18 months?

rollotommasi wrote:

BehindTheBikesheds wrote:

Yet AGAIN … he DID brake, virtually halved his speed, no-one comes to a complete emergency stop (as fallaciously portrayed by plod) when a ped crosses in front some way ahead. He steered at a low speed, admitted by the prosecution to be as low as 10mph. How can his actions be deemed reckless for the environment/situation? To state it’s because he didn’t have the front brake utterly misses the pount. Sure, do him for no front brake, that’s a Con & Use 1984 breach. But a brake if affixed would not have changed the outcome, it was not that that caused the collision, it was not reckless to brake to 10mph and steer around someone dawdling in the road deliberately trying to avoid them. Step back into your path at the last moment and you simply have no chance to even start to operate the lever, the human brain cannot work that fast for unknown events.(crash investigators work on 1.5s thinking time for singular eventoccurences for good alert drivers).

No. He made a LIMITED attempt to brake, which got his speed down to between 10-14 mph.  But he this is what you forget/ignore….

He had the choice to slow down further, but he CHOSE not to. His primary motivation was not to avoid an accident, but that he was entitled to go on (as he said in evidence) and that she should get out of his way.  That meant trying to thread a path between Mrs Briggs and a parked lorry on his left.  If he had made more of an effort to slow down, he may or may not have been able to stop in front of her.  It would almost certainly have been easier for the two of them to avoid each other.  And, even if they had collided, the impact would have been lower.

As the judge said: “On your own evidence by this stage you weren’t even trying to slow or stop. You expected her to get out of your way. Thus I make it clear that it was not merely the absence of a front brake but your whole manner of riding that caused this accident.”

 

BehindTheBikesheds wrote:

The Wanton and furious does not hold up to dcrutiny and it’s clear the judge has acted in a discriminatory and unlawful manner. She should be arrested for perverting the course of justice, she’s a fucking disgrace. She even unlawfully instructed the jury never mind her summing up just before handing out sentence which was full of lues and contradictory BS!

That’s a really strong accusation to make.  Unless you have a detailed understanding of the case and the law that lies behind it, it’s out of order to be throwing dirt like that around.

NO, read again, he braked, where did i say he did an emergency stop (As per the police video) why would he do an emergency stop or come to a complete stop at all? In the same scenario replicated on every street in every town and city not one single person would do the emergency stop because some twat decided to walk right into the middle of the road without looking 20 or so metres ahead when only doing 18mph to start with, they’d BRAKE to a slower speed and think that they would carry on their way, they might even BRAKE again or swerve if there was space, which in this case there was room to move around the person at a slow speed. You admit 10mph is a slow speed right?

You’re clearly deranged and have avoided all semblance of logic and understanding of what happens all the time and how human beings cannot react instantaneously to unknown situations even when taking precautions.

his use of certain words are irrelevant, his actions of BRAKING/SLOWING and attempting to avoid collision are all we need to know with regards to the charges, the charge of Wanton or Furious are not met unless the CPS think he mowed her down on purpose, oh wait, they and pretty much everyone else think he did because he shouted at the stupid person after she collided with him.

 

Your narrow mindedness idiocy is beyond reproach.

wellsprop wrote:

+1

So, hopefully, for the rest of us it means that providing we aren’t riding like anti-social plebs, we’re alright.

I reckon this idiot is one of those cyclists I occasionally come across on my commute with total disregard for anyone but themselves. Unfortunately, from what I have seen, there are a lot of younger people riding fixed with no front brakes and they don’t seem to care about anyone’s safety.

 

I actually collided with a pedestrian the other day (his arm and my handlebar collided), on a shared use path, whilst travelling at about 6 mph, with my eldest child cycling behind me and the youngest in a child seat behind me.  He had headphones in and was walking directly in the middle of the path (leaving very little space for anyone to pass) with his headphones in.

 

If I’d been on my own I probably would slowed to walking pace until there was a wider space to pass.  Unfortunately 6 mph is about as slow as I can manage with young child bouncing about on the back.  He then, without warning, indication or for any apparent reason, decided to move to the left of the path, as I started to pass him on the left.  I could have slammed the brakes on, but there’s always the risk that my eldest (whilst I do all I can to instill a sense of vigilance and the importance of keeping a safe distance) won’t notice in time and run into the back of me, injuring herself.

 

This leaves me with the option of:

 a. Running into someone who is completly ignorant of their surroundings, choosing not to look and to dull their hearing – using a shared path, in a completely antisocial manner.

 b. Risking my child’s safety.

 

I suppose the point I am getting to, is that we might occasionally see cyclists apparently “with total disregard for anyone but themselves”, but I personally, see a lot more pedestrians without any regard for anyones safety or the consequences of their actions.  That’s fine, they’re ignorant, unless they cycle themselves, why wouldn’t they be?  I give them as wide a berth as possible.

 

When I am driving my car, my primary concern is the safety of those around me, especially those who are more vulnerable.  My primary concern when I am on my bike is my own safety and that of my family.  If I collide with a pedestrian, I imagine that I am likely to come off worst.  I have concern for others, but my fate is closely tied to theirs.  Unfortunately some cyclists are ignorant of the dangers that pedestrians pose – but I think we need to be careful not to attribute “conditions to villainy that simply result from stupidity”?

rollotommasi wrote:

rollotommasi wrote:

Bikebikebike wrote:

The stopping distances quoted in the trial for the single-brake bike were about the same as a car.  And given you’re less likely to hurt someone going at 18mph on a bike than a car, it’s really a struggle to say that 18mph on a bike is criminally reckless.

But it’s not the cycling at 18mph in itself that’s criminally reckless.  It’s cycling in a way that’s reckless for the current road conditions.  Plus failure to take reasonable steps to avoid a collision (i.e. braking).  Plus using what he knew (or should have known) was an unroadworthy and unsafe bike.  Plus lack of remorse.

 

 

Yet AGAIN … he DID brake, virtually halved his speed, no-one comes to a complete emergency stop (as fallaciously portrayed by plod) when a ped crosses in front some way ahead.
He steered at a low speed, admitted by the prosecution to be as low as 10mph.
How can his actions be deemed reckless for the environment/situation? To state it’s because he didn’t have the front brake utterly misses the pount.
Sure, do him for no front brake, that’s a Con & Use 1984 breach. But a brake if affixed would not have changed the outcome, it was not that that caused the collision, it was not reckless to brake to 10mph and steer around someone dawdling in the road deliberately trying to avoid them. Step back into your path at the last moment and you simply have no chance to even start to operate the lever, the human brain cannot work that fast for unknown events.(crash investigators work on 1.5s thinking time for singular eventoccurences for good alert drivers)
The Wanton and furious does not hold up to dcrutiny and it’s clear the judge has acted in a discriminatory and unlawful manner. She should be arrested for perverting the course of justice, she’s a fucking disgrace.
She even unlawfully instructed the jury never mind her summing up just before handing out sentence which was full of lues and contradictory BS!

madcarew wrote:

From the judges comments it sounds as though (and CCTV would be interesting) that he was weaving in amongst traffic and other road users shouting and swearing. Personally I think the sentence is a result of bad luck (it was very unfortunate that Miss Briggs died, as she essentially died from a fall), a result of his lack of compassion, behaviour in public after the event, and it would seem his behaviour leading up to the event. Basically he seems the cycling equivalent of a boy racer who has been seen dropping donuts, swearing and being a yob, and then a few minutes later, while in an unroadworthy car hits someone  and then pouts and is unpleasant on social media. He may not deserve 18 months in the clink, but he certainly was asking for more than a slap on the wrist, which is likely what he would have got if Miss Briggs had not died.

+1

So, hopefully, for the rest of us it means that providing we aren’t riding like anti-social plebs, we’re alright.

I reckon this idiot is one of those cyclists I occasionally come across on my commute with total disregard for anyone but themselves. Unfortunately, from what I have seen, there are a lot of younger people riding fixed with no front brakes and they don’t seem to care about anyone’s safety.

wellsprop]

wellsprop wrote:

[quote=Bikebikebike] [quote=rollotommasi]

 

One was too busy looking at their phone to even check to see if the road was clear, the other just walked straight into my path after looking at me. I’m not alone either, most of my mates who cycle have had collisions with pedestrians who have stepped into the road without looking.

 

 

This happens to me all the time, usually they’re staring at a phone. Stupid as it is it’s sort of understandable, phones are very immersive and distracting.

What I don’t understand is people looking, seeing you approach and then just stepping out anyway. Seriously, what are they thinking? Are these the same people who shout at you to “get a car” or “get off the road” when they’re driving? Is it an arrogant act of defiance against cyclists? Do they think we aren’t part of the traffic?

What goes through their minds when they do this?

I try to ride defensively

I try to ride defensively around pedestrians but sometimes its impossible short of pootling along at 5mph. Fortunately on my commute there isn’t much pedestrian traffic, and as its mostly through an industrial area peds are quite focused on not being flattened by container lorries.

Ultimately though you just can’t account for all eventualities. This morning, cycling east (so fully illuminated by the 9am sun), with my front dyno light running, with reflective mudguards, with an 18st bloke kitted out in red and blue cycling kit, a driver completely failed to see me somehow and turned right straight across me into a car park. Fortunately I was covering my brakes and did a really decent endo (hydro disks FTW). Adrenalin being what it is there was then a hell of a lot of swearing and gesturing. No doubt if I’d subsequently twatted the pedestrian that ambled across in front of me on her phone the idiot would have testified against me

I have pretty much zero sympathy for Alliston because I just can’t see how anyone would think riding around London on a bike with no front brake would be A Good Idea.

Equally though this campaign to change the law is utterly out of proportion and the MoJ will deserve all the contempt they get if they do, particularly considering that they’ve kicked around the road sentencing review for the best part of 4 years. 

I think all anyone asks is that the law be equal and proportionate and road law definitely isn’t