-
This was up for debate in the case, apparently (according to local press). Cambs council cycling maps would appear to disagree - but there is no signage - so the police were unable to determine whether or not the path was shared use. *caveat - this is just my own reading of the local reports
I did look at that earlier, and the only evidence of shared use that I could find was a little west of the crash site, where there are several such signs.
Whether or not something is shared-use doesn't depend on signage, though, but on whether there is a Traffic Regulation Order in force (Traffic Management Order in London), which obviously the signage should advertise. The police can find out about this very easily by asking the highway authority, probably Cambridgeshire County Council, which is tasked with knowing what orders there are. (I realise that highway authorities sometimes fail in this duty.) As traffic orders are generally not available on-line (I'm sure there are exceptions), in most cases signage is a reliable indicator of one, or indeed the little things that traffic engineers do where there is shared use, e.g. the give-way triangles painted on the footways in the examples above.
I do think it's irrelevant in any case in view of the harm done.
Oliver Schick-
Agreed that whether she was cycling on the ‘footway’ or not is irrelevant in this case.
For academic purposes, as far as I can tell RE actual signage having scooted around the ring road on streetview. Only the inner footway of the ring road seems to be signed as shared use. The outer footway of the ring road (which she was on), doesn’t have any shared signs at all.
The fact that the police couldn’t establish either way sums up just how bad our cycling infra is.
Other observations. I am astonished that the jury decided against the pedestrian, knowing the general hatred of cyclists I’d have thought at worst the case would have been thrown out.
Jameo
This was up for debate in the case, apparently (according to local press). Cambs council cycling maps would appear to disagree - but there is no signage - so the police were unable to determine whether or not the path was shared use. *caveat - this is just my own reading of the local reports