-
It's the principle of vehicle user should be prepared to stop/avoid collision if driving to conditions, that never ever gets applied to car drivers except in extreme circumstances...
-
Utterly ridiculous double-standard and, as you say, terrifying.
-
The general principle is 'sail before steam'. As a bike rider, you're so fast compared to a pedestrian that the larger share of the responsibility falls on you. This is obviously complicated by inattentive pedestrians. However, it is difficult to avoid bias when assessing/assigning 'share of responsibility'. As we know from innumerable cases of driver vs. rider, the general tendency, because of minority issues, dominant 'culture', etc., the rider (=the pedestrian in this case) is often found to be more liable than by any reasonable assessment they should be. I have to say that in this case I would have found the rider more liable than the walker, even though she was being oblivious.
Ms Brushett, who works for a City finance company, “panicked” and tried to retreat to a traffic island but Mr Hazeldean swerved in the same direction and hit her.
What immediately strikes me here are the parallels with the Charlie Alliston case. Both somehow assumed that sounding warnings was the right thing to do, the pedestrian stepped back, and then the rider tried to go around the back of the pedestrian. Prioritising warnings over braking, stepping back (on the part of the pedestrian), and going round the back are all bad ideas and the wrong decisions. All understandable in the confusion of the moment, but the stepping back thing at least is often warned against in traffic education. Not assuming that sounding an air horn will give you priority is just common sense. However, the going round the back of the pedestrian is such a rare scenario that I don't think it's likely to get specifically mentioned in education or training. It was very lucky that unlike Kim Briggs Gemma Brushett didn't fall on the back of her head, or she might well have died in these very similar circumstances.
The main difference is that non-fatal outcome and the fact that Robert Hazeldean was presumably riding a standard geared bike.
-
I've started a thread here:
You are reading a single comment by @Manson7am and its replies.
Click here to read the full conversation.
deleted
c00ps
Oliver Schick
@Manson7am
Am i missing something or is this just fucking terrifying
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/payout-for-yoga-teacher-hit-by-cyclist-as-she-crossed-road-on-her-phone-a4169716.html
Cyclist Shouted, sounded a horn, swerved, was knocked out... and the pedestrian still gets compensation.... they were on their phone and walked out on the road.
how does this work?