I am gobsmacked. How would going out in the rain compare to these circumstances.
Different context, supposing someone was walking along railroad tracks when the person got run over by a train. Would it be the train driver's fault?
Husband of cyclist killed by London lorry cries as driver is acquitted
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
I am gobsmacked. How would going out in the rain compare to these circumstances.
Different context, supposing someone was walking along railroad tracks when the person got run over by a train. Would it be the train driver's fault?
Mugshot
Cracking a solo.
Are you suggesting that the cyclist should not have been on the road?
Smokin Joe
Legendary Member
- Location
- Bare headed cyclist, Smoker
So you're stationary at the lights on two occasions when you get rear ended with fatal consequences for the other drivers/riders you get banned?
That would be fair, eh?
Fortunately, the law does not work on the basis of "just because it seems like it might"
No. I am saying that it seems like the cyclist went up the left side of a lorry about to turn left. This is a big no no whether or not you think the vehicle is going to turn or not. Best to hang back at junctions. I feel this was a tragic mistake by the cyclist if this was the case. Tragic events sometimes unfold that can involve other people through no fault of their own.
[QUOTE 4220505, member: 45"]That's not a good comparison. A better one would be a person on a level crossing, with the gates up, being hit by a train.[/QUOTE]
Again I wouldn't consider the train driver at fault. There is no way a train driver can stop in time. Maybe I'm wrong but truckers simply cannot see into certain blind spots from their position in the cab. If someone is directly below the mirrors on the left side of the cab (driver positioned on right?) then how could the driver possibly see that person. I do not know the specifics of trucks and their blind spots, but this is how I interpreted what I have read in general.
Mugshot
Cracking a solo.
The problem is that somebody has lost their life, they weren't the first and unfortunately they wont be the last. Even if we accept that it is big no no to go up the inside of a truck, to lose your life for doing so seems a disproportionately harsh penalty. It also doesn't help to explain the incidents where people have been KSI'd when they were already waiting at the lights and have a had a large vehicle pull up either alongside or behind them.
If the truck driver is unable to see the areas that they are going to be driving the vehicle in to, shouldn't efforts be concentrated on alleviating such a fundamental flaw? Remember that these vehicles, which are allegedly impossible to see out of, are being driven around every town and city in the UK. Instead the blame and responsibility is shifted and laid at the feet of the individual that has lost their life.
Pale Rider
Legendary Member
There is a middle ground.
It may be the jury in this case thought it was a genuine accident - no blame to be laid on either party.
GrumpyGregry
Here for rides.
Stationary train. Person standing on tracks in front of train cab. Driver pulls away. Would it be the train driver's fault?
Smokin Joe
Legendary Member
- Location
- Bare headed cyclist, Smoker
That must happen a lot.
GrumpyGregry
Here for rides.
Lots of reasons why it doesn't.
markharry66
Über Member
This is sad. I feel so sorry for the driver and the pain he feels (really).
How long and how many lives before road safety is really embraced rather than brushed under the rug.
How long and how many lives before road safety is really embraced rather than brushed under the rug.
From the article:
So she was visible in the mirrors then?
There is no way of her being not visible in the mirrors before being hit, and then suddenly visible after being hit.
Plus the driver had literally only just overtaken her, and should have been well aware of the possibility of her cycling up the feeder lane.
I find in inexplicable that the jury came to the conclusion that the driver had fulfilled their responsibility to properly carry out his observations before manoeuvring.
So she was visible in the mirrors then?
There is no way of her being not visible in the mirrors before being hit, and then suddenly visible after being hit.
Plus the driver had literally only just overtaken her, and should have been well aware of the possibility of her cycling up the feeder lane.
I find in inexplicable that the jury came to the conclusion that the driver had fulfilled their responsibility to properly carry out his observations before manoeuvring.
JtB
Prepare a way for the Lord
- Location
- North Hampshire
I know this video has been posted several times already, but it struck me that the only thing visible in the mirror is the lorry itself plus a very thin strip of road down the side.
The thing I fail to understand is how vehicles like this where the driver is unable to see the space into which they are being driven can be taken out onto the roads. Even cars these days have CCTVs to facilitate reversing. What's even more difficult to understand is how it can be considered acceptable to blindly drive into a cycle lane, would it also be considered acceptable to blindly drive across a footpath placing pedestrians lives at risk?
I'm sure the driver's life has been changed forever, but I know exactly what the cyclist's family are going through. A similar thing happened to my sister 22 years ago with the same outcome.
The thing I fail to understand is how vehicles like this where the driver is unable to see the space into which they are being driven can be taken out onto the roads. Even cars these days have CCTVs to facilitate reversing. What's even more difficult to understand is how it can be considered acceptable to blindly drive into a cycle lane, would it also be considered acceptable to blindly drive across a footpath placing pedestrians lives at risk?
I'm sure the driver's life has been changed forever, but I know exactly what the cyclist's family are going through. A similar thing happened to my sister 22 years ago with the same outcome.
Last edited:
