Author Topic: Seems consistent - cyclist rides dangerously/carelessly?  (Read 5704 times)

Seems consistent - cyclist rides dangerously/carelessly?
« on: 04 July, 2012, 09:18:13 am »
I see in today's paper that a cyclist in London, jumping a red light, caused significant brain injury to a solicitor. The solicitor is now saisd to be "only 40% of who he was".

The verdict was that the cyclist was guilty, and was fined £850.

It seems to me that ignoring a red light is worse than "getting it wrong".

My point is this - whether we agree or not about sentences to motorists, at least there seems to me to be some consistency with those sentenceswhen it comes to sentencing cyclists. (i.e. no custodial sentence).

spindrift

Re: Seems consistent - cyclist rides dangerously/carelessly?
« Reply #1 on: 04 July, 2012, 09:56:35 am »
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/public/cyclesafety/article3464777.ece

Quote
Gaye Cheyne, chairwoman of the bench, said that he had shown a “lack of care and competence” and had been cycling at an “unsafe speed” as he rode towards a group of pedestrians. She said the maximum fine the bench could impose was £1,000 and that she would not award compensation because it was inevitable that civil proceedings would follow

If that cyclist doesn't have TP insurance he's pretty much financially shafted. Mr Hyer may have earned £50k a year. Two children. 

Woofage

  • Ain't no hooves on my bike.
Re: Seems consistent - cyclist rides dangerously/carelessly?
« Reply #2 on: 04 July, 2012, 09:59:04 am »
If that cyclist doesn't have TP insurance he's pretty much financially shafted.

No sympathy here. Obey the rules of the road or accept the consequences of your actions. Simples.
Pen Pusher

mattc

  • n.b. have grown beard since photo taken
    • Didcot Audaxes
Re: Seems consistent - cyclist rides dangerously/carelessly?
« Reply #3 on: 04 July, 2012, 09:59:58 am »
No, I don't think there is equality between the car and bike situations. Jumping a red light is far more likely to hurt another human being if you do it in a motor vehicle.

An RLJer is still in the wrong, but sentencing has to come up with some numbers somehow. Unless you want to hang every offender.
Has never ridden RAAM
---------
No.11  Because of the great host of those who dislike the least appearance of "swank " when they travel the roads and lanes. - From Kuklos' 39 Articles

spindrift

Re: Seems consistent - cyclist rides dangerously/carelessly?
« Reply #4 on: 04 July, 2012, 10:05:37 am »


My point is this - whether we agree or not about sentences to motorists, at least there seems to me to be some consistency with those sentenceswhen it comes to sentencing cyclists. (i.e. no custodial sentence).

Sentences for all road injuries are pathetic. I was wondering whether you could compare this with a motor vehicle rtc because the cyclist shouted "Oi, move!". So the cyclist didn't slow down and hit a pedestrian. The car equivalent would be accelerating toward a pedestrian you'd already acknowledged. 

Re: Seems consistent - cyclist rides dangerously/carelessly?
« Reply #5 on: 04 July, 2012, 10:06:57 am »
The amount of money seems slightly higher than I've seen for drivers, but I agree it is basically similar.  Confirms something I've thought before - the courts are simply very bad at dealing with driving offences. 

I have a theory that the courts are set up for, and used to seeing, directly deliberate stuff: mug someone, burgle someone - it's all done with intention to mug or burgle.  Whereas driving into someone is closer to incompetence; they might have intended to speed but they genuinely didn't intend to hit someone.  The court sees it isn't deliberate in the sense of a mugging, and go along with a proportionately lower punishment for it. 

It's completely stupid and doesn't take into account that people have been driving like shits for years, and finally the odds have caught up with them.  If there was a magic fairy tale way of catching all the low level bad driving and punishing it at a low level then it might even work.  (c.f. speeding, where enforcement has begun to have an effect, but because it's only a part of safe driving the effect on safety is limited).

Re: Seems consistent - cyclist rides dangerously/carelessly?
« Reply #6 on: 04 July, 2012, 10:08:55 am »
Matt, I think part of the point is that if a motorist had done this to a cyclist, many people on here would be bemoaning the lack of a custodial sentence.  The court seemed to think that £1000 was the maximum fine but I wonder if custody was an option?  The results of this cyclist's action are pretty horrific but I'm not sure about locking people up as a matter of course.  I think it's the comparison between what happens to cyclists who "err" with what happens to motorists and there does seem to be some sort of equivalence here.  I find it a bit wishful that the court was expecting a further court-case to deal out more punishment to the cyclist because there  is no guarantee that the victim would win.  Most motorists' victims are in no position to bring similar action.  It's all a bit odd on the face of it

Re: Seems consistent - cyclist rides dangerously/carelessly?
« Reply #7 on: 04 July, 2012, 10:09:51 am »
If that cyclist doesn't have TP insurance he's pretty much financially shafted.

No sympathy here. Obey the rules of the road or accept the consequences of your actions. Simples.

+10

Quote
Witnesses said that he shouted “Oi, move” as he saw Mr Hyer step into the road.
He sounds like a complete knob.
<i>Marmite slave</i>

clarion

  • Tyke
Re: Seems consistent - cyclist rides dangerously/carelessly?
« Reply #8 on: 04 July, 2012, 10:12:02 am »
No, I don't think there is equality between the car and bike situations. Jumping a red light is far more likely to hurt another human being if you do it in a motor vehicle.

An RLJer is still in the wrong, but sentencing has to come up with some numbers somehow. Unless you want to hang every offender.

I would agree.  The risk is much lower.  It's an unpredictable consequence.  A
But aren't we in the realm of eggshell skulls here?  In which case, walking down a street is more dangerous to others.

No sympathy for the cyclist.  Sounds like a dick.

I wonder what I would have thought if I'd knocked someone down when I jumped a red light escaping from a maniac the other day?
Getting there...

ian

  • serious Alex Jones energy
Re: Seems consistent - cyclist rides dangerously/carelessly?
« Reply #9 on: 04 July, 2012, 10:14:56 am »
I see in today's paper that a cyclist in London, jumping a red light, caused significant brain injury to a solicitor. The solicitor is now saisd to be "only 40% of who he was".

The verdict was that the cyclist was guilty, and was fined £850.

It seems to me that ignoring a red light is worse than "getting it wrong".

My point is this - whether we agree or not about sentences to motorists, at least there seems to me to be some consistency with those sentenceswhen it comes to sentencing cyclists. (i.e. no custodial sentence).

Not really. There are questions of intent and responsibility.

I don't think pedalling a cycle should carry the same burden of responsibility as driving several tonnes of high powered metal. The expected outcome of a collision, for instance after intentionally going through a red light, should be quantitively different. That's not to say either is right. They're both wrong and this story demonstrates this.

£850 is on the surface offensive but I assume there are limits as to what the court could impose for the crime charged ('careless cycling') and I don't like to speculate based on a newspaper article. The court would have heard the full evidence and medical opinions. There's no independent medical opinion presented in the story, just the solicitor's, and well, it's an adversarial system so no one is going to claim just a minor abrasion (especially given that I am sure there will be civil claims on the back of this). I assume with a more serious outcome, the CPS could have charged differently, but IANAL.

This kind of thing should be a reminder that crossing a red light, even on a cycle, should not be assumed to be consequence free. The cyclist in this case seemed pretty loathsome, and I sadly see plenty like him on my commute, zigging through pedestrian crossing and across junctions at speed.

That said comments like "it’s about time people stopped worrying about cyclists being killed by lorries if they do not conduct themselves in the right manner. He nearly killed my husband" don't help either. I appreciate that the victim's wife might be angry, but it's an unpleasant opinion. You'd think you wouldn't need to explain that the sum of any number of wrongs is never going to equal a right.
Authoritarian Thought Leader, the Pol Pot of Powerpoint, the Stalin of Spreadsheets, the Putin of pandas

Eccentrica Gallumbits

  • Rock 'n' roll and brew, rock 'n' roll and brew...
Re: Seems consistent - cyclist rides dangerously/carelessly?
« Reply #10 on: 04 July, 2012, 10:59:18 am »

I would agree.  The risk is much lower.  It's an unpredictable consequence.  A
But aren't we in the realm of eggshell skulls here?  In which case, walking down a street is more dangerous to others.
Another unpredictable consequence might be if the motorist who had a green light swerved or braked and skidded to avoid the red light jumping cyclist and hit another cyclist or a pedestrian as a result.

Look, we all know how traffic lights work. If you have a red light, either other traffic has a green light or pedestrians have a green man. That jumping a red light could have risky consequences for the jumper or for others is not unpredictable.
My feminist marxist dialectic brings all the boys to the yard.


mattc

  • n.b. have grown beard since photo taken
    • Didcot Audaxes
Re: Seems consistent - cyclist rides dangerously/carelessly?
« Reply #11 on: 04 July, 2012, 11:14:16 am »
Look, we all know how traffic lights work. If you have a red light, either other traffic has a green light or pedestrians have a green man. That jumping a red light could have risky consequences for the jumper or for others is not unpredictable.
Yeeees, but we're talking about sentences, not guilt.

My chieftan tank is not to be trifled with - and many traffic lights are invisible through the slit.
Has never ridden RAAM
---------
No.11  Because of the great host of those who dislike the least appearance of "swank " when they travel the roads and lanes. - From Kuklos' 39 Articles

Re: Seems consistent - cyclist rides dangerously/carelessly?
« Reply #12 on: 04 July, 2012, 06:59:07 pm »
Look, we all know how traffic lights work. If you have a red light, either other traffic has a green light or pedestrians have a green man.

A lot of the traffic lights round here will revert to red in all directions if the sensors don't see any traffic. 

The sensors, of course, don't always spot cars.



Quote from: Kim
Paging Diver300.  Diver300 to the GSM Trimphone, please...

AndyK

Re: Seems consistent - cyclist rides dangerously/carelessly?
« Reply #13 on: 05 July, 2012, 11:57:52 am »

spindrift

Re: Seems consistent - cyclist rides dangerously/carelessly?
« Reply #14 on: 05 July, 2012, 12:06:02 pm »
Quote
If any driver causes the injury or death of a cyclist through careless or dangerous driving, I am entirely in favour of the full force of the law being applied.


Four cyclists have been killed recently and the drivers who killed them faced no charges whatsoever, not even a fine.

Re: Seems consistent - cyclist rides dangerously/carelessly?
« Reply #15 on: 05 July, 2012, 03:48:11 pm »
Isn't it simply that the cyclist is being punished under the criminal law for a breach of the rules that in itself is not considered by parliament/society as being particularly evil, even if it could have (and here has had) significant consequences for the victim.  The victim's ability to seek compensation through civil action for the damages that resulted from that breach, although it should be easier in the light of the criminal conviction, is a separate matter from how the criminal system responds to the cyclist's breach of the law.

AndyK

Re: Seems consistent - cyclist rides dangerously/carelessly?
« Reply #16 on: 05 July, 2012, 06:35:08 pm »
An interesting discussion. Anyone else care to contribute?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/newsdebate/r/t-10247840/index.html?threadIndex=2

Redlight

  • Enjoying life in the slow lane
Re: Seems consistent - cyclist rides dangerously/carelessly?
« Reply #17 on: 05 July, 2012, 10:29:07 pm »
An interesting discussion. Anyone else care to contribute?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/newsdebate/r/t-10247840/index.html?threadIndex=2

Given that this section is allegedly edited by Simon Heffer, a man who makes one long for some insight from Jeremy Clarkson, no. It would be like trying to make rational points in an asylum.  Best leave them to it.
Why should anybody steal a watch when they can steal a bicycle?

AndyK

Re: Seems consistent - cyclist rides dangerously/carelessly?
« Reply #18 on: 06 July, 2012, 05:17:03 pm »
That 'B J Mann' is absolutely barking!  :o

Re: Seems consistent - cyclist rides dangerously/carelessly?
« Reply #19 on: 06 July, 2012, 06:12:58 pm »
I think the case here was rather contrived - the chairman of the bench went for "excessive speed" and seemed to forget that there are two hazards - one facing the cyclist from motor vehicles, best served by maintaining speed - along with mindless pedestrians who IMO are too lazy to look and bring their vulnerability upon themselves.  Add to this that some lights can change green, amber, red in too short a time to stop a bicycle short of the line without flipping over.  I would wager that this was not properly considered.

As an off-topic, one thing that bugs me from every road user angle (including pedestrian) is those who wait for the green man without looking at the traffic, quite often they could ba across safely and quicker if they took a look left and right and just waited for a gap (green man or otherwise).  Add in those that have battering prams and the Saddam-style child human shield, who are often the worst.  There could be an emergency vehicle or an unintended overshoot.  Even if waiting for the green man, it's still a good idea to look.  There could be a dismounted cyclist (legally a pedestrian) using the dismount-and-wheel across the line circumvention technique.

In fact, pedestrians who wait unconditionally for the green man bug me for two reasons
  •   They're parents who want to set a good example.  My response would be sorry, but I'm not a parent and I'm not planning on it either
  • They're self righteous little < phalluses > who get their kicks from obeying silly rules while being too lazy to actually think for themselves

Coming back top the case, it could be that the rider saw the light at green and went for it, which might have seemed the safest approach, and was too bent over to notice the change.  This is something that a lot of the road lobby just doesn't get, the cyclist bent-forward viewpoint is a different angle to a motorist who is usually slightly reclined.  As for some of the daily fail comment pieces, they are verging on hate crime by association ("tartars" - a reference to the tatar ethnic group, association by applying it to cyclists).

This is one decision that I would prefer not to have to make, but if it's a choice between a major risk to me versus a minor risk combined with a risk to someone else who I don't care much for, in a situation that feels like a set-up or ^they^ couldn't do better if ^they^ were setting me up, I know which one I'm going to take...

AndyK

Re: Seems consistent - cyclist rides dangerously/carelessly?
« Reply #20 on: 06 July, 2012, 06:38:38 pm »

spindrift

Re: Seems consistent - cyclist rides dangerously/carelessly?
« Reply #21 on: 06 July, 2012, 09:22:31 pm »
That 'B J Mann' is absolutely barking!  :o

BJMann is the chap who trolls the stories about dead cyclists on the Standard website. The last time was the story of the child on a bike killed in East Ham, bjmann popped up to make a random and insanely inappropriate remark about cyclists on pavements. He's ben around for years, he's banned from Honest John's forum and a few other places for being a ranting nutjob.

Re: Seems consistent - cyclist rides dangerously/carelessly?
« Reply #22 on: 06 July, 2012, 09:46:31 pm »
Reading the original report, the court does not mention him jumping a red light.

http://www.hamhigh.co.uk/news/court-crime/cyclist_who_jumped_red_light_and_left_lawyer_brain_damaged_is_fined_just_850_1_1432529

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/public/cyclesafety/article3464777.ece :

Quote
City of London Magistrates’ Court saw CCTV footage of Schipka, having ignored a red light, hitting Mr Hyer in the middle of the road at Holborn Viaduct while travelling at about 26mph.

Also:
Quote
Schipka, 44, an IT manager with Commerzbank

but Ham & High says "Investment banker Schipka, a German national who has lived in London for 10 years and works for Commerzbank".

Redlight

  • Enjoying life in the slow lane
Re: Seems consistent - cyclist rides dangerously/carelessly?
« Reply #23 on: 06 July, 2012, 11:15:08 pm »

Quote
Schipka, 44, an IT manager with Commerzbank

but Ham & High says "Investment banker Schipka, a German national who has lived in London for 10 years and works for Commerzbank".

Lazy journalism. Anyone who works for an investment bank is "a banker".  It ensures that readers are less sympathetic.  A friend of mine whose son was among those killed in the Belgian coach crash earlier this year was labelled in the press as a banker, with a tone of "don't be too sympathetic, he's obviously rich". He's not a banker as any intelligent person would understand it; he simply works for a bank.

Why should anybody steal a watch when they can steal a bicycle?

Toady

Re: Seems consistent - cyclist rides dangerously/carelessly?
« Reply #24 on: 06 July, 2012, 11:29:26 pm »
What is different here is the reporting.  Would an incident where someone was seriously injured in an incident involving one or more motor vehicles have made the national papers?  Unlikely.

Whether this is because it's an uncommon - man bites dog - incident and therefore newsworthy, or whether it's been published as grist to the anti cyclist mill, or both, I wouldn't like to say.