either. It's a very unfortunate accident, it seems to me.
but some of the posts here have been blatant victim blaming.
U
User6179
Guest
He was 6.75 metres away when he swerved to avoid a collision travelling at 18 mph which is less than one second away from the victim,
I think you could reasonably prove that swerving and not braking would be the better option in most cases at that speed and distance to avoid a collision.
Go out on your bike and mark a line 6.75 metres away from a bollard then cycle towards it at 18mph and see for yourself.
But she would more likely have seen/heard a car and not stepped out...?
Arjimlad
Tights of Cydonia
- Location
- South Glos
Quite possibly, or had more respect for the damage a car can do. I had a lecturer eyeball me - look me straight in the eye - and step out right in front of me once. Thankfully I was going uphill slowly but even braking hard I still couldn't avoid my front wheel hitting her leg.
