In the news

There but for the grace of God ...

A great summary - https://thecyclingsilk.blogspot.co.uk/

Exactly - a 'usual accident' - could happen to any cyclist and pedestrian.

was what I was going to say ... ^

agreed - needs this sort of defence if there is an appeal.

There but for the grace of God

Yeah, and it often appears to bias juries against convicting drivers, I guess I would have just as biased if called up to this case...

Exactly - a 'usual accident' - could happen to any cyclist and pedestrian.

Looking at it as a physicist I can't help but feel the inevitability of bumping into people when living in a city is often overlooked. Maybe the consequences of the choice of vehicle we take out should play more heavily and less the split second actions.

When your bias is contrary to the majority, it has potential for discourse and progress for one or more parties.

Was in a shop just now, the owner and employee were discussing the case, they were disappointed that he was acquitted, had never heard of "furious driving" and thought it was a shame that "the opportunity to make an example" wasn't taken, also referring to his terrible attitude and comments (most likely the ones made before she died, but would not have been clear in reporting). It's an amazingly highly talked about case, considering how common road 'accidents' resulting in single fatalities are.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=98CWbGG2DJ0

400 road deaths this year according to the cycling lawyer guy.

Were his rantings on here presented as part of the case against him ?

There is no record that Alliston had his own expert to give evidence or that the risk of tipping over the handlebars was considered.

Interesting

It's an amazingly highly talked about case, considering how common road 'accidents' resulting in single fatalities are.

It is and I am lucky that I'm not in my work/office/family place these last few days because the talk will be intolerable.

Alliston obviously had no danger of going over the bars due to braking. Am assuming that must have been in reference to the potential stopping distances quoted by the prosecution's 'expert'.

According to the expert the supposed rate at which Alliston could have stopped had he had a brake would have thrown him over, is what I'm saying. It's interesting that this wasn't mentioned in court.

or if he was pedalling out of the saddle when it happened he could have gone straight over if he used his front brake.

source: sprained both wrists and elbows and fractured radial head in one arm about 9 weeks ago doing just that.

Looks like the lesson is simple. If you're riding fixed then get a front brake, even if only for legal reasons.

Were his rantings on here presented as part of the case against him ?

I do not believe so.

His posts here were removed swiftly, long before it was understood there were to be legal proceedings and no requests were made to me for a copy.

This doesn't mean that he didn't post elsewhere, i.e. Facebook or Twitter or other forums. But nothing on this forum was used in the proceedings as far as I know.

or if you do ride sans brak, dont ride like a fucking arsehole. do that.

He made similar comments on the online article about the incident. (Evening Standard perhaps?)

Would rep.

I think in one of the earlier articles on the case reference was made to a fixed-gear forum, which must be us, but I can't remember seeing a comment attributed directly.

Given the visibility of 'Rider Down' threads to Internet searches, it's quite possible that someone connected to the case saw and saved the comments, but that's speculation.

If you're going to ride brakeless get a good lawyer?

Couldn't a lawyer be compared to a helmet and avoiding having a crash in the first place could be compared to, well, avoiding having a crash in the first place?