Mary Hassell - time to go?

[dellzeqq]

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/lond...illed-in-crash-with-tipper-truck-8879430.html

can we have a coroner who can add up, please? As in deaths on blue paint and deaths caused by tipper lorries?

 

[deptfordmarmoset]

[QUOTE 2725213, member: 30090"]Is this the job of the coroner and purpose of the inquest?[/quote]
It was a Prevention of Future Deaths report. Regulation 28. 3 common links (HGVs, cyclists, blue paint), 2 seen.

 

[dellzeqq]

It was a Prevention of Future Deaths report. Regulation 28. 3 common links (HGVs, cyclists, blue paint), 2 seen.

indeed, A dozen or more cyclists get killed by tipper lorries and the coroner decides that cyclists should be educated about the shortcomings of blue paint. Muppet is as polite a word as I can manage.

 

[Bromptonaut]

I think Dell and Reg are both being a bit harsh. The report is a response by one Coroner to two specific inquests before her where HGV and CS routes were involved. As it's made under a statutory power she may be restricted to those inquests or she may have chosen not to mention others so as to use cases where the facts were laid out in front of her.

On my reading I think she's over egging the blue paint point a bit - some of it reads like a pejorative reference, bit like anti-helmeteers use of term 'plastic hat' but there is a real point there. I've never had need to use CS myself but they seem to have same issue as many ordinary green bike lanes; they can lead the unwary into danger. Even on my short folder ride form Euston to Westminster there are several ASL feeder lanes that offer an easy route up nearside of traffic. The picture of Bow roundabout oft used in illustration of these cases is an example where CS does same.

I don't know all the facts of these two accidents and there seems to be an element of speculation in accounts of how Mr Dorling, an experienced cyclist, came to be in danger. The report in the Standard says 'The court heard that Mr Dorling probably undertook the lorry'.Was running the red his planned escape route in case undertake went titsup?

Mlle de Gerin-Ricard is said to entered the lane from the pavement and into the driver's blind spot (my emphasis). We all see riders doing the same sort of thing with HGVs and buses on a daily basis. Last night in the Strand there was a young woman riding what looked like a student's bike weaving and ducking under door mirrors between lines of trucks and buses which moved intermittently. To add to danger she had a long rolled paper object sticking out of corner of her rucksack - could easily catch/be caught and tip her off under wheels.

There certainly needs to be more will to prosecute culpable drivers and train them all but that and cyclist education are not either/or solutions. There is a need for action through public information films, stuff for students at fresher's week, posters etc to educate cyclists on not putting themselves at risk. Whats to argue against that?

 

[dellzeqq]

I think Dell and Reg are both being a bit harsh. The report is a response by one Coroner to two specific inquests before her where HGV and CS routes were involved. As it's made under a statutory power she may be restricted to those inquests or she may have chosen not to mention others so as to use cases where the facts were laid out in front of her.

the Coroner is entitled to offer advice when she or he thinks that a death (or, in this case, two deaths) exposes a risk that affects others. What she or he is not entitled to do is to disregard the numbers. Millions of people use the blue painted bits of road without a problem, but a small, indeed tiny proportion of the motor vehicles on London's roads are responsible for about half the cyclist deaths - and there are solid reasons for that being the case.

So - the coroner takes the word of a man who belongs to that tiny minority, and goes for the cheap headline. In doing so she has a pop at a system that can be shown to have reduced the number of casualties per million miles ridden by cyclists. My guess is that she's hooked in to the crap LCC propaganda that represents the needs of the organisation (in a very material way) rather than the aspirations of cyclists. She's a complete, total muppet - and utterly unfit for the job. Time to go.

Oh - and as for blind spots - see also fresnel mirrors.

 

[Bromptonaut]

the Coroner is entitled to offer advice when she or he thinks that a death (or, in this case, two deaths) exposes a risk that affects others. What she or he is not entitled to do is to disregard the numbers. Millions of people use the blue painted bits of road without a problem, but a small, indeed tiny proportion of the motor vehicles on London's roads are responsible for about half the cyclist deaths - and there are solid reasons for that being the case.

So - the coroner takes the word of a man who belongs to that tiny minority, and goes for the cheap headline. In doing so she has a pop at a system that can be shown to have reduced the number of casualties per million miles ridden by cyclists. My guess is that she's hooked in to the crap LCC propaganda that represents the needs of the organisation (in a very material way) rather than the aspirations of cyclists. She's a complete, total muppet - and utterly unfit for the job. Time to go.

Oh - and as for blind spots - see also fresnel mirrors.

I get all that stuff but what she did was report on accidents on her patch. One can criticise the emphasis on blue paint-v- numbers, but apt from bolding of cyclists but not motorists what' s wrong with trainiing about (a) taking he lane and (b) not undertaking - or at least having every eventuality covered before ding so - large vehicles?

If you think she's that far of beam perhaps you should write to the Chief Coroner. A deal of political and career blood was spilled saving his role from the quango axe of Public Bodies Act - it would be a pity to ignore the opportunity to make use of his role

 

[dellzeqq]

I get all that stuff but what she did was report on accidents on her patch. One can criticise the emphasis on blue paint-v- numbers, but apt from bolding of cyclists but not motorists what' s wrong with trainiing about (a) taking he lane and (b) not undertaking - or at least having every eventuality covered before ding so - large vehicles?

her job is to warn of risks - real risks, not imagined or alleged - and, if she can, to propose remedies. There's a real risk, and dealing with that risk is going to take some effort and expense - although fresnel mirrors and a bit of FORS training are not that expensive.

Put it this way - if I spent my time writing risk assessments on stuff that didn't matter and neglected stuff that did matter I could end up in court - and rightly so. I'd be the wrong person for the job. And she is the wrong person for her job.

 

[glenn forger]

Mlle de Gerin-Ricard is said to entered the lane from the pavement and into the driver's blind spot (my emphasis).

The "blind spot" would have been eradicated had the driver checked there was nobody in front of him. Defending the driver with that excuse is like a cyclist riding with a huge parcel in their front basket that obscures the view ahead. If the cyclist collided with and hurt someone would you accept the cyclist's excuse that the victim was in the "blind spot"?