Cyclist kills pedestrian

[Alan D]

Excuse me if I am a bit rushed and halfbaked with this, was awake during the night thinking about it.

No doubt most of you have heard this on yesterdays news. The Judge stated that the defendant was an arrogant and unrepentant man. I was suprised to see that he was an adult who should have known better, was expecting to see a youth.

Well I think that this made the national news because it's such a rare event, but no doubt the anti-cycling brigade will try to give us all a caning over it, so here we go with yet another round of "cyclists should" ranting in the press.

So what issues come to mind:
Should we, politely, point out to riders on pavements that they should not be there? Even if it does win us a smart alec response.

What about the relationship between the cyclist on the road and the pedestrian who steps off the kerb without paying attention? Would it be appropriate to stop and have a polite word about looking before stepping off the kerb?

Then there is the scenario where the cyclist and pedestrian share space. There is a canal tow path near me that my Girlfriend and I regularly walk along and it is also frequented by cyclists. On one occasion I was absolutely insensed when a group came along where there was hardly room to pass and they just did not even bother to curb their breakneck speed, hurtling by with inches to spare. It is very easy to assume, "I am on wheels and moving fast so you had better get out of my way", which I gather is similar to what the defendant shouted out before he ran the girl over. If this happens again, I am now tempted to stand my ground and shout out for them to stop and let me pass. Actually, I think that there are notices saying something to this effect.

Come to think of it, many of the scenarios in the pedestrian-cyclist relationship can easily translate into the motorist-cyclist/pedestrian relationship.

Alan

[petercook80]

I was thinking about this yesterday as well. A while ago on the way home from work some girls were standing in the road and they all saw me coming and one of them moved herself to block my path to make me stop, somewhat foolishly I did not slow down and she jumped out of the way. But in hindsight is was a daft thing for me to have done as it could have all gone wrong big time. But I was on the road and she was not on the pavement.
In fact this bit of road is always a problem as because it is no longer a through road for cars (but is for bikes) people think its fine to walk in the road (is that as bad as a cyclist on the pavement?).
I think as is often the case, we never get to hear the full facts, it depends what spin (if any) the press wish to put on it, its a very sad event that a girl lost her life. And in this particular instance I would say its a bit of an oddity or a one off case that may never happen again.

[kwackers]

Come to think of it, many of the scenarios in the pedestrian-cyclist relationship can easily translate into the motorist-cyclist/pedestrian relationship.
Alan

I'd disagree, fundamentally cyclists inhabit a space designed for cars and therefore we expect them to be travelling faster and make allowances. That's obviously not to say they shouldn't pay due care.

On the other hand cyclists on paths inhabit space intended for pedestrians. And therefore we should make allowances for them.

I don't think it's as black and white as saying "cyclists should never be on pavements" because it's not just pavements, we have lots of shared space, local cycle paths near me often have pedestrians on them.
Also the infrastructure is confused, signs often put cyclists on pavements but never tell them to get off - at what point is the cyclist behaving illegally?

Since there are areas were we both need to share the space, I'd suggest it's cyclists responsibility to slow down and pass with caution any pedestrians on.

If cyclists didn't cycle along at breakneck speed along pedestrianised areas (even when shared or with marked cycle areas) but applied a bit of common sense the whole cyclist/pavement thing would never exist.

Since I use a lot of shared space (sometimes of dubious legallity) I make a point of slowing down (sometimes to walking pace) ensure that I'm seen, smile and say excuse me. Works a treat.

It's not so much legallity as common sense (hence the proviso of 'cycling likely to endanger other users' in the guidelines).

[alanjb]

I think all the above posts are valid. In fact I mistakenly posted about this case in the 'on the road' forum.
I was concerned that the BBC allowed the AA to make a negative comment about cyclists, and also that the offence apparently took place on the carriageway, not on the pavement.

[Wildduck]

Confused with some of the reporting. Been trying to get the facts of the case....

Was he actually on the pavement? There appears to be some doubt.

The girl had been drinking stella artois in a public place and was underage (17 years old).

There was the question whether she was standing on the kerb/? in gutter.

I agree, there's no excuse him bellowing at somebody and no altering speed/course (and therefore probably playing chicken).

But there was already animosity towards him. Apparently prior to this he was known as a thrill seeker and locals alledgedly were 'sick' of seeing him bomb around on his alledgedly £4,750 custom made carbon fibre bike.

Will continue to try and dig up the facts on this one.....

[hubgearfreak]

In fact this bit of road is always a problem as because it is no longer a through road for cars (but is for bikes) people think its fine to walk in the road (is that as bad as a cyclist on the pavement?).

it is fine for pedestrians to walk on the road. check your highway code. those going faster should be careful around them.

this is the behaviour they, and I, expect of you. any other method of dealing with them may end in injury or death, and animosity towards cyclists.

Since I use a lot of shared space (sometimes of dubious legallity) I make a point of slowing down (sometimes to walking pace) ensure that I'm seen, smile and say excuse me. Works a treat.

if you wish to race your car, motorbike or bicycle, go to a designated racing track

[petercook80]

I think saying its fine is strange, It may not be illegal to walk down the middle of the road but its not the best thing to do as a pedestrian, 'Fine' it certainly is not, legal yes, daft yes, fine not really!

You chose to be selective and not to quote me with this...

"somewhat foolishly I did not slow down and she jumped out of the way. But in hindsight is was a daft thing for me to have done as it could have all gone wrong big time."

which does let you know I realised what I did then was wrong, and makes your reply a little out of context and unreasonable.
I do learn by my mistake's, as should we all!

[hubgearfreak]

I think saying its fine is strange, It may not be illegal to walk down the middle of the road but its not the best thing to do as a pedestrian, 'Fine' it certainly is not, legal yes, daft yes, fine not really!

it's only not fine because of irate and impatient wheeled types who think that pedestrians should be out of their way.

i'm sorry if you think i've overreacted, but there's a lot of cyclists who now take the (bad) motorists attitude & expect people to get out of their way. you're obviously (now) one of the good guys

[workhard]

that's all going to depend on your definition of "fine"....

Legal? yes, sensible? in many circumstances no. Bit like cycling on a motorway standard A road when alternatives exist, legal? for sure. Teeny bit stupid? quite possibly.

Rule #1 Pavements (including any path along the side of a road) should be used if provided. Where possible, avoid being next to the kerb with your back to the traffic. If you have to step into the road, look both ways first. Always show due care and consideration for others.

Does wandering down the carriageway of a road when a pavement exists "because I can" show due care and consideration for your cycling cohabitees?

Peds., and I'm proud to be one, often place their convenience over their safety whilst seemingly expecting all other cohabitees of the shared space to compensate for this.

[hubgearfreak]

Rule #1 Pavements (including any path along the side of a road) should be used if provided. Where possible, avoid being next to the kerb with your back to the traffic. If you have to step into the road, look both ways first. Always show due care and consideration for others.

brilliant. is that from the HC? when did it become required knowledge for pedestrians?

what about blind, stupid, drunk, drugged, infant, infirm ones? they can walk into things and each other without significant damage. but put wheels (and worse motors) into the equation and the impact speed is greater, meaning the wheeled (and motorised) ones have an obligation to take care around them.

[petercook80]

it's only not fine because of irate and impatient wheeled types who think that pedestrians should be out of their way.

i'm sorry if you think i've overreacted, but there's a lot of cyclists who now take the (bad) motorists attitude & expect people to get out of their way. you're obviously (now) one of the good guys

That’s OK, just prefer it if people quote the whole context of a previous post rather than a small bite that suits there upcoming statement.
That maybe true what you say about cyclists attitude but even if you are not an "irate cyclist" it is not the 'finest' thing you can do as a pedestrian unless you have no pavement. I hope we can all agree on that.

[hubgearfreak]

we certainly can agree on that...with the proviso that it is a pedestrians right to be on the road, if they so choose, and our responsibility to exercise caution and care around them, either on our bikes or in our cars

[petercook80]

[petercook80]

As a further thought, how do these disabled electric buggies fit into the laws. I presume they should give way to pedestrians? as we have quite a few that wiz around the pavements without much care for pedestrians. I am sure there is a serious accident waiting to happen with those.

[workhard]

As a further thought, how do these disabled electric buggies fit into the laws. I presume they should give way to pedestrians? as we have quite a few that wiz around the pavements without much care for pedestrians. I am sure there is a serious accident waiting to happen with those.

Whole chunks of the HC dedicated to them. Doubt the owners ever read it.