I agree, I am a non-helmet/hi-viz/glove wearer but would never use music/earphones on the roads, I too get involved in the music, it's really pleasurable on the towpath but on the roads, never for me.
Cyclist's death may have been caused by listening to music on her phone
- Thread starter Accy cyclist
- Start date
-
- Tags
- music
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
I agree, I am a non-helmet/hi-viz/glove wearer but would never use music/earphones on the roads, I too get involved in the music, it's really pleasurable on the towpath but on the roads, never for me.
fossyant
Ride It Like You Stole It!
- Location
- South Manchester
Hearing on a bike is another sense that you need.
Problem is, in law, if someone can argue for the slightest contributory negligence, they will. It saves them thousands ! As an individual you need to mitigate this as much as possible. The number of times I've been asked 'were you wearing a helmet' and I've come back and said it was my back, and my helmet was mark free. I even had lights on. At the minute, the other side are still going to try and argue road position (I had been filtering on the outside so could see and be seen, then went to primary before the driver turned right across my path). They will try anything even speed etc. Fortunately my GPS shows me not going fast.
As in this incident, they are trying to find blame. No reflector, poorly mounted bell - who is going to hear a bell in a truck ? The sad thing is a poor individual lost their lives on the road, this shouldn't be happening !
Problem is, in law, if someone can argue for the slightest contributory negligence, they will. It saves them thousands ! As an individual you need to mitigate this as much as possible. The number of times I've been asked 'were you wearing a helmet' and I've come back and said it was my back, and my helmet was mark free. I even had lights on. At the minute, the other side are still going to try and argue road position (I had been filtering on the outside so could see and be seen, then went to primary before the driver turned right across my path). They will try anything even speed etc. Fortunately my GPS shows me not going fast.
As in this incident, they are trying to find blame. No reflector, poorly mounted bell - who is going to hear a bell in a truck ? The sad thing is a poor individual lost their lives on the road, this shouldn't be happening !
Pale Rider
Legendary Member
A meaningless comment.
Just say the Mail didn't cover the story.
The inquest would have gone ahead just the same, the cyclist would still be dead, and the coroner would have reached the same conclusion.
The inquest is trying to establish what happened and why, also who, where, and when.
As part of his job, the accident investigator will examine the bicycle and produce a factual report.
It's up to the coroner to judge what impact that information - and all the rest of the evidence before him - had on the death.
The coroner said the faulty front brake may have caused the cyclist to apply more than usual pressure to the rear brake, in turn causing a skid which led to the fall and fatal injury.
Seems a reasonable hypothesis to me, although that's all it is, and the coroner presented it as such - a possible explanation.
Pale Rider
Legendary Member
The coroner's remarks are what they are, it matters not where you read them.
It's been noted upthread the same stuff appears on road cc.
Most likely is the inquest was covered by a freelance or news agency which has sold the story to whoever will buy it.
In other words, both newsdesks get the same copy, hence the quotes are identical because they are what they are - quotes.
But hey, bleating about the Mail is much more important than a cycling fatality and how officialdom deals with it, so you carry on.
jefmcg
Guru
I usually hate the DM, but I am fascinated that everyone hated the DM article, then poured love on the road.cc article that was nearly the same word for word. Even though I have locked horns with @Pale Rider on the subject of the Daily Mail before (when he was very wrong 
), he is right this time.
As for the content of both articles, I'm OK with it - assuming it's an accurate report of the inquest. When a cyclist is crushed under the wheels of a lorry and the papers immediately say "died when his cycle collide with ...", I am enraged. But when an inquest exonerates the driver, who had previously be tarred 'hit and run, fleeing the scene at speed" then I think it's ok for the newspaper to exonerate him too.
Whether the coroner was correct? I don't know. But mentioning a helmet in an accident that involved head injuries seems ok, especially as there is no criticism or suggestion it would have made a difference. Ditto for mentioning headphones in an accident where the fatality did not seem to notice her surroundings? That seems ok too. The reflector and bell - that's seems to be reporting what the police said. And I think it's fine that the police would mention every "fault" with the bike, whether or not it was a factor. And it doesn't seem to me that the coroner thought it was a factor.
Yeah, I'm ok with the coroner and the DM.
), he is right this time.As for the content of both articles, I'm OK with it - assuming it's an accurate report of the inquest. When a cyclist is crushed under the wheels of a lorry and the papers immediately say "died when his cycle collide with ...", I am enraged. But when an inquest exonerates the driver, who had previously be tarred 'hit and run, fleeing the scene at speed" then I think it's ok for the newspaper to exonerate him too.
Whether the coroner was correct? I don't know. But mentioning a helmet in an accident that involved head injuries seems ok, especially as there is no criticism or suggestion it would have made a difference. Ditto for mentioning headphones in an accident where the fatality did not seem to notice her surroundings? That seems ok too. The reflector and bell - that's seems to be reporting what the police said. And I think it's fine that the police would mention every "fault" with the bike, whether or not it was a factor. And it doesn't seem to me that the coroner thought it was a factor.
Yeah, I'm ok with the coroner and the DM.
mjr
Comfy armchair to one person & a plank to the next
- Location
- mostly Norfolk, sometimes Somerset
Are you also fine with the shoot about the brake cables, saying that either the outer was cut too short or that the cable was too short? It really doesn't make much sense to me, but the coroner seems to think it was a factor.
How can you have the outer so short it affects braking without it being immediately obvious with the inner in a straight line and the outer rattling around? Have you ever seen a bike like that? Or if the cable was too short, surely it would lock the brakes on or be flapping around... at which point, the outer wouldn't stay on the bike anyway...
Surely it's more probable that the front brake cable came off in the crash?It all feels like a bunch of motorists who don't understand how bikes work have sat in judgement on a cyclist who can no longer offer testimony.
OP
OP
Accy cyclist
Legendary Member
- Location
- The hills of Accrington
When i was knocked off my bike last year i was lucky to have a reliable witness to the incident. He was very sympathetic in our phone conversation but he did say that maybe i should've been wearing a high viz jacket then all of this wouldn't have happened. I was wearing a white red and yellow jersey(hardly black or grey)and it was daylight. Yet even those who sympathise with us think we bring it upon ourselves when we're hit by some tit who'd hit you even if you were dressed from head to toe in high viz and had a flashing light on your helmet! The boy racer who knocked me off said in court that he didn't see me, but i made eye contact with him as we approached each other. He definitely saw me but chose to cut across my path either through bravado,stupidity or total inexperience.
Last edited:
Pale Rider
Legendary Member
Even though I have locked horns with @Pale Rider on the subject of the Daily Mail before (when he was very wrong
I can't remember locking horns with you over the Mail so I must have been wrong on that occasion.
Court reporting in this country is fairly straight, the laws of contempt and vigilant judges and lawyers see to that.
The reporter who did this inquest has probably done dozens if not hundreds in the past, and won't work for the Mail anyway.
So just this once the simple answer is the correct one - it's an accurate report written by a competent journalist.
mjr
Comfy armchair to one person & a plank to the next
- Location
- mostly Norfolk, sometimes Somerset
[QUOTE 4586161, member: 45"]If the inner was too long (outer too short) then the lever would hit the bars when squeezed, as the report said, and the brake wouldn't engage properly.[/QUOTE]
Isn't that simply the inner clamped in the wrong place, too far out, rather than the outer too short? And how does it tie up with the inner being too short?
Isn't that simply the inner clamped in the wrong place, too far out, rather than the outer too short? And how does it tie up with the inner being too short?
fossyant
Ride It Like You Stole It!
- Location
- South Manchester
Plenty of badly maintained bikes out there. Brakes are the luxury option like indicators on BMWs
mjr
Comfy armchair to one person & a plank to the next
- Location
- mostly Norfolk, sometimes Somerset
And yet, some of the most vehement opponents of cycling sound systems (headphones or speakers) ride around with fat straps in front of their ears making whoosh whoosh noises and few people criticise that!
Yes, it feels like the motorists' courts looking for reasons to blame the deceased instead of suggest how to improve the junction and it shouldn't be happening.
jefmcg
Guru
Did anyone get the impression there a forensic examination of the bike, by an expert? I seems like it was just a copper checking it over. It had been in a crash. OK, maybe the brakes didn't work, not unheard of in a Halfords bike, or maybe they worked fine before the crash and things were knocked badly out of alignment.
fossyant
Ride It Like You Stole It!
- Location
- South Manchester
It probably was just a coppa. Comments on damage to my bike by the officer on scene was damage to the wheel. There actually wasn't any. Just a scratch on the forks which they missed.
jefmcg
Guru
Yeah, you were clearly continuing an argument that you had previously had SC&P, so might not have noticed a new voice (mine).
1) correct 2) incorrect
https://uk.linkedin.com/in/alexander-matthews-b9748452
I am heartened to see that the Mail is still employing an actual journalist - maybe there are more than one. I apologise for my plagiarism remark above, I am sure that road.cc purchased the article rather than stole it.
More article by him
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...k-using-mobile-phones-reading-maps-wheel.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...len-van-just-42-MINUTES-reported-missing.html
Nothing world shattering, but perfectly fine tabloid writing.
