Cyclist's death reported in local paper

[Boris Bajic]

Awful for the friends and relatives of the victim. That's a nightmare I want to avoid. And a thought that keeps occurring....

It is weird how we have 'developed' into a society who cannot wait. I often comment on how cycling was just as safe before anyone wore a helmet...

Similarly, we all felt just as connected with our social and professional contacts before we were able to exchange inanities with them while doing the shopping, driving the car or weeding the garden.

What is it that conditions us to grab a 'phone as soon as we hear an incoming call or text?

In twenty years, I've yet to miss a call saying that there's a dinosaur on the loose half a mile ahead and it'll eat me and my car unless I turn round at once. That would be the call I'd want to pick up. The only calls I miss while driving are about swimming lessons or pasta sauce or tiles for the bathroom. Life, ultimately, is not as exciting as the brochure makes out.

And calls about life tend to be less exciting again.

I don't want to cheapen a thread about a terrible personal tragedy for those involved, but it does stagger me that as a society we seem disinclined to question why we feel that need to respond immediately to probable telephonic inanity.

A joy I am trying to get into is that of letting my 'phone ring out. As the father of three teens, it is one I rarely witness other members of my family enjoying. We ban phones at the meal table and other family places, but when one buzzes invisibly in a pocket the owner looks as if they are about to explode because they can't answer it.

Sorry, that's the end of my musings for now.

 

[david k]

According to the law, if you have to press a button it is not hands-free!

how do you operate the 'hands free'?

 

[green1]

If you have to press a button on the phone to answer the call its breaking the law. On the system in my car to answer/make a call you press a button on the steering wheel and then its voice recognition, that is legal.

 

[Peowpeowpeowlasers]

I'm struggling to grasp how a hands-free phone call could contribute toward this accident. Here's the location:

http://goo.gl/maps/iVkw

Lorry driving in straight line well below speed limit
Cyclist turns in front of him
Cyclist hit by lorry after travelling perhaps two-three bicycle lengths

The most alert lorry driver in the world could not have avoided someone who did that, except perhaps to swerve into oncoming traffic and even risk overturning. Three witnesses each said there was no way for the lorry to avoid the cyclist and a forensic investigator agreed that the cyclist was entirely to blame.

 

[Amanda P]

I'm struggling to grasp how a hands-free phone call could contribute toward this accident....
The most alert lorry driver in the world could not have avoided someone who did that, except perhaps to swerve into oncoming traffic and even risk overturning. Three witnesses each said there was no way for the lorry to avoid the cyclist and a forensic investigator agreed that the cyclist was entirely to blame.

Well... (speculation follows)
A perfect driver, knowing that there would be oncoming traffic, that he was passing a junction, and that he was about to pass close to a cyclist who just might move off unwisely, might have slowed to rather less than 30 mph. And perhaps the collision would then not have occurred, or it might have been less severe.

A perfect driver would not have been on the phone, and therefore might have been more likely to have thought of this.

We all, surely, have a duty on the road, not only to avoid making mistakes and misjudgements ourselves, but to behave in such a way that we can allow for others' mistakes and misjudgements.

 

[benb]

We all, surely, have a duty on the road, not only to avoid making mistakes and misjudgements ourselves, but to behave in such a way that we can allow for others' mistakes and misjudgements.

I like that.

 

[Peowpeowpeowlasers]

So how slowly should the lorry driver have gone, in your opinion? 25mph? 20mph? 15mph? If I drove my car like that I'd never get anywhere. You can see from the link I posted that the road has very good visibility and plenty of space for traffic turning right to wait.

You can anticipate many hazards, but a suicidal cyclist who pushes off into your path seconds before you hit him isn't really one of them.

 

[green1]

Well... (speculation follows)
A perfect driver, knowing that there would be oncoming traffic, that he was passing a junction, and that he was about to pass close to a cyclist who just might move off unwisely, might have slowed to rather less than 30 mph. And perhaps the collision would then not have occurred, or it might have been less severe.

Do you slow down to a crawl just incase at every junction with a turning box when traffic is waiting to turn? The lorry had right of way after all.

We all, surely, have a duty on the road, not only to avoid making mistakes and misjudgements ourselves, but to behave in such a way that we can allow for others' mistakes and misjudgements.

I agree but there are limits to what you can do with reverting to having a man with a red flag walking in front of all motor vehicles again.

Eyewitness, Paul King, was driving in the direction of Reading when the incident happened.
He said: “He shot across to reach the curb on the other side [of the road] and a large lorry was coming from the other direction.
“I thought to myself ‘If he makes that it will be a miracle’.
“He shot right in front of the lorry.
“He was completely safe where he was; if he had just waited.
“There was no way the lorry could have stopped.”
Pedestrian, Christopher McMillan said in a statement: “The only way the accident couldn’t have happened was if the cyclist chose not to cross.
Another witness, Frederick Barber, said that Mr Fraser’s movements in attempting to cross the road were “unusual”.
In a statement he said: “It was a sudden and aggressive movement.
“The lorry driver didn’t stand a chance of stopping.”

 

[Maylian]

A helmet was as much use to that cyclist as bullet proof vests would have been to victims of hiroshima. Unless the cyclist deliberately jumped into the trucks path (or actions as good as), then its the truckers fault. Its a mere legality, not rocket science.

Whilst I agree that a helmet in this case wouldn't make the blindest bit of difference the rest of your comment seems to imply that the truck driver is to blame? Personally I feel sorry for all families involved, especially the truck driver who has to deal with the death of a person on his conscience even though it wasn't his fault. I don't understand why on a cycle forum it is wrong to say the cyclist was to blame, in this scenario he was 100% at fault from all evidence given. Maybe he wanted to be hit....who knows but sympathy to all families.

 

[Alun]

Well... (speculation follows)
A perfect driver, knowing that there would be oncoming traffic, that he was passing a junction, and that he was about to pass close to a cyclist who just might move off unwisely, might have slowed to rather less than 30 mph. And perhaps the collision would then not have occurred, or it might have been less severe.

A perfect driver would not have been on the phone, and therefore might have been more likely to have thought of this.

We all, surely, have a duty on the road, not only to avoid making mistakes and misjudgements ourselves, but to behave in such a way that we can allow for others' mistakes and misjudgements.

Phil, you're pushing it now!
From the info available it was the cyclists fault, personally I feel sorry for the lorry driver, not forgetting the family of the cyclist!
Imagine if the situation was reversed, would people be trying to blame the cyclist?

 

[david k]

If you have to press a button on the phone to answer the call its breaking the law. On the system in my car to answer/make a call you press a button on the steering wheel and then its voice recognition, that is legal.

i didnt know that, i use speaker phone and thought it was legal

 

[ufkacbln]

The problem is the ability of the individual to multi-task.
Test shown with drivers on a phone (hands free) are listening, formulating responses and replyng, then repeating this process.

Think about it like an of Windows PC.... running a task like this will prioritise the processing power over other tasks.

The argument is that these tasks reduce the ability to recognise, and respond to other input.

Theoretically a driver who is not on the phone could react and take action more quickly and effectively than one on the phone
For more detail THis is an interesting paper

 

[Accy cyclist]

At the end of the day it's Britain's seemingly obsession with bloody mobile phones that's putting lives at risk! I'm sick of seeing motorists with them stuck to their thick heads while trying to control a dangerous vehicle. Pedestrians are as bad, they wander out in front of us with those little ear buds in, so they've no chance of hearing us shout at them to "move out the way", or "standstill"!! My advice is to cycle as close to them, as is safe to do so, then either stick your leg out like you're going to boot them, or give them a squirt of your drinking bottle, that'll wake the dozy sods out of their ignorant slumber!!

 

[al78]

I don't understand why on a cycle forum it is wrong to say the cyclist was to blame ...

http://youarenotsosmart.com/2010/06/23/confirmation-bias/
http://youarenotsosmart.com/2011/06/10/the-backfire-effect/
http://youarenotsosmart.com/2010/06/14/hindsight-bias/
http://youarenotsosmart.com/2011/08/21/the-illusion-of-asymmetric-insight/

You have to be aware of these four phenomena when reading opinions about RTC's on here, or indeed anywhere.

 

[mr_hippo]

Test shown with drivers on a phone (hands free) are listening, formulating responses and replyng, then repeating this process.

If you are talking to your passenger, aren`t you listening, formulating responses and replyng, then repeating this process?
Whilst cycling with friends never, ever talk to them - you may be distracted or may distract them
If you are reading this and either drinking tea/coffee, eating a butty or having a smoke, please stop and concentrate on one thing at a time.