“The driver is not facing charges”
Uncategorized October 22nd, 2008
Rhino from Urban Seeds sent me this awful news from Phoenix, about a man struck in the bike lane by an SUV. The cyclist was driving some kind of motorized bicycle (full disclosure: I find those things obnoxious) but it seems he had every right to be where he was and every right not to be driven into by an SUV. But not according to the police, who indicate that “the driver is not facing charges.”
The cyclist was life-flighted to the hospital and is in “very serious” condition.
–Erik Ryberg
October 22nd, 2008 at 11:51 am
WTF? Am I missing something here? Cyclist in bike lane hit by car. Seems pretty straightforward to me. Would the driver have been cited had he hit another vehicle and caused a crash? Most likely. However he is not fined, nor any points against his license. Glad to know I can break the law and not be punished in this state.
October 23rd, 2008 at 1:57 pm
I keep reading this comment from the linked story over and over…
“They don’t have enough power to keep up with the big boys and they have too much to utilize the sidewalks.”
No profanity in the comment. No anger. Almost pity. It’s as though the reader is *almost* ready to admit that bicyclists (motorized or otherwise) have a place on the road.
October 24th, 2008 at 12:57 pm
I tried to post a comment to the site but the page was updated every couple of minutes while I was typing and wiped out what I had to say 4 times.
I just wondered why there were no charges filed for a motor vehicle hitting another vehicle from behind in a lane that was prohibited to the motor vehicle. Id the SUV driver had hit another motor vehicle from behind in an HOV lane, which was prohibited to the SUV because there was only the driver in the vehicle, and the occupants of the other vehicle had suffered life-threatening injuries, you know the driver would have gone to jail, directly to jail, do not pass Go, do not collect $200. In addition there was the matter of the AZ 3 foot passing law, I’m pretty sure nailing a bike from behind is a clear violation of that law. So why were no charges filed in this case? Do cyclists in PHX not qualify for protection under the law?
October 24th, 2008 at 3:37 pm
“Do cyclists in PHX not qualify for protection under the law?” Do they ANYWHERE?? Has anyone EVER been cited for violation of the 3-foot law? Seems like the bus driver that flattened that poor kid recently was in clear violation, why no citation?
October 24th, 2008 at 3:48 pm
Opus– I know, it’s inexplicable. People ask me all the time to explain why local police departments are hostile to cyclists and all I can do is shake my head. I don’t know. But over and over in my practice I see it, this undeniable bias against the cyclist and in favor of the driver. I just had the traffic sergeant at Tucson Police Department call me a “prick” because I was asking him to give me the witness information in a hit and run accident prior to the police report being released. The witness might help us find the driver, but the police department won’t so much as lift a single finger to reveal his contact information to us. How do you explain it? I don’t know . . . .. Carhead I guess.
October 24th, 2008 at 11:27 pm
Hey erik, A friend of yours reminded me today to ” ride safe”. I rode off thinking “safe??” there is no safe. Every day is a ride through a gauntlet. OH WELL!! Next time a traffic cop calls you a prick—
call him a pussy–cause that’s what he is. Doughnut eating m#$$%^^&&**()))_+!!!!”s Law?? Keep me posted on it’s existence. Once again disgusted—-See you out there—DG
October 29th, 2008 at 4:40 pm
Two-stroke engines are a leading cause of smog in the world’s largest metropolitan areas.
November 10th, 2008 at 9:59 am
Had the victim ignored the “bike ghetto” and centered himself in the travel lane, he would not have been hit.