A woman in Canada who killed a teenage cyclist when she ran into him and two of his friends while driving her sports utility vehicle (SUV) is suing his family for C$1.35 million in damages – claiming that “her enjoyment of life has been and will be lessened.”
The Province reports that the lawsuit alleges that due to the incident in which 17-year-old Brandon Majeski was killed in October 2012, Sharlene Simon “has sustained and will sustain great pain and suffering,” including “a severe shock to her system.”
The lawsuit, filed in December on Ontario Superior Court, also names as defendants two friends of Brandon’s who were with him when he was killed, Richard McLean and Jake Roberts, both aged 16.
Also named is the County of Simcoe, some 50 miles north of Toronto, which is responsible for maintaining Innisfil Beach Road, where the fatal collision took place.
The teenagers were riding three abreast on a rural road as they returned home from a coffee shop at 1.30 in the morning of 28 October when Simons’ Kia Sorrento SUV struck all three from behind.
The impact threw Brandon over the roof of the vehicle and despite the efforts of paramedics at the scene, he died approximately two hours later in hospital.
Of his friends, Jake escaped serious injury, but Richard spent a number of weeks in a hospital in Toronto as a result of the injuries he sustained.
An investigation by the South Simcoe Police Service held that the cyclists’ “lack of visibility… was the largest contributing factor,” and that “the driver of the Kia did not see the cyclists on the roadway and was unable to make an evasive reaction.”
A Crown Prosecutor told police that there was “absolutely no reasonable prospect of conviction and that no charges should be laid.”
Derek Majewski, the victim’s father, said: “My dead son and the boys are being sued by the woman that killed him because she is distraught.
“Normally, I would not react like this, but I think it’s very cruel,” he added.
The family was struck by a second tragedy when Brandon’s elder brother Devon, who had been hit hard by his sibling’s death, died in his sleep as a result of alcohol and pharmaceuticals.
According to the report on The Province, Brandon’s parents have some concerns about the police investigation, and they made a complaint to the Office of the Independent Police Review Director, claiming that the it was biased, because Simon’s husband is also a law enforcement officer, albeit in a different force.
They believe that their son and his friends are being blamed for the crash, because they were riding three abreast, were wearing dark clothing (but with some reflective material), weren’t wearing helmets and only two of the bikes were equipped with what the police termed “minimal reflectors.”
As Majewski put it, “They’re kids; they’re allowed to make a mistake.”
A police report into the incident said that while Simon was driving at around 10kph above the 80kph speed limit, she did not have to take a breath test since there were “no grounds to request” that she do so.
It added however a roadside screening device established that she had “zero alcohol content in her blood system.”
Brandon’s parents, who are no longer together and have new partners, are themselves plaintiffs in a C$900,000 lawsuit against the Simons and Simcoe County.
They claim that Sharlene Simon was speeding, under the influence of alcohol or using her mobile phone to text at the time of the incident, and that her husband allowed her to drive her vehicle when “he knew or ought to have known” she was in no fit state to do so.




















50 thoughts on “Driver who killed teen cyclist sues his family – because “her enjoyment of life… has been lessened””
Awful awful awful.
Awful awful awful.
broomwagonblog wrote:Awful
+1 – this is a disgraceful turn of events
Awful awful awful.
Awful awful awful.
Disgraceful and a sad example
Disgraceful and a sad example of someone who does not belong in the gene pool….
Sigh. What has this page
Sigh. What has this page become? A platform for fueling hate against anybody who accidentaly harms a cyclist. I’m gonna unfollow your fb page because it makes me sick how self-righteous the people who comment there are. The amount of stupid generalizations is just enormous. It makes me sad that the majority of the community one would like to feel a part of is acting this way. It does exactly the opposite of what it should – teach people respect and look out for each other.
ricolek wrote:Sigh. What has
WTF – are you for real?
gb901 wrote:ricolek
Yep. Arguing the motorist is always in the wrong is as bad as arguing the cyclist always is – both are human beings. If a story about me hitting somebody in THE CAR THAT I OWN came up on road.cc – frankly I don’t think I’d get a fair trial. That gives me major cause for concern when it comes to the question of whether I should be supporting the “cause” or not.
nuclear coffee wrote:
Yep.
Well its not quite as bad, because its significantly closer to the truth – the truth being the motorist is more often in the wrong. It wouldn’t always be correct of course (cf the story on here recently about the sportive rider crashing into a car while doing 40mph on the wrong side of the road) but it would be a better default assumption than the reverse.
Also, I tend more towards the view that road planners are always in the wrong, which in turn means the politicians who tell them what to do, and in turn the voters who elect those politicians.
Oh – and which is worse? Having some people think you are always the one in the wrong or always being the one who gets killed or maimed? If the former were so unbearable why do so many chose to drive when they have a choice?
FluffyKittenofTindalos
Apparently, I’m both. And I’m honestly not sure. Why do I have to make that choice? Why can’t we hope to improve driving standards without laying great vengeance and furious anger on someone before finding out whether they could have done anything better?
Regardless of who was to
Regardless of who was to blame for this terrible tragedy ……to seek financial gain the motorist…who got to walk away is showing an amazing lack of compassion and empathy for the dead boys family.
This is very sad….she values her suffering.. over a lifetime of suffering that they will endure….even if she feels she was not in the wrong..her morals are whacked
imho.
Sorry but no one comes out of
Sorry but no one comes out of this with any credit. The lads were cycling three abreast with little or no visibility in the middle of the night; the driver was breaking the speed limit and then bringing ridiculous litigation and the parents are suing her with, on the face of it, no real evidence to support their claims. An appalling tale from start to finish – nothing to do with cars vs bikes just a lot of idiots
I for one am on the fence
I for one am on the fence here…Coming back from a “coffee shop” a 1.30am….not adequate lighting or reflectors. Riding three breast.
It is ALLEGED by the family of the boy who died that she was either unfit through alcohol or texting and that her partner should not have let her drive….I’m sure the police would have at least checked her alcohol level.
[EDIT] Police did not suspect alcohol was involved, and she was not given a breathalyzer”](http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/04/26/newser-driver-sues-boy-she-hit/8201609)
The family are also trying to sue her…..so this could just be a counter claim to stop that action.
But I do feel for her, if she was law abiding and genuinely didn’t see the guys on the bikes, that is the sort of thing that ruins lives.
But suing is a little over the top on BOTH parts.
Gkam84 wrote:
But I do feel
10 mph over the __maximum__ speed limit? I think it’s pretty clear that she was not law abiding. And yes, lives have been “ruined” by this. I’d save my sympathy and uncomfortable fence sitting for a more deserving case.
If she couldn’t see three bicycles in the middle of the road — all with reflectors — then she wouldn’t see a low blood sugar diabetic stumbling across the road, or an old person with alzheimers or (fill in possible things or people you, as a motorist have a duty to be on the look out for).
Car use is too prevalant. The only people out on the roads at 1:30 am should be cyclists or emergency vehicles.
I sincerely hope she bankrupts herself in a long, protracted and pointless legal action.
Sympathy to the boys’ families.
Ush wrote:Gkam84 wrote:
But I
Another person who doesn’t read….just quotes one of my posts and didn’t see my follow up…
Also, they did not ALL have reflectors, various reports says two of the bikes had PEDAL reflectors, nothing else.
She’s admitted to 6mph…not 10mph…nearer 10kmph
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/04/26/newser-driver-sues-boy-she-hit/8201609/
Three bikes with pedal reflectors….If I had the means, I’d recreate it, with a car, a dark night, three bikes with some pedal reflectors and then we would see what can be seen…
Pedal reflectors to me look like cats eyes, do they have these in Canada??
Gkam84 wrote:
Pedal
They tend not to be used because the roads are snow-ploughed regularly.
So, another hand-waving exculpation of the driver drifts away on the noisome breeze of your airy hypothesizing.
YES, it’s INEXCUSABLE to be
YES, it’s INEXCUSABLE to be suing for this reason, but on the other hand, let’s look at this a bit more measured.
Posted speed limit is 80kph? That’s not a city road. In Canada, 80kph is for highways. 70kph is typical for long rural area roads with good visibility.
So the real question here is why were there 3 cyclists riding three abroad… on a HIGHWAY?
I can think of quite a few places where there are highways in Canada at 80 or 90kph where there are indeed corners and places where a cyclist could be hard to see and actually at fault if they were riding in the middle of the road late at night with nothing for visibility. The Malahat is a big one on Vancouver Island. I drove that one a lot and never saw a cyclist stupid enough to venture towards the middle of the road. Plenty of spots where cyclists riding three abreast would be road lube.
It’s pretty ridiculous to assume that there might be someone with alzheimer’s wandering around on that road though. It’s 80-90kph for a reason. It’s not in a city, it’s at the top of a mountain that has a handful of residences hidden *well* off the beaten path and probably a half dozen small businesses.
It’s also pretty ridiculous to assume that *most* people don’t drive 10kph over the limit. In my decades as a driver in Canada, I’d say 95% of the traffic drove around 8-10kph over any posted limits unless it was downtown.
You say car use it too prevalent but this is Ontario you are talking about. It’s a BIG place. And it gets *C*O*L*D* there. If you lived there, I doubt you’d be riding your bike 24/7 (I have done 365days/yr cycle commuting in Canada, but I wouldn’t have if I lived in Ontario).
Also, you say “all three with reflectors”, but the article says that TWO had “minimal reflectors” and no lights. That’s pretty common. I never had reflectors (although all night riding used good quality lights). But I can picture guys riding with a bit of 3M on their shoes or something.
Methinks you need to use your brain a bit more before you speak.
I’d agree that the woman needs to bankrupt herself. Would be nice if her SUV got repo’d and she had to downgrade to driving only during the grips of winter and biking for the rest of it.
What utter scumbags
What utter scumbags
Just been made aware, the
Just been made aware, the husband of the driver is also suing
http://www.torontosun.com/2014/04/25/witness-haunted-by-tragic-bike-accident
It also makes sense to me now why the family are suing, it REEKS of a cover up, he’s a serving police man who didn’t even have to hang around as he and his wife were let home and other witnesses had to stay around….
I am not so on the fence anymore.
Fewer front page stories
Fewer front page stories about misery half a world away, please.
vbvb wrote:Fewer front page
Absolutely. Cycling is primarily a safe activity and Road.cc should be seeking to promote it – i worry that the volume of these stories on this site could be sending out the wrong message. It’s a horrible story but I don’t know how relevant this is to the UK as it’s thousands of miles away.
I love the rest of the site but could do without this.
jasecd wrote:vbvb wrote:Fewer
So lets have stories about fluffy bunnies and pretty flowers you see while cycling around the countryside and not being hit by a car…..great story…
We all know cycling is a safe activity, but safe things don’t make news stories..
If you want safe and nice things, Go here http://road.cc/blogs
Gkam84 wrote:jasecd
So lets have stories about fluffy bunnies and pretty flowers you see while cycling around the countryside and not being hit by a car…..great story…
We all know cycling is a safe activity, but safe things don’t make news stories..
If you want safe and nice things, Go here http://road.cc/blogs— vbvb
So if we all know cycling is a safe activity why does it appear that a popular cycling website is disproportionatly reporting incidents like these?
The deaths in the UK and sentencing are relevant – in other counties I don’t think they are. The rest of the site is great – reviews, the sport etc. are all brilliantly reported on. I think these sensational stories are the weak point.
Gkam84 wrote:So lets have
Is that really the choice? Either we can soak in all the awful tales that are dreadful enough to be heard this far away or we can read about bunnies? Really? How many thousand people cycled to the Scottish parliament the other day in the Pedal on Parliament? How young was the youngest? Did it go well? No idea. But I know all about some depressing idiot case from Canada. It’s not real life vs bunnies. The coverage of Canada here is not representative of real life. And before it is suggested, no, I will not submit my own PoParliament story. This Canada misery was trawled up by a paid writer (more into cooking than fixing bikes, as he admits in his profile).
Sigh , I despair at the
Sigh ~X( , I despair at the human race sometimes. Wait….does that mean I can sue someone for making me despair?! Haven’t the family of the teenage lad suffered enough? Now with 2 deaths in the family.
I must admit Road.CC post 2-3
I must admit Road.CC post 2-3 times a week about something that is half way around the world, just because it’s ‘shocking’. This is wrong… Reminds me of the Mail online.
faz. wrote:I must admit
Agreed. If it’s in Britain, we can change it, we should know. If not, what’s the point?
faz. wrote:I must admit
All major UK websites seem to have gone ‘international’, or at least ‘TransAtlantic’ now. Its one of the few things the Mail and the Guardian have in common.
FluffyKittenofTindalos
Road.cc doesn’t claim anywhere I can see to be a UK website.
CC infers Cycling Club to me. A worldwide cycling club infact.
They cover stories for all over the world, just the same as the fantasy game covers races from all over the world and the users…..come from all over the world
Why are other countries not
Why are other countries not relevant?
This is not a UK exclusive site, we have users from all over the world, so I think it is wholly relevant to report incidents from all over.
I’ve always enjoyed the
I’ve always enjoyed the international feel that road.cc has. It’s great to hear stories from far flung places and interact with fellow cyclists across the world. Sadly, a lot of the stories that the team come up with will be those that have had media exposure like the OP here. Very rarely will you get the press covering the good stories for example,a youngster my way had their bike stolen and the LBS heard about it and replaced the bike. This didn’t even reach the local rag, yet it is a good story for cycling. Or how many of us complete endurance cycles for charity and it doesn’t hit the media?
And you know what, this is where we come in as members of the ‘road.cc family’. It’s up to us to make use of the blog page and the forum to post the good stories that we hear of or our GOOD experiences. I will admit, I’m as guilty as any other in not doing this and being quite happy to join in the tirades about shocking behaviour of motorists and cyclists.
So how about the moaners of the ‘bad stories’ posting some good experiences themselves.
Gkam84
Road.cc doesn’t claim anywhere I can see to be a UK website.
CC infers Cycling Club to me. A worldwide cycling club infact.
They cover stories for all over the world, just the same as the fantasy game covers races from all over the world and the users…..come from all over the world— faz.
True, but it seems to me that the posters/readers are overwhelmingly from the UK.
And for me there’s just more than enough to get worked up about in relation to UK transport issues, without bringing in foreign ones where one just doesn’t know much about the context or background and where the chances of getting anything changed seem even more negligible. Its just a recipe for getting uselessly upset.
I think this sort of problem (cyclists vs motorised traffic) is, even more than say, an issue like racism, is very much tied into local culture and law and physical conditions and you need local knowledge to be able to have an informed opinion as to what to make of an event like this. Are there any posters local to this event on this thread?
FluffyKittenofTindalos
In this thread, I have no idea, but there are on Facebook, which is where I got my secondary information about the husband being a police officer.
Just because people do not comment, doesn’t mean they do not read the story. Yes the majority of people who comment on here are from the UK, but readers, I doubt there is much of a majority from anywhere.
People in the UK seem to get much more worked up about things and that leads them to feel they MUST comment on a subject, where are others are more laid back, read the articles and have their opinion, but sometimes feel that it does not need to be shared with the world.
Giff, stories like that can
Giff, stories like that can be published here, just contact the news team and give them the story….
Want to talk to the news team? Click here
Firstly. Reporting from all
Firstly. Reporting from all over the Anglo Saxon world vastly enriches this site. The discussion of best practices in a number of countries could even tempt UK voters to want some of them implemented in their own country! Especially regarding cycling, what this site is all about.
Secondly. This tragic fait divers lifts the tip of the curtain ever so slightly on the very different models of jurisprudence evolving in the New World vs the Old one, where the former becomes ever more litigious. A generation or two from now, the USA/Canada will have become a very difficult place to understand for a European!
Thirdly. Please check out the article in road.cc earlier this week on the introduction of presumed liability which emphasizes that the road user capable of the greater harm has the greater responsibility (Jacknorell).Introduction of presumed liability would have reduced the temptation to litigate: driving above the speed limit in a SUV? killing and maiming 2 out of 3 cyclists? Guilty. Now, let us hear about mitigating circumstances.
Saw this yesterday, did some
Saw this yesterday, did some more reading and digging around (Gawker, r/rage, local and national news sites). There’s only 25% of this reported so far, and seems there’ll be 25% that never comes to light because of odd behaviour by the police at the scene and in the investigation.
The current position appears to be that Majewski’s have lodged a PI claim against Simon’s insurance company, and alleged to have been raising merry hell in the home town, resulting in Mrs Simon being harassed at work, and their home vandalised. The suit against the dead kids and their families is a spoiler countersuit, albeit one which leaves a very, very bad taste in one’s mouth.
I’d prefer to read good stories about cycling as well. Mine’s a receipt dated this morning for a cup of coffee and some cake, pinned up on the noticeboard. It won’t get a thousand posts on Reddit, but it’s my little bit of good cycling news for the week.
Meanwhile back to the
Meanwhile back to the original story and the nonsense that is litigation and then even further back to the original incident.
I don’t subscribe to the driver is always wrong and I’m dead sure the cyclist isn’t always right.
The big issue for me in this case is not whether or not the driver was sober, or texting or whatever. The big issue here is a driver travelling at an inappropriate speed for the conditions. If you can’t see three substantial objects (whether people, animals or big holes in the road, lit or unlit) soon enough to stop then you are going too fast.
That’s what cars have lights for. Simple really!
Would it have been OK if the driver killed pedestrians?
Or ran into a herd of cattle when a gate had been left open?
No! Drivers are responsible for seeing what is ahead of them and driving at an appropriate speed.
Sorry to say it road.cc but
Sorry to say it road.cc but this is the last time I’ll be visiting your website. This is a non-article all too reminiscent of DM online. I cycle to get away from this shit.
1) if this had been 1.30 in
1) if this had been 1.30 in the afternoon would the outcome have been different.
2) on a rural type road if an animal comes into the road and causes an accident. Who is to blame ? The animal or the driver?
3) accidents will always happen “there for the grace of god” most do not end up in total tragedy.
4) hindsight is a wonderful thing but even with this will we all drive/ ride safer
5) the funny thing is that all three were hit so the idea of 3 abreast being a causitive factor is not really an arguement
Very sad all round
Driving or cycling at night
Driving or cycling at night is very dangerous.
Under no circumstances should you be without lights (as a cyclist) or go over the speed limit (as a driver).
Being a teenager isn’t a great excuse for the former (although I’ve done it); being an adult is even less excuse for the latter (not done it so far).
In fact it would be a good idea if all speed limits in all countries automatically became 20% less as soon as sunset occurs. I certainly drive at least 10% less faster than daylight and usually more than that.
Roadcc has always reported accidents and issues related to them over the 3 years I’ve been on here. Sometimes I avoid reading them or even avoid roadcc altogether during the winter when there’s no fantasy or anything very exciting to read. I usually read inrng then for my cycling fix. There is an element of sensationalism to it but in that regard they are merely reflecting the wider culture. I doubt that it puts off non-cyclists because they don’t come here and those of us who cycle regularly know the real statistics and dangers. Even at that age I would never have cycled 3-abreast on a country road without lights. When I went back drunk from a friend’s party at 4am I went on the pavement, although the police did me for it!! My only ever fine as a cyclist!
Outrageous. I hope she loses
Outrageous. I hope she loses and has to pay costs which will bankrupt her.
In this country the Highway
In this country the Highway Code paragraph 126 says
“Drive at a speed that will allow you to stop well within the distance you can see to be clear.”
I would be surprised if the Canadian equivalent did not say the same. It is a basic safety idea. The International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea say something pretty similar about fog navigation.
This does not mean, keep going at speed unless you see an obstacle, but, if you cannot see that there is nothing within your stopping distance, then slow down. Basic common sense. There might be something a bit solider than cyclists in the road. A fallen tree or broken down lorry for instance.
We all know that many drivers do not obey this rule. There is much advice to cyclists to make themselves conspicuous with hiviz. It is seldom accompanied with advice to drivers to obey rule 126.
If this woman had obeyed this basic safety rule she would not be feeling so upset at having killed.
Isn’t this a weakness in her case?
If anything she should be
If anything she should be sueing the motor industry for making her believe that driving at speeds like that on suburban roads is acceptable.
We are all victims of a powerful and pervasive force we have little or no control over, the advertising media that makes us feel that we are within our right to drive at speeds that kill where there could be three teenagers coming home on their bikes.
The driver is only in the wrong if he or she chooses to subscribe to a delusional sense of what’s normal. What she did wasn’t normal, it was irresponsible, but in her world it was normal and she feels like the victim.
We are all victims if we don’t think things through in the light of what’s real rather than what the telly says we can do.
Should the Majeskis sue Simon
Should the Majeskis sue Simon for the upset this new lawsuit is causing them?
If Dave Davey Dave “Call me
If Dave Davey Dave “Call me Dave” Cameron is reading this, then he could solve unemployment and reduce road accidents in one move.
Employ the peasantry to carry and wave red flags in front of each of these murderous contrivances called motorcars. Then, when each of the bloodthirsty and speed crazed evildoers behind the wheel alights from their vehicle, we can all grab them and scream “burn the witch”
That’ll teach ’em, the bastards.
Seriously, I know the original article sounds pretty horrendous, and that everyone involved is suing everyone else, but generally on here I think we all need to lighten the fuck up and stop preaching and whining. Cars exist. Accidents happen, that’s how it is, society as a whole has accepted a level of road deaths as an unfortunate downside to the benefits of mass personal transport. Raging against this is as futile as trying to reverse the industrial revolution.
Oh, and Nelson Mandela apparently really liked cars. Jimmy Saville raced in the Tour of Britain. Chew on that little conundrum while I go off to ride through some red lights (but not all of them) alternately wearing hi vi, helmet and headphones in varying combinations.
Outta here.
I don’t think it is at all
I don’t think it is at all reasonable to describe complaints about a dangerous driver killing two people as “whining”. In fact I think it is rather nasty.
Is it really the case that we either accept driving which must surely go against any safety code, or have a new Red Flag Act? This is an extreme reaction to being asked to drive safely. It seems that a request that drivers’ restrain their potential to kill and obey the H.C. provokes hysteria.
The level of danger on our roads is set and accepted happily by drivers, who are least vulnerable. The most vulnerable have no choice in setting this level.
It is possible to have roads which are safer for cyclists and pedestrians. Have a look across the North Sea. It does require that drivers accept some restraints on their behaviour, and not go off in a tizzy, as if the whole basis of their way of life is threatened.
The more I read of this story
The more I read of this story the more distressing it sounds, but its in a far away country and has nothing to do with me so I wish I hadn’t started. What’s the point in trying to play Columbo from second-hand reports a thousand miles away?
The following are things I find puzzling:
The newspapers report that the police report definitively states the driver was not breathalysed on the spot.
Its also widely reported that her policeman husband was (for unknown reasons), following along behind her as she drove over the speed limit.
It also seems established that after he approached both were allowed by his fellow officers to leave the scene immediately while other witnesses were held there.
This makes the whole thing sound a bit odd.
As does the way the woman is now apparently claiming the accident occurred because ‘the boys didn’t brake properly’ – even though she hit at least two-out-of-three of them from behind while doing 90kmph. How would better braking technique have helped them in that situation? Surely she was the one who needed to brake, not them?
It does seem a truly _terrible_ idea to ride sans lights on an unlit road with an 80kmph speed limit (why is the speed limit so high, if there is no safer alternative route provided for pedestrians or cyclists to use, incidentally? That’s another angle I’d be inclined to take if this were a domestic case).
When I’ve ridden such routes I’ve found it terrifying and added more lights every time I repeated the journey till I resembled something out of Close Encounters of the 3rd Kind.
It is, I think, another reason why cyclists should _always_ have lights – don’t give drivers any get-out-of-jail-free cards!
And if unlit roads are to have 60mph limits, how about showing some thought and providing some provision for those not in cars?
Canada’s bigger than you
Canada’s bigger than you think. Ontario itself his probably a couple dozen times larger than the entire island of Great Britain. There are a LOT of rural areas, with LOTS of road. It’s not all well-lit. It’s not even all straight.
I personally agree with the smell of bullshit being all over this woman’s claims, as a Canadian, I don’t find the road conditions at all unusual. I do think it’s unusual that three cyclists were riding abreast on an unlit highway with dark clothes, no lights and minimal reflectors.
Unfortunately, that’s probably the biggest factor in the accident.
Driving 10kph on a semi-rural or rural highway at 1:30am? I’m personally surprised she wasn’t going much faster. 1:30am, most traffic is 20-30kph over the limit, even in the city in just about every city I have ever driven/ridden in.
Ok it’s a cyclist that was
Ok it’s a cyclist that was killed.
I don’t doubt that the woman’s life has been massively affected.
The law in anglo saxon jurisdictions and most others allows tou to sue for damages if you have suffered loss or harm. She has suffered mental harm.
She has a right to sue.
In my opinion she shouldn’t. In fact the mere fact that it cosses her mind to sue (even if she has a right to) is somewhat disturbing.
I would expect most decent people if they suffered in the way she does to perhaps wake up from that night mare or flashback and then consider the way the family of the dead girl must feel. On doing that I wouldn’t expect a decent person to sue them and add to their distress. It takes a “special” kind of heartless to do that.
I am thinking of suing her
I am thinking of suing her because she has destroyed what little faith I had left in humanity.
Even if just one of the bikes
Even if just one of the bikes had pedal reflectors they would have told out a mile.
I was driving down a pitch black a road late at night and I saw a cycling ninja riding down there. All in black. No lights but his pedal reflectors were doing a brilliant job. Id not have ridden like that – but I could see him hundreds of meters away.
Cycling at night isn’t dangerous normally.
Good lights (always two in the rear) and plenty of reflectives and you stand out much better than in daylight. It’s also a lot quieter.
Did they not look at the scene to work out what happened ?