Lorry blind spots; a get out of jail free card?

[User6179]

So there's a cycle lane the full length of the road, but the legal system decided that someone crossing a cycle lane without bothering to check for cyclists has done nothing wrong.

Don't think the lad was on the cycle lane , he was on the pavement perhaps because a lorry was behind him and the cycle lane ends shortly.

 

[glenn forger]

The court made the decision without reference to the infrastructure. That's the whole point.

 

[Beebo]

The cyclist was going from pavement to pavement across a junction is what I thought happened , the worst bit is the lorry was aware of him but still managed to kill him which suggests it could of been easily avoided by the lorry slowing down till they eye balled the cyclist again , put it this way , if it had been a cyclist driving the lorry I would of thought the accident would never of happened .

I probably agree with you, but I stand by my comment that a jury will never convict on that basis, and I'm not sure I'd be happy with the driver going to prison, as the cyclist has to accept some blame, albeit they are now sadly dead.

So there's a cycle lane the full length of the road, but the legal system decided that someone crossing a cycle lane without bothering to check for cyclists has done nothing wrong.

He was on the pavement, not in the cycle lane, and CCTV support this.
Sometime there are no winner or loser, just victims on both sides.

 

[Profpointy]

I have to say, the existence of a cycle lane increases the risk of such incidents. Whatever exactly may have happened here, cycle lanes like this encourage less experienced cyclists into risky road positioning, risking left hookings, and people pulling out, and likewise encouraging drivers to disregard cyclists as being in another lane and hence out-of-mind as it were.

 

[steveindenmark]

Prof, I dont understand your point. Being in a cycle lane avoids confusion.

If I saw a cyclist riding in that cycle lane, they can only go straight ahead or left. I would slow down in any case until they cleared the junction. I think the confusion could have arisen because the cyclist left the cycle path.

In Denmark cyclist have priority over everything but this type of turn is still the biggest cycle killer.

 

[Turbo Rider]

Prof, I dont understand your point. Being in a cycle lane avoids confusion.

If I saw a cyclist riding in that cycle lane, they can only go straight ahead or left. I would slow down in any case until they cleared the junction. I think the confusion could have arisen because the cyclist left the cycle path.

In Denmark cyclist have priority over everything but this type of turn is still the biggest cycle killer.

Hmm, definitely a bone of contention. I ride on a good variety of roads every day and I can see the point, because as wonderful as they are, the only places I seem to find cars swerving in on me are when I'm i a cycle lane. Bit hard to prove without riding the same route without a cycle lane, mind, and I dare say that my journey would take a fair bit longer without the lanes being there, but they do open up a risk of their own and I'm extra cautious when I'm in one.

 

[PK99]

So there's a cycle lane the full length of the road, but the legal system decided that someone crossing a cycle lane without bothering to check for cyclists has done nothing wrong.

From the reports it sounds as if the cyclist left the road/cycle lane and went onto the pavement ie was not in the cycle lane

 

[w00hoo_kent]

With @Turbo Rider here. I'm extra wary in cycle lanes, once you're detached from the road, even by a bit of painted line and some different tarmac, drivers tend to presume you don't exist. They'll drive close to the lane (not that close passes aren't unusual anyway) and will swing across it in a turn without checking if it is occupied. I've only been driven in to once, I was partly in to a junction on a cycle lane. I don't believe it's a coincidence.

 

[glenn forger]

From the reports it sounds as if the cyclist left the road/cycle lane and went onto the pavement ie was not in the cycle lane

It also sounds from the reports that the driver admitted she had a 50/50 choice. her guess was inspired by "the angle of the bike" and she killed someone.

 

[glasgowcyclist]

As an ex class 1 lorry driver, my reaction if I were in a similar situation to what is described above would be to stop and even get out to find where the cyclist had got to if necessary.

This is the point I was getting at. An experienced driver sees a cyclist who is on a course that may meet with hers, loses sight of him but completes the manoeuvre anyway. It reminds me of the excellent training video by Lothian Buses highlighting the dangers of the limited view of drivers of large vehicles.

In the same way that SMIDSY and being blinded by low sun should be seen as admissions of not keeping a proper lookout, so should resorting to the 'blind spot' excuse.

GC

(typo corrected)

 

[theclaud]

If the cyclist had skipped off the road and onto the pavement, the lorry driver could have thought the cyclist was going to turn left.

Not an assumption one is entitled to make when about to swing 18 tonnes of vehicle across what will otherwise be his path. The driver knew she had passed the cyclist, lost sight of him and didn't bother to ensure that she wasn't killing him with her next manoeuvre. 15 years old, and dead because his killer made a reckless 50/50 call.

 

[PK99]

Not an assumption one is entitled to make when about to swing 18 tonnes of vehicle across what will otherwise be his path. The driver knew she had passed the cyclist, lost sight of him and didn't bother to ensure that she wasn't killing him with her next manoeuvre. 15 years old, and dead because his killer made a reckless 50/50 call.

A different reading would be that the cyclist left the roadway to cycle on the pavement, the lorry turned left into a clear road and the cyclist left the pavement and cycled into the lorry

"The collision appears to have been a tragic combination of Miss Howson’s assumption as to Callum’s direction of travel, together with an apparent failure on Callum’s part to check before re-entering the carriageway onto South Street."

Read more: http://www.retfordtimes.co.uk/Accid...tory-24688264-detail/story.html#ixzz3KHuvtv2b
Follow us: @retfordtimes on Twitter | RetfordTimes on Facebook

The key point would be the point on the lorry that the impact occurred Front or side?

 

[glenn forger]

I think my point is this. Kids make mistakes. It's how they learn. The penalty for a rash choice ought not be death, the driver had a choice, had she waited and double checked I doubt she would have been sacked. The world would have turned, the sky wouldn't have fallen in, she'd be maybe five seconds later on her journey.

 

[broadway]

And the road layout with a pinch point being the reason he cycled along the pavement at that point.

https://maps.google.co.uk/maps?q=so..._oaklW8K0U7Qq9MW0g&cbp=12,307.44,,0,3.33&z=17

Edit link corrected

 

[theclaud]

A different reading would be that the cyclist left the roadway to cycle on the pavement, the lorry turned left into a clear road and the cyclist left the pavement and cycled into the lorry

"The collision appears to have been a tragic combination of Miss Howson’s assumption as to Callum’s direction of travel, together with an apparent failure on Callum’s part to check before re-entering the carriageway onto South Street."

Read more: http://www.retfordtimes.co.uk/Accid...tory-24688264-detail/story.html#ixzz3KHuvtv2b
Follow us: @retfordtimes on Twitter | RetfordTimes on Facebook

The key point would be the point on the lorry that the impact occurred Front or side?

All your quotation tells us is that the coroner identifies with the driver's perspective. The boy's movements were entirely consistent with Things That Kids Are Likely to Do on Bikes. Howson was wielding lethal force - she should have checked that her guess was correct. Instead she made an assumption and killed a child.