Yet another elderly person killed by a cyclist

[Fastpedaller]

I nearly found out the hard way about 3 years ago...... Riding along a country lane (1 1/2 car width). As I approached a couple who were walking on the left I rang my bell, slowed a bit (probably 12MPH) and as I went through on the far right the male ped decided to leap into road at 90 degrees towards the right - who knows why ? (I'm not sure he even did) I hit the brakes and yelled and we didn't contact. He was indignant that he could just amble all over the road, and I calmly pointed out that although it was a country lane, he should have looked as traffic uses the lane, but thankfully nobody was hurt. We amically agreed it was a close shave. My lesson learned (even after 40 + years cycling) is never to assume a pedestrian is aware of my presence until they have actively acknowledged I am there!

 

[fritz katzenjammer]

I’ve had people complain at me because I didn’t ring my bell, but I’ve had just as many cuss after me because I did! Pedestrians are like squirrels, you never know which way they are going to dart. Equally offensive though are the roadies on their carbon missiles that race through the slower traffic, both pedestrians and other cyclists, like they were simple static obstacles to be dodged. Let’s face it, the average human is an unpredictable unreliable animal.

40 plus years of commuting on motorcycles has taught me to ride like nobody sees me or cares if they hit me or they themselves are hit. Slow down, keep your eyes open and always have an escape plan.

 

[ebikeerwidnes]

In reality - on some roads "proper" road cyclists seem to treat me the way some cyclists treat walkers - as an unwanted obstacle

and I am going faster than most bike

The closest passes I have had were mostly from people in lycra on road bikes

no bell (it adds weight presumably) or shouts or anything

If I am lucky I get an inaudible shout of something that I presume was meant to be "on you right" which is useless as I don;t get time to react even if I understand what he (always he) said

TO make the world a better place all we need to do is get people to treat other people like people!

 

[Rusty Nails]

Pedestrians just don't realise the stress and problems cyclists have with warning them of our presence.

To shout or ring a bell, or just rely on squeaky brakes?

What to shout...will they understand what "on the right" means (or "on your left" if they are hogging the right of the path). When to shout so that they have time to react without jumping out of their skins but without being out of earshot.

If using a bell, how many rings, how far away, getting a bell that sounds firm but friendly and doesn't scream "get out of my way".

Is it worth shouting or ringing a bell if they have headphones or earbuds?

It causes me so much stress I just shut my eyes and bomb through whatever gap there is as fast as possible to get it over with. Tbf it has not gone wrong very often.

 

[Poacher]

Found not guilty - will all the pitchfork-wielding, "hanging's too good for him" ragers (some in this thread!) wind their necks back in please.

 

[icowden]

Found not guilty - will all the pitchfork-wielding, "hanging's too good for him" ragers (some in this thread!) wind their necks back in please.

Yep. I thought that would be the case. Firstly limited evidence - most of what was reported is his version of events plus the friends version of events. There may be some limited forensic evidence which would have substantiated whether there was any significant collision with the bike and whether she was thrown forward. Secondly however the prosecution have to satisfy the Jury beyond reasonable doubt that the cyclist was at fault, and that was always going to be an uphill battle.

 

[simongt]

Reminds me of an occasion on the Monsal Trail, which I posted a while back.
On the famous viaduct, there were a lot of walkers of mixed age and probably ability, milling about admiring the scenery.
Suddenly, from behind me, I heard an urgent ting, ting, ting of a cycle bell. Two cyclists then rode, or rather wove through all the walkers at speeds much too fast for the situation apparently expecting all to suddenly be aware of their presence and get out of THEIR way. It obviously never occurred to either of them that some of the walkers could be deaf or not paying attention and decide to vere off to one side to look at something.

 

[wafter]

Found not guilty - will all the pitchfork-wielding, "hanging's too good for him" ragers (some in this thread!) wind their necks back in please.

That's great news - presumably a pretty easy decision too given the short duration of the trial.

In other news, pictured is Iffley lock - which is on my commute. It's not escaped me how lucky I am to be able to travel in such surroundings

 

[T4tomo]

sympathies to the old girl & her relatives and to the poor chap who will have no doubt have had 18 months of stress etc having to deal with his part in the incident and then on top of that a pending court-case.

 

[Cycleops]

To all those uninformed people who said he must have been going very fast, he wasn't. He was travelling at 'little more than walking pace'.
Unfortunately she moved the wrong way after he rang his bell and he hit her. Obviously the correct verdict.

 

[Punkawallah]

O that's ok then.

“For context”.
If you want to imply I am some sort of heartless monster, don’t bother. Guilty as charged.

 

[Cycleops]

“For context”.

I don't think he's saying it was okay, just putting it into perspective for those suggesting all sorts of punetive measures against cyclists.

 

[icowden]

To all those uninformed people who said he must have been going very fast, he wasn't. He was travelling at 'little more than walking pace'.
Unfortunately she moved the wrong way after he rang his bell and he hit her. Obviously the correct verdict.

To be fair, he stated that he was travelling at 'little more than walking pace' and the prosecution was unable to prove otherwise, unless data was submitted in evidence to substantiate his pace (e.g. strava data). The Jury were clearly satisfied that his account was correct and it couldn't be proven beyond reasonable doubt that the events transpired in another way.

 

[wafter]

To be fair, he stated that he was travelling at 'little more than walking pace' and the prosecution was unable to prove otherwise, unless data was submitted in evidence to substantiate his pace (e.g. strava data). The Jury were clearly satisfied that his account was correct and it couldn't be proven beyond reasonable doubt that the events transpired in another way.

A witness also stated the same, while as far as I can tell no eye witnesses have said anything to dispute this claim.

So, the decision to charge him as he was appears utterly baseless.. makes me wonder if it only got to court because of intrinsic anti-cyclist bias in those involved.

 

[Cycleops]

If he hadn't of been charged I think there would have been a public outcry. This way the evidence was laid out and his innocence was proved beyond doubt.