Shocking footage from Tennessee that was posted to Facebook shows the moment the driver of an SUV rear-ended a cyclist, apparently on purpose.
The incident took place on Saturday on Natchez Trace Parkway in Franklin, Tennessee, a location administered by the National Park Service (NPS) and where there is signage highlighting that cyclists are entitled to use the entire width of the lane.
Writing on Facebook on Saturday, Greg Goodman said: “Three hours ago this person intentionally hit my friend Tyler Noe on Natchez Trace.
“We had a witness behind us who said he has seen this same Volvo try to hit someone else last week.
“Tyler is at the hospital and doing ok. He is one TOUGH DUDE!”
In a statement on Facebook, the NPS said that Marshall Grant Neely III, 58, from Franklin had been arrested on Saturday evening and charged with felony reckless endangerment, leaving the scene of an accident, failure to immediately notify of an accident and failure to render aid.
It added that NPS park rangers would be meeting with the U.S. Attorney’s Office to consider additional federal charges.
42 thoughts on “Video: Shocking moment driver rear-ends cyclist in Tennessee”
That guy was lucky
That guy was lucky
Why not attempted murder? Looked pretty deliberate to me
Unbelievable that someone
Unbelievable that someone would think it’s fine to use a two tonne metal box to hurl a human being out of their way. I hope he gets jail time for that. Lunatic.
Thank god he was wearing a
Thank god he was wearing a helmet.
don simon wrote:
Why? It doesn’t appear to touch the ground or the car.
Glasgow Cyclist wrote:
The irony of it all…
Or is this also ironically being ironic…
The _Kaner wrote:
Why? It doesn’t appear to touch the ground or the car.
— Glasgow Cyclist The irony of it all… Or is this also ironically being ironic…— don simon
I’m not sure if the original comment was irony? Or wasn’t it?
Let’s start another helmet debate and really get the clicks going!
burtthebike wrote:
I assumed irony (naturally), but now I’m not so sure…
Alas, if only he’d been wearing high viz.
Glasgow Cyclist wrote:
#QED.
don simon wrote:
QED what?
Glasgow Cyclist wrote:
But it does appear to hit the ground..?
Glasgow Cyclist wrote:
Wearing a helemt and no head injury.
Helmets save lives.
[/quote]
[/quote]
Wearing a helemt and no head injury.
Helmets save lives.
[/quote]
No they don’t, look at the data, not the “helmet saved my life” stories.
Is this the full half hour argument or just the five minute one? I was only joking about starting another helmet debate, but some people just don’t understand irony or humour I suppose.
Glasgow Cyclist wrote:
You need to watch more carefully. The back of his hemmet clearly hits the ground as he rolls on his back
Having said that, I don’t think his helmet saved him from any injury in this situation
Tennessee law;
Tennessee law;
In legal terms, the word “reckless” means that a person was “aware of, but consciously disregarded, a substantial and unjustifiable risk that his conduct would place another person in imminent danger of death or serious bodily injury.”
Reckless endangerment can be a Class A misdemeanor OR a Class E felony if the endangerment was committed with a deadly weapon. A vehicle can be considered a deadly weapon for purposes of aggravating the charge to a felony.
MandaiMetric wrote:
Any chance we could get to vote on which one he’s charged with?
burtthebike wrote:
The report says he’s been charged with a felony… No doubt his attorney will try to plea down to misdemeanor. But there are multiple charges, so it may depend on his prior record whether that’s a viable avenue. As I understand it, If you have prior conviction of misdemeanor, then a subsequent similar offence may be charged as a felony.
In terms of voting, I guess if you consider that trial judges are elected (for 8 year terms I think) in Tennessee, then you could say “yes, people do get a vote”, albeit indirectly. Having judges stand for popular election is somewhat controversial, I think.
http://www.tennessean.com
http://www.tennessean.com/story/news/local/williamson/2017/07/09/hit-and-run-cyclist-natchez-trace-williamson-county-caught-video/462473001/
Road.cc – where bad things
Road.cc – where bad things happen to good people!
Well that was a bit more immediate than ‘close pass of the day’. Hopefully the Volvo driver will drop the soap in showers once convicted.
Volvo. Safest car in the
Volvo. Safest car in the world. Until a scumbag gets behind the wheel to flaunt their safety conscious superiority at other road users
Sub4 wrote:
There appears to be a direct relationship between how safe a car is for the driver and how many injuries and deaths it inflicts on other people. I think it was in “Death on the Streets” by Robert Davis where he analysed this, but Volvo wouldn’t co-operate and were the only car manufacturer to refuse.
It’s been said many times, but the safest car for other road users would have a large, rusty bayonet sticking out of the steering wheel and no seat belt or any other safety devices for the driver. The trouble with modern cars is that they are very safe for the occupants, so the driver takes more risks. As one policeman said in a meeting I was at some time ago, the number of collisions isn’t falling, but because of better design and emergency services, fewer people are dying.
I think we’re looking at this from the wrong end of the telescope and we should be targetting bad driving, not making sure that drivers survive it.
burtthebike wrote:
Side Impact protection Systems (SIPS) I’m pretty sure have become the bane of many a Motorbike rider and cyclist… they particularly encourage dangerous moves with the driver remaining safe in their cage from the consequences… similar to the rise in pedestrian deaths with the introduction of seatbelts…
How the fcuk can a person do
How the fcuk can a person do that to another human on purpose?
I reckon a deterrant for men
I reckon a deterrant for men at least could be that we ban you from ever driving anything more powerful than a sit on lawnmower and if we catch you driving we immediately nip off a bollock. do it again, we nip the other one off, third time we just euthanase you as it’ll likely save at least one life and removes an extreme hazard from society.
3 strikes and you’re out as it were, enforced strictly and I reckon it could save the planet, no more food shortages, no more worries about population explosion …
BehindTheBikesheds wrote:
While some might consider that to be rather draconian, I have to say I rather like it.
To be serious for a moment, the severity of the punishment does not deter criminals, what does is the risk of being caught. The most frequently quoted example is of pickpockets picking pockets at the hanging of a pickpocket.
The most severe punishments are irrelevant if they don’t change behaviour, they are just revenge, and while I’m not entirely opposed to a bit of good old fashioned corporal or capital punishment, I’d rather that behaviour was changed and the person is no longer a threat. It is clear that prison doesn’t reform a lot of people, so what punishment would reform dangerous drivers? Being forced to wear a placard saying “I’m a knob driver” perhaps?
burtthebike wrote:
I just think the harshest penalty as being the most effective, IF strictly adhered too. It immediately removes the threat (by one) and so that person cannot ever then be a threat to society after proving they were unable to follow the rules. It may seem harsh but society is surely safer/enhanced by removal of such individuals that do massive damage globally both in financial terms and the obvious human cost.
Given that we know how motorists are going to break their bond to not drive after driving like the above it shouldn’t take much more than a year to have at least 10 million reckless/dangerous drivers removed from the planet. maybe not a deterrent to all but it removes the most dangerous from society completely and with a bit of luck the eunuch’s will be on best behaviour.
You could also have a quota system linked to learners, if we haven’t had someone euthanased for a while for bad driving/getting behind the wheel after being banned they have to wait to get their full license/be allowed on the road, one out one in.
Frankly I think it’s quite a fair way to go about things, don’t act like a cunt to other human beings and you’ll be just fine.
The sad thing is in the US you can be snuffed out by the old bill for a lot, lot less than the driving seen here!!
BehindTheBikesheds wrote:
If harsh penalties worked there would be no murder in countries with the death penalty, we would still be transporting people for stealing a loaf of bread and crime in the USA would be non-existent.
The severity of the penalty has no influence on the criminal, what does is the likelihood of being caught.
Locking people up is very tempting, but it doesn’t reduce crime, as they’ve shown in this country and the USA, both with burgeoning prison populations, but criminals are not deterred from committing crimes.
Many close passes, especially
Many close passes, especially on dual carriageways, are simply because the driver is too lazy to change lanes.
Cyclists often ride 2 abreast or in the primary to force drivers to change lanes, but every once in a while you get a dumbass that decided to just ram you or clip you. Thankfully it is rare, but this is why we need computers to take the choice away from the driver. The human element (I.e. Regressive caveman) is the biggest issue, and we need to eliminate that, and I say that as a petrolhead and BMW driver!
The vast majority of SUVs /
The vast majority of SUVs / 4x4s have utterly no place on our roads. Drivers should be demonised. How about a remake of the ‘Hit me at 40 … Hit me at 30’, with the caption ‘Hit me with a 4×4 and there’s a x% chance that I’ll die … Hit me with a normal car and there’s a y% chance that I’ll die’.
This is why helmet cams are
This is why helmet cams are so useful. Could have be his word against theirs…
http://ux.tennessean.com/story/news/local/williamson/2017/07/10/man-charged-natchez-trace-parkway-hit-and-run-said-cyclist-threw-bike-his-car/464581001/
KevM wrote:
he was standing in the road and threw his bike at me and then in his interview still stated that that’s what he remebered as happening. Couldn’t bring himself to say i was a lying cunt and got caught lying.
I hope this POS gets some decent jail time.
The sad thing is most people are attacking the cyclists (in the rags over there), using the ‘tenessee state law’ qhich says don’t impede other road users, where the fuck is the impeding, what about in towns and cities when cars get in the way of people on bikes ao by definition would be impeding progress. s
Can’t go over the double yellows some are saying but this is BS, you’re allowed over them IF it’s safe and the other vehicle is moving slowly, and clearly it is. Typical US moton mentality just like Australia and NZ!
BehindTheBikesheds wrote:
…
Can’t go over the double yellows some are saying but this is BS, you’re allowed over them IF it’s safe and the other vehicle is moving slowly, and clearly it is. Typical US moton mentality just like Australia and NZ!— KevM
In the tennessee drivers handbook,
‘You may not cross solid double yellow lines to overtake another vehicle “
“Federal regulations require bicyclists to ride single file, and riders are encouraged to move to the right to allow for vehicles to pass,”
I’m sticking my head firmly over the parapets and I’m ready for all the victim blaming BS…
Those cyclists were being asses. They appear to be on an open speed limit road, there is a solid yellow line which means traffic can’t cross to overtake them, and they’re effectively blocking the lane. They might be able to use the whole lane if they need it, but it sure doesn’t help perception of cyclists, and I think it’s plain unhelpful and dumb. They weren’t allowed to be double file.
It doesn’t in any way shape or form excuse anything the driver of the volvo did. He deserves the fleas of a thousand camels to infest his pubic hairs… while he rots in solitary confinement. But, as responsible road users those cyclists behaviour was plain dangerous for them, and just stupid, and illegal. IMHO. How about it was someone riding a ride on lawn mower at 25 kph down that lane. Would we consider it remotely sensible, safe, or intelligent?
And yes, I’m from NZ…Moton mentalitiy apparently!
madcarew wrote:
That bit of road is in a park (hence the report to the rangers), you are allowed to overtake slower vehicles on double yellows if safe to do so in such areas. it was clear and safe to do so at that juncture and otherwise wouldn’t have being a problem, this is the same here in the UK in fact with solid white lines if the vehicle is doing about 10mph (or thereabouts)
To even partly blame the cyclists IS simply bullshit, they are entitled to be where they are, full stop. Go and learn something about road safety, learn something about your responsibility when wielding 2 tons of mass.
You would have to overtake in the opposite lane anyhow for one, or are you suggesting with your kiwi moton mentality they should have squeezed over into the gutter so that big utility vehicle could bomb past them in the same lane. Get away with yourself, only a moron moton thinks like that and is a selfish bastard who doesn’t give a fuck about anyone else but themsleves, clearly YOU are a moton and I claim my leg of lamb.
BehindTheBikesheds wrote:
In the tennessee drivers handbook,
‘You may not cross solid double yellow lines to overtake another vehicle “
“Federal regulations require bicyclists to ride single file, and riders are encouraged to move to the right to allow for vehicles to pass,”
I’m sticking my head firmly over the parapets and I’m ready for all the victim blaming BS…
Those cyclists were being asses. They appear to be on an open speed limit road, there is a solid yellow line which means traffic can’t cross to overtake them, and they’re effectively blocking the lane. They might be able to use the whole lane if they need it, but it sure doesn’t help perception of cyclists, and I think it’s plain unhelpful and dumb. They weren’t allowed to be double file.
It doesn’t in any way shape or form excuse anything the driver of the volvo did. He deserves the fleas of a thousand camels to infest his pubic hairs… while he rots in solitary confinement. But, as responsible road users those cyclists behaviour was plain dangerous for them, and just stupid, and illegal. IMHO. How about it was someone riding a ride on lawn mower at 25 kph down that lane. Would we consider it remotely sensible, safe, or intelligent?
And yes, I’m from NZ…Moton mentalitiy apparently!
[/quote]
That bit of road is in a park (hence the report to the rangers), you are allowed to overtake slower vehicles on double yellows if safe to do so in such areas. it was clear and safe to do so at that juncture and otherwise wouldn’t have being a problem, this is the same here in the UK in fact with solid white lines if the vehicle is doing about 10mph (or thereabouts)
To even partly blame the cyclists IS simply bullshit, they are entitled to be where they are, full stop. Go and learn something about road safety, learn something about your responsibility when wielding 2 tons of mass.
You would have to overtake in the opposite lane anyhow for one, or are you suggesting with your kiwi moton mentality they should have squeezed over into the gutter so that big utility vehicle could bomb past them in the same lane. Get away with yourself, only a moron moton thinks like that and is a selfish bastard who doesn’t give a fuck about anyone else but themsleves, clearly YOU are a moton and I claim my leg of lamb.
[/quote]
Let’s be really absolutely clear. I didn’t blame the cyclists at all. I said what they were doing was (i) illegal, and (ii) stupid. You can do that without apportioning blame for the motorist’s actions, which I clearly stated “It doesn’t in any way shape or form excuse anything the driver of the volvo did”
So, you can enter a discussion if you like, or you can just spiel whatever comes off the top of your preconceptions .
I know plenty about road safety (I have a traffic managment qualification… I’m one of the guys who arranges things people can ride bike races and events on public roads), and I know plenty about my responsibility when driving my 4WD (2.6 tons actually) and so I slow down when I’m overtaking cyclists, I indicate to move out even when the cyclists are on the hard shoulder so traffic behind me knows there’s something there, I give cyclists at least as much room as I want when I’m riding a bike.
However, when I’m riding a bike, I keep as far to the left as practical, I claim the lane when I need to (I think you need to know that about 50% of my riding is on our 2 busiest state highways. Imagine the A1M with no hard shoulder and only one lane each way, and an artic every 3 minutes. On a 4 hr ride I’m going to have about 100 close passes from a 40 ton truck.). I’m aware of what a PITA really slow moving traffic can be, and I want those people in their 2 ton boxes to look on me kindly, so I never ever give them the finger, I never ever shout at them, I never ever abuse them in any way, and every chance I get I thank them when they act courteously. For this I accept your accusation of moton-ship, and you are welcome to your leg of lamb, just pop over here and come for a 4 hour ride with me.
Seriously, the 2 cyclists were being dicks. It doesn’t excuse what happened, but they weren’t helping the rest of us either.
After watching the video, I
After watching the video, I know I’ve seen bigger lying sacks of shit, but I can’t remember when.
Again, he proffers the “I didn’t see him” “excuse” which is completely ludicrous. You didn’t see a man bouncing off your front fender ? What the fcuk were you looking at?
You are NOT allowed to cross over double yellow lines for any reason, except to turn left.
Can we stop with the helmet
Can we stop with the helmet stuff?
That’s a case of licence withdrawal, lengthy ban, retest and phsycological testing.
As I say, the cyclist was there so:
A: Either the driver saw and ignored, or
B: Driver didn’t see.
Either way there has to be a dangerous or negligent driving offence in there, it’s clear.
To then sit and blatantly lie should be added to the charges.
Anyone who commits an offence then says ” I wouldn’t do that, it’s not the type of person I am” needs a severe beating with wet fish ‘coz they’re lying twats!
Wiki says:
Wiki says:
Which does seem to make sense, I’ll tend to take more seriously than forum randoms who’ve had a week’s holiday over the pond.
If Daily Mail comments get
If Daily Mail comments get you wound up, prepare for American MMA fans. If this is indicative of American views of cycling it’s no wonder they’ve got no decent cyclists at elite level.
If you insist on being a faggot driving in the middle of the lane and slowing down traffic because you have “just as much a right to be there” then you deserve whatever happens to you. That video was awesome
http://www.mixedmartialarts.com/forums/OtherGround/Biking-for-transport-ok-For-sport-stay-off-road:2663018?pc=107
Yorkshire wallet wrote:
and why it’s the fattest country on the planet.
BBC reckons the motorist was
BBC reckons the motorist was a school principal. So presumably not some *total* moron… (Maybe his parents wouldn’t buy him a bicycle when he was a child, and now he’s just jealous…)
brooksby wrote:
So he’s got even less excuse going by your way of thinking as he should have above average (American) intelligence, in which case then it must be deliberate if he’s not a moron/unintelligent/well respected?
BehindTheBikesheds wrote:
Sorry, yes: that had been my point. This is someone who is supposedly educated, who lectures kids on their behaviour, but then does something like this.
I will never be able to take
I will never be able to take seriously the US practice of naming your kids as if they are a monarch or a movie sequel.