berty bassett
Legendary Member
- Location
- I'boro
Death ?
Cyclist escapes prosecution after fatal collision with pensioner
- Thread starter PK99
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
Death ?
Rusty Nails
We remember
- Location
- Living in the slow lane
I can see why groups of cyclists like that route around Regents Park. It's flat, suitable for circuits and better than the other crappy roads around that part of London, but it is popular with families and tourists who may not be familiar with the area and traffic and has many parked cars that limit the awareness of cyclists for pedestrians and vice versa.
Because cyclists can ride at 29÷ mph, and have the legal right to that doesn't mean they are right to.
Because cyclists can ride at 29÷ mph, and have the legal right to that doesn't mean they are right to.
Bristolian
Well-Known Member
- Location
- Bristol, UK
I would say that the fact they couldn't stop before hitting the pedestrian would suggest it was too fast.
glasgowcyclist
Charming but somewhat feckless
- Location
- Scotland
How far away was the cyclist when the woman stepped into the road?
Ajax Bay
Guru
- Location
- East Devon
Piece on Radio 4 at about 0752 this (Monday) morning: a very good (rational, articulate and considered) interview with the husband of Kim Briggs (knocked down in central London in 2016 by the bloke on a fixed gear bike with no front brake (who got 18 months)) who has lobbied for a simple law change to incorporate cycling into the RTA (and seemed close to achieving, but legislative action stalled). There are people on here who understand all this: I do not.
But I encourage people to allow 5 minutes to listen on BBC Sounds (or whatever).
"cycling is a lawless activity": wanton and furious is not specifically for cycling (was for horses)
Suggestion that the "cycling lobby" have captured the DoT is reason for inaction.
Question: How many pedestrians die or VSI as a result of collision with a cyclist annually? Of course every death is tragic.
How many pedestrians/cyclist collisions resulting in at least minor injury are reported annually?
What is the proportion of those on pavement(footway) (some shared use, some not)?
Are collisions involving e-bikes (sub sets: legal and illegal) split out in the stats? Is that an emerging issue or will it just reflect the increased % of e- versus pedal-powered?
“Electrically assisted pedal cycles are included in the pedal cycle category depending on their power output.”
Microsoft took me to "In 2022, the most recent year for which figures are available, there were 462 collisions between cyclists and pedestrians recorded by police. This increased from 308 collisions in 2020, an increase of 33 per cent"
Comment: 2020 figures, maybe pandemic affected, were significantly lower (about 24% down, one year only) than the flat line of the previous 8 years so (Telegraph article quoted has got its 30% headline by choosing 2020: if they'd chosen any of the previous 8 years it've been zero increase / an increase of 0%!] NB maths of % down and then up means 24% down and bounce back to 'norm' = 31%!
'Cycling lobby' graph (https://www.cyclinguk.org/briefing/cycling-and-pedestrians
Chris Boardman: “there were more people killed by lightning and cows than by cyclists”.
The official statistics (Stats19) data on incidents do not include those on/in:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214140522000123
Have deliberately cropped this = see mod advice.
But I encourage people to allow 5 minutes to listen on BBC Sounds (or whatever).
"cycling is a lawless activity": wanton and furious is not specifically for cycling (was for horses)
Suggestion that the "cycling lobby" have captured the DoT is reason for inaction.
Question: How many pedestrians die or VSI as a result of collision with a cyclist annually? Of course every death is tragic.
How many pedestrians/cyclist collisions resulting in at least minor injury are reported annually?
What is the proportion of those on pavement(footway) (some shared use, some not)?
Are collisions involving e-bikes (sub sets: legal and illegal) split out in the stats? Is that an emerging issue or will it just reflect the increased % of e- versus pedal-powered?
“Electrically assisted pedal cycles are included in the pedal cycle category depending on their power output.”
Microsoft took me to "In 2022, the most recent year for which figures are available, there were 462 collisions between cyclists and pedestrians recorded by police. This increased from 308 collisions in 2020, an increase of 33 per cent"
Comment: 2020 figures, maybe pandemic affected, were significantly lower (about 24% down, one year only) than the flat line of the previous 8 years so (Telegraph article quoted has got its 30% headline by choosing 2020: if they'd chosen any of the previous 8 years it've been zero increase / an increase of 0%!] NB maths of % down and then up means 24% down and bounce back to 'norm' = 31%!
'Cycling lobby' graph (https://www.cyclinguk.org/briefing/cycling-and-pedestrians
Chris Boardman: “there were more people killed by lightning and cows than by cyclists”.
The official statistics (Stats19) data on incidents do not include those on/in:
- "footpath or bridleway with no lawful access for motor vehicles"
- “cycle path/track with no lawful access for motor vehicles” (eg towpaths and the like)
- municipal or private parks (eg Regent's Park - thread topic incident)
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214140522000123
Have deliberately cropped this = see mod advice.
Last edited:
Rusty Nails
We remember
- Location
- Living in the slow lane
Yes, sadly the woman could and should probably have been more careful when crossing a road that cyclists use as a track to measure their performance, but it still doesn't alter the fact that the MH "Peloton" Club were riding like idiots doing timed laps of a busy, flat inner city circuit surrounding a popular tourist and leisure attraction with parked cars obstructing the views of both them and pedestrians in many places.
It is clearly considered a risk for cars to exceed the 20mph limit in that area and is just as much of a risk for cyclists (individual or "peloton") to be riding at 29mph, even if the likely damage caused by a car is far greater.
There are many roads not far from Muswell Hill where it is considered suitable for the limit for traffic to be 30 and 40mph, that the club could choose to ride rather than the tempting track circuits around Regents Park.
glasgowcyclist
Charming but somewhat feckless
- Location
- Scotland
I agree.
I’ve said several times on here (discussing speed limits and cycling) that I believe cyclists should comply with all posted limits.
Drago
Legendary Member
- Location
- Suburban Poshshire
Irrespective of any speed limit applying to bicycles the rider was almost certainly not scanning, almost certainly with gaze fixed dead ahead, and was clearly not riding at a speed that would allow them time/space to react if the unforeseen should happen.
Indeed, the manner of riding appears to have been such that the reasonably foreseeable became unforeseen. That's pretty much the definition of negligence.
Indeed, the manner of riding appears to have been such that the reasonably foreseeable became unforeseen. That's pretty much the definition of negligence.
slowmotion
Quite dreadful
- Location
- lost somewhere
Quite so.
"Just cos you can don't mean you should".
Time Waster
Veteran
Switch out the bike for car and a driver would be expected to drive at a speed they could react to what they can see. I'm certain there's been threads on here where the driver of the car was driving faster than appropriate, even if it was within the speed limit, then hit someone stepping out unexpectedly. Obviously vilified on here, quite rightly. So why do the ones criticising motorists see no evil with cyclists hitting and killing a pedestrian when they're riding too fast for the area?
Imho speed kills. It's harder for a cyclist to kill than a motorist so in my opinion it is at least as bad if not worse. Do as you would have done to you (by motorists). Ride within safe speeds, ride in safe manner and expect the unexpected! No matter what happened in the courts one person is dead, the MH "Peloton" Club and the cyclist who hit her had a hand in that. I'd hope if I did that I'd have more than a little remorse and feel guilt at it. With hindsight, will he and the club repeat their habit of riding 9pmh over the speed limit and clearly too fast to stop in time.
Imho speed kills. It's harder for a cyclist to kill than a motorist so in my opinion it is at least as bad if not worse. Do as you would have done to you (by motorists). Ride within safe speeds, ride in safe manner and expect the unexpected! No matter what happened in the courts one person is dead, the MH "Peloton" Club and the cyclist who hit her had a hand in that. I'd hope if I did that I'd have more than a little remorse and feel guilt at it. With hindsight, will he and the club repeat their habit of riding 9pmh over the speed limit and clearly too fast to stop in time.
Bristolian
Well-Known Member
- Location
- Bristol, UK
I don't know but it's a fairly irrelevant question; she didn't just materialise from nowhere in the middle of the pack. She must have approached the side of the road and been visible to the pack leader.
A principal of advanced driving is that nothing should happen "suddenly" because the driver should be aware of all potential hazards developing in the direction he is travelling and have a plan to mitigate those. You should also be able to stop in the distance you can see to be clear in full control of your vehicle. To my mind there is no difference for cyclists who consider themselves advanced enough to need to undertake this type of team training on public roads.
Victim blaming
Time Waster
Veteran
How far away was the Motorist when the cyclist appeared in front of him? Motorist claimed the cyclist just appeared there and he couldn't avoid him. Nope, the driver wasn't driving to what he could see.
Change motorist to cyclist and cyclist to pedestrian. What's the difference? Dead is dead! Stop victim blaming no matter who the victim and perpetrator are.
Change motorist to cyclist and cyclist to pedestrian. What's the difference? Dead is dead! Stop victim blaming no matter who the victim and perpetrator are.
From Today's times
Crampton, as he most often does, is talking sence.
Cycling used to be cool. Now, too many bike riders are jerks
Robert Crampton
Tuesday May 07 2024, 12.01am, The Times
I was a regular cyclist, for transport not sport, ever since my stabilisers came off 55 years ago. I cycled to school, at university and then around London for work for 35 years. Now, I’ve pretty much stopped. That’s partly laziness, partly loss of confidence, partly the discovery of a bus direct to the office. But it’s also because I realised that I was no longer proud to identify as a cyclist.
Quite the opposite. Cycling used to be cool. Now, too many two-wheelers are selfish jerks. The guy who knocked over and killed the old lady in Regent’s Park may not have been breaking the law, technically. But I think he was behaving like an entitled shameless bozo. His “apology” in court was a wholly inadequate embarrassment.
Packs of City boys using Regent’s Park as a racetrack is a localised issue. The more general problems, I think, are fourfold: mounting the pavement; running red lights; not having a clue about hand signals, road positioning, braking distances (what people my age were taught in our cycling proficiency tests at primary school, in other words); and fourth (the newest menace), heavy, chunky, near-silent electric bikes that are basically motorcycles, but not legally treated as such.
This last, most serious threat is posed by electrically assisted pedal cycles. They do not require a licence, tax or insurance. Their batteries are supposed to be speed-restricted, yet a Google search yields video instructions on how easily they can be souped up. They are allowed in parks, unlike mopeds, and are thus a danger to unsuspecting pedestrians, especially kids, the elderly and the disabled.
The ebike problem could be solved swiftly, by bringing them within the scope of existing regulations governing more powerful vehicles. Similarly, the lack-of-road-sense issue could be addressed by reinstating the proficiency test.
But the pavement-invading and light-jumping issues are trickier because they are already illegal, yet flouted anyway, and not by a minority of self-consciously anarchic bike bandits, as was the case in my heyday 30 years ago, but routinely and brazenly by what appear to be otherwise respectable people.
At my bus stop in the morning, a bottleneck often leads to traffic jams. Held-up cyclists, impatient to keep moving, do so by using the pavement. They don’t lower their speed or look shamefaced. They just plough on, smugly, sometimes even tut-tutting at anyone in their way.
These jokers include middle-aged men and women, all decked out in hi-vis gear. I’ve witnessed several near-misses. As for red lights, many if not most cyclists now view them as optional. The police seem to include these illegalities on the long list of offences they no longer investigate.
Sometimes, I’m tempted to take direct action with a well-aimed shove, but that wouldn’t be very grown up, would it? Vigilantism isn’t the solution. Instead, a huge cultural reset is required, and it should be initiated within the cycling fraternity.
Those who know better should tell those that don’t to behave themselves, or the full panoply of registration will be coming for cyclists before too long, such is the public disquiet. I might even saddle up again myself, this time less as a commuter, more a road marshal, marauding around east London, distributing a piece of my mind as appropriate, a proper grumpy old man. I might even get some bike clips.
Crampton, as he most often does, is talking sence.
Cycling used to be cool. Now, too many bike riders are jerks
Robert Crampton
Tuesday May 07 2024, 12.01am, The Times
I was a regular cyclist, for transport not sport, ever since my stabilisers came off 55 years ago. I cycled to school, at university and then around London for work for 35 years. Now, I’ve pretty much stopped. That’s partly laziness, partly loss of confidence, partly the discovery of a bus direct to the office. But it’s also because I realised that I was no longer proud to identify as a cyclist.
Quite the opposite. Cycling used to be cool. Now, too many two-wheelers are selfish jerks. The guy who knocked over and killed the old lady in Regent’s Park may not have been breaking the law, technically. But I think he was behaving like an entitled shameless bozo. His “apology” in court was a wholly inadequate embarrassment.
Packs of City boys using Regent’s Park as a racetrack is a localised issue. The more general problems, I think, are fourfold: mounting the pavement; running red lights; not having a clue about hand signals, road positioning, braking distances (what people my age were taught in our cycling proficiency tests at primary school, in other words); and fourth (the newest menace), heavy, chunky, near-silent electric bikes that are basically motorcycles, but not legally treated as such.
This last, most serious threat is posed by electrically assisted pedal cycles. They do not require a licence, tax or insurance. Their batteries are supposed to be speed-restricted, yet a Google search yields video instructions on how easily they can be souped up. They are allowed in parks, unlike mopeds, and are thus a danger to unsuspecting pedestrians, especially kids, the elderly and the disabled.
The ebike problem could be solved swiftly, by bringing them within the scope of existing regulations governing more powerful vehicles. Similarly, the lack-of-road-sense issue could be addressed by reinstating the proficiency test.
But the pavement-invading and light-jumping issues are trickier because they are already illegal, yet flouted anyway, and not by a minority of self-consciously anarchic bike bandits, as was the case in my heyday 30 years ago, but routinely and brazenly by what appear to be otherwise respectable people.
At my bus stop in the morning, a bottleneck often leads to traffic jams. Held-up cyclists, impatient to keep moving, do so by using the pavement. They don’t lower their speed or look shamefaced. They just plough on, smugly, sometimes even tut-tutting at anyone in their way.
These jokers include middle-aged men and women, all decked out in hi-vis gear. I’ve witnessed several near-misses. As for red lights, many if not most cyclists now view them as optional. The police seem to include these illegalities on the long list of offences they no longer investigate.
Sometimes, I’m tempted to take direct action with a well-aimed shove, but that wouldn’t be very grown up, would it? Vigilantism isn’t the solution. Instead, a huge cultural reset is required, and it should be initiated within the cycling fraternity.
Those who know better should tell those that don’t to behave themselves, or the full panoply of registration will be coming for cyclists before too long, such is the public disquiet. I might even saddle up again myself, this time less as a commuter, more a road marshal, marauding around east London, distributing a piece of my mind as appropriate, a proper grumpy old man. I might even get some bike clips.
PhilipBenstead007
Regular
How should CTC/CUK BC LCC IWGBCB (if at all) respond to this report?
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...list who knocked down,a Saturday in June 2022.
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/lon...l-crash-dog-walker-regents-park-b1155776.html
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...list who knocked down,a Saturday in June 2022.
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/lon...l-crash-dog-walker-regents-park-b1155776.html
