Milton Keynes van driver sentenced to 175 hours community service for killing cyclist

alansmurphy wrote:

I have some evidence:

 

I have been knocked off my bike twice, 9.15am and 9.25am in October, slightly dim but certainly not dark as many drivers had no lights. And yes, it was the same day. 3 lights on the back, two on the front, reflective and high vis jacket - I was hit from behind by a driver cutting a roundabout and the front by a driver desparate to turn into a McDonalds.

 

I have never been hit when wearing team sky black clothing.

 

See, there's some evidence.

 

Incidentally I was hit from behind on a retail park a few nights ago, old lady driver wasn't impressed with my right hand turn from a right hand filter lane. She had time to beep at me for no apparent reason before I stopped and she seemed unable to stop her car from approx 8mph.

 

Nice people turn into morons when they get in a car...

Anecdotal evidence is the best kind.

Rich_cb wrote:

The 'victim blaming' comments are a bit hysterical. The police officer is simply reiterating the advice given in the highway code. If you disagree with the highway code campaign to get it changed but don't blame people for basing advice on it. Rule 59. You should wear reflective clothing and/or accessories (belt, arm or ankle bands) in the dark.

He seems to have said "Hi-Vis" not reflective.  You can't see colours in the dark so hi-vis makes no difference.  

You also can't see anything if you're not looking...  considering the driver admitted being distracted it sounds like he wasn't looking.

jestriding wrote:

He seems to have said "Hi-Vis" not reflective.  You can't see colours in the dark so hi-vis makes no difference.  

 

You also can't see anything if you're not looking...  considering the driver admitted being distracted it sounds like he wasn't looking.

The policeman's words are quoted in the article.

He doesn't mention hi-vis.

Yorkshire wallet wrote:

Maybe you 'shouldn't have to' wear hi-viz etc., maybe you 'should' be able to dress like a ninja with a barely legal rear light but in this day and age it helps to attract a drivers attention asap. The further away you initially spot someone the better IMO. 

I really don't think some of you drive and the world just goes by at 15mph or less. Seriously, banging on about the 1920s!??! You're about 100 years out of date. 

No, the point is valid. The CTC objected to the making compulsary for people riding bikes to have a rear light saying that this just encouraged motorists to drive faster and flout the law which is clearly what has happened over the last 100 years and some, or maybe you don't want to accept that UK drivers have killed in that time over half a million people?

We as people riding bikes have brighter lights, told to wear X, Y and Z and all the while driving standards are dropping further and further because the responsibility to drive safely is being taken away from them and the onus for safety pushed upon the vulnerable hence why we have the shit state of affairs that we do.

it's YOU that is out of date with your way of thinking and thinking that will not solve anything as seen by the numerous deaths and serious injuries sustained by those travelling not only within the law but well beyond what is required and are still blamed.

Change/modify the behaviour of those doing the harm not that of the vulnerable/victims, least of all blame them for their demise when they've done sod all wrong.

oldstrath wrote:

" We are all responsible for looking after each other on our roads" Cobblers. Nothing we do as cyclists will harm a motorist, so what exactly does this clown think we're going to do to look after them - give them a hug? ".

Cobblers?

e.g. Someone on a bike rides through a red light, causes a car to swerve, crash/hit another car or pedestrian? The one thing said correctly in this article is that people, no matter what form of transport need to look out for each other. Empathy and respect fix a lot.  Creating labels and tribes of cyclist/motorists is nothing but divisive and the biggest issue. 

I don't like to speculate on whether the sentence was too lenient but I doubt his family will get any closure from this outcome. Another very sad and all too common event.

Cupotea wrote:

oldstrath wrote:

" We are all responsible for looking after each other on our roads" Cobblers. Nothing we do as cyclists will harm a motorist, so what exactly does this clown think we're going to do to look after them - give them a hug? ".

Cobblers?

e.g. Someone on a bike rides through a red light, causes a car to swerve, crash/hit another car or pedestrian? The one thing said correctly in this article is that people, no matter what form of transport need to look out for each other. Empathy and respect fix a lot.  Creating labels and tribes of cyclist/motorists is nothing but divisive and the biggest issue.

 

 

Biggest issue round here is impatient drivers. Second biggest is not looking drivers.

I can just about empathise, but respect? Sorry, no can do.

oldstrath wrote:

Cupotea wrote:

oldstrath wrote:

" We are all responsible for looking after each other on our roads" Cobblers. Nothing we do as cyclists will harm a motorist, so what exactly does this clown think we're going to do to look after them - give them a hug? ".

Cobblers?

e.g. Someone on a bike rides through a red light, causes a car to swerve, crash/hit another car or pedestrian? The one thing said correctly in this article is that people, no matter what form of transport need to look out for each other. Empathy and respect fix a lot.  Creating labels and tribes of cyclist/motorists is nothing but divisive and the biggest issue.

 

 

Biggest issue round here is impatient drivers. Second biggest is not looking drivers. I can just about empathise, but respect? Sorry, no can do.

Because we keep letting it go. Homicide by car is not a crime, not even a misdemeanor it seems like. 

Cupotea wrote:

oldstrath wrote:

" We are all responsible for looking after each other on our roads" Cobblers. Nothing we do as cyclists will harm a motorist, so what exactly does this clown think we're going to do to look after them - give them a hug? ".

Cobblers?

e.g. Someone on a bike rides through a red light, causes a car to swerve, crash/hit another car or pedestrian? The one thing said correctly in this article is that people, no matter what form of transport need to look out for each other. Empathy and respect fix a lot.  Creating labels and tribes of cyclist/motorists is nothing but divisive and the biggest issue.

 

 

NO. This is bollocks.

In civised countries you don't get this inexcusable sh*te.

What kind of people come onto a forum like this and join in some scummy victim blaming exercise? It's bad enough the little Englander gutteer press and it's tiresome bile and hatred for those not encased in the latest aspirational  'normal' mode of tranport cage on wheels.

It is truly and utterly disgusting  that time after time the same old f*cking excuse gets trotted out...

I mean........ "did't see her/him"   ????        FFS How many more times???

The lady driver in Regent's Street example....the cyclist was sent "flying through the air" -

"didn't see him...." "fair enoough madam....off you go then"...

This stinks. F*ck the hi viz bollocks.

Motor vehicles are routinely and regularly driven at criminsl speeds and with criminally negligent levels of conscientiousness and conideration for other rpad users.

If you drive at 20mph you'll get tail gated, spat on etc for holding up the over-indulged, over-entitled, single occupancy vehicles making their all too often inappropriate journeys, foulling up the roads - an inconvenience at the very least to those DARING to cycle: an impediment, a menace, a complete and total disgrace. 

IF....people have to drive they should be driving with the UTMOST care and attention.

Once this was normal. THe yob culture that now exists means that driving like a c*nt is normal.

And you don't have to worry about killing anyone on a bike cos you'll get a few hours community service!!!

Is this offensive to all you who go out proteted in your hi viz and helmets?

I guess this is tribal then. Because the sort of sh*te written about cyclists going through a red light and causing cars to swerve and have an accident.....?

FFS - You need to get a bit real. Once we have bit of respect for people that want to get on a bi/tricyle etc and use it as their means of getting about without being subject to the last 'acceptable' form of prejudice, hatred that leads to the above latest disgusting excuse for 'legal protection' we can start looking at the incidences of where cyclists may not follow rules of stopping at red lights ...

but to the anti-mass cycling (ie  8 to 80 in any clothing....y'know grand-kids and grand parents kind of thing....mobility aid for those who cycle but cannot easily walk kind of thing....or anyone els who just wants to go to the shops on a bike FCS) commenters above,

I would  suggest are in need of an education.   

emishi55 wrote:

Cupotea wrote:

oldstrath wrote:

" We are all responsible for looking after each other on our roads" Cobblers. Nothing we do as cyclists will harm a motorist, so what exactly does this clown think we're going to do to look after them - give them a hug? ".

Cobblers?

e.g. Someone on a bike rides through a red light, causes a car to swerve, crash/hit another car or pedestrian? The one thing said correctly in this article is that people, no matter what form of transport need to look out for each other. Empathy and respect fix a lot.  Creating labels and tribes of cyclist/motorists is nothing but divisive and the biggest issue.

 

 

 

NO. This is bollocks.

In civised countries you don't get this inexcusable sh*te.

What kind of people come onto a forum like this and join in some scummy victim blaming exercise? It's bad enough the little Englander gutteer press and it's tiresome bile and hatred for those not encased in the latest aspirational  'normal' mode of tranport cage on wheels.

It is truly and utterly disgusting  that time after time the same old f*cking excuse gets trotted out...

I mean........ "did't see her/him"   ????        FFS How many more times???

The lady driver in Regent's Street example....the cyclist was sent "flying through the air" -

"didn't see him...." "fair enoough madam....off you go then"...

This stinks. F*ck the hi viz bollocks.

Motor vehicles are routinely and regularly driven at criminsl speeds and with criminally negligent levels of conscientiousness and conideration for other rpad users.

If you drive at 20mph you'll get tail gated, spat on etc for holding up the over-indulged, over-entitled, single occupancy vehicles making their all too often inappropriate journeys, foulling up the roads - an inconvenience at the very least to those DARING to cycle: an impediment, a menace, a complete and total disgrace. 

IF....people have to drive they should be driving with the UTMOST care and attention.

Once this was normal. THe yob culture that now exists means that driving like a c*nt is normal.

And you don't have to worry about killing anyone on a bike cos you'll get a few hours community service!!!

Is this offensive to all you who go out proteted in your hi viz and helmets?

 

I guess this is tribal then. Because the sort of sh*te written about cyclists going through a red light and causing cars to swerve and have an accident.....?

FFS - You need to get a bit real. Once we have bit of respect for people that want to get on a bi/tricyle etc and use it as their means of getting about without being subject to the last 'acceptable' form of prejudice, hatred that leads to the above latest disgusting excuse for 'legal protection' we can start looking at the incidences of where cyclists may not follow rules of stopping at red lights ...

but to the anti-mass cycling (ie  8 to 80 in any clothing....y'know grand-kids and grand parents kind of thing....mobility aid for those who cycle but cannot easily walk kind of thing....or anyone els who just wants to go to the shops on a bike FCS) commenters above,

I would  suggest are in need of an education.   

 

 

 

So, I need to get real and get an education?  I think you need to climb off your high horse o-brave internet knight.

I didn't victim blame at all, but you, you become what you supposedly hate and treat someone you know nothing about with utter contempt and with language which would in a physical world translate to a punch, yet you claim some moral high ground. 

You missed the entire point of my post.  I'm a cyclist. I'm a motorist. I'm a pedestrian.  A mode of transport does not brand a person. I fully agree that society today is breeding a lack of care for others and it needs addressing. That was the point of my post.

And whilst you suggest I need an education and despair at the kind of people dare visit this site, at least look up the definition of a forum, which this isn't. It's a place to put forward your views and opinions. 

nappe wrote:

Going by Street view, there are long sections without street lights. If I rode that as part of my commute, I'd be lit up like a Xmas tree. Though even a cheap rear flasher, assuming the batteries are checked regularly would have been visible enough for the driver. Again reflectives, on a road like that would be quite easily picked out by headlights. Nobody deserves it, however if Mr Trotman had paid some attention to his own safety, he'd still be here. A man died for the sake of spending a tenner on some cheap kit, a damned shame.

ANY object on or just off the road would have quite easily have being picked out at sufficient distance by the headlights and thus the driver should have being able to avoid a collision. You know the go at a speed so that you can stop well within the distance you can see to be clear rule.

So, no reflectives required, no hi-vis, in fact as per CTC in the early part of the 1920s you shouldn't even need a rear light, this victim blaming bollocks is getting on my tits and the police are complicit in this yet again.

nappe wrote:

Going by Street view, there are long sections without street lights. If I rode that as part of my commute, I'd be lit up like a Xmas tree. Though even a cheap rear flasher, assuming the batteries are checked regularly would have been visible enough for the driver. Again reflectives, on a road like that would be quite easily picked out by headlights. Nobody deserves it, however if Mr Trotman had paid some attention to his own safety, he'd still be here. A man died for the sake of spending a tenner on some cheap kit, a damned shame.

Surely ANYTHING on that road would have been clearly picked out by headlights. Isn't that the primary function of headlights??

Quote:

Trotman had not been wearing hi-vis clothing when he was hit and investigating officer, Sergeant Richard Moors, appeared to refer to this afterwards.

I find it sad that the very people who we hope will protect and look after, blame the very people they are supposed to protect and look after. 

nappe wrote:

Going by Street view, there are long sections without street lights. If I rode that as part of my commute, I'd be lit up like a Xmas tree. Though even a cheap rear flasher, assuming the batteries are checked regularly would have been visible enough for the driver. Again reflectives, on a road like that would be quite easily picked out by headlights. Nobody deserves it, however if Mr Trotman had paid some attention to his own safety, he'd still be here. A man died for the sake of spending a tenner on some cheap kit, a damned shame.

NO,NO,NO... a man died because he was hit by a  2 ton van which was being driven carelessly.

nappe wrote:

Going by Street view, there are long sections without street lights. If I rode that as part of my commute, I'd be lit up like a Xmas tree. Though even a cheap rear flasher, assuming the batteries are checked regularly would have been visible enough for the driver. Again reflectives, on a road like that would be quite easily picked out by headlights. Nobody deserves it, however if Mr Trotman had paid some attention to his own safety, he'd still be here. A man died for the sake of spending a tenner on some cheap kit, a damned shame.

no mention that the cyclist didn't have lights. No mention he wasn't riding 100% within the Highway Code and law.

and still people like you victim blame. I've seen so many of these cases over the years. Even when they're lit up like a Xmas tree they'll always be an excuse as to why it wasn't the drivers fault regardless of evidence to the contrary. Always people like you blame the cyclist, nothing changes.

nappe wrote:

Going by Street view, there are long sections without street lights. If I rode that as part of my commute, I'd be lit up like a Xmas tree. Though even a cheap rear flasher, assuming the batteries are checked regularly would have been visible enough for the driver. Again reflectives, on a road like that would be quite easily picked out by headlights.

Nobody deserves it, however if Mr Trotman had paid some attention to his own safety, he'd still be here. A man died for the sake of spending a tenner on some cheap kit, a damned shame.

Funny, I manage to see cyclists when in the car, even when theyre not using lights.

As a recumbent rider, I have lights, but reflective clothing is sod-all use cos the seat obstructs it.

The times when I've had drivers pull out on me without looking have been when, viewed from the front, I *have* been lit up like a fecking Christmas tree (Inc when I ve been riding an upright) or its been daytime.

In about 45 yrs of cycling, IME reflectives, bright clothing etc mean sweet FA if they're not paying attention.

nappe wrote:

Going by Street view, there are long sections without street lights. If I rode that as part of my commute, I'd be lit up like a Xmas tree. Though even a cheap rear flasher, assuming the batteries are checked regularly would have been visible enough for the driver. Again reflectives, on a road like that would be quite easily picked out by headlights.

Nobody deserves it, however if Mr Trotman had paid some attention to his own safety, he'd still be here. A man died for the sake of spending a tenner on some cheap kit, a damned shame.

You're wrong. The judge said that driver inattention was the cause of the accident.

What do you know that the judge doesn't, that would lead you to a different conclusion? Answer: Nothing, you just made it up.

nappe wrote:

Going by Street view, there are long sections without street lights. If I rode that as part of my commute, I'd be lit up like a Xmas tree. Though even a cheap rear flasher, assuming the batteries are checked regularly would have been visible enough for the driver. Again reflectives, on a road like that would be quite easily picked out by headlights. Nobody deserves it, however if Mr Trotman had paid some attention to his own safety, he'd still be here. A man died for the sake of spending a tenner on some cheap kit, a damned shame.

this is true, i regularly go drive off the road on to the sidewalk and drive onto trees, buildings, bushes, homeless people. It is damned shame they don't put on reflectors on themselves for their own safety, otherwise i would be liable to see them and not run into them. I can not be expected to see out of my front windows things that are not reflective, what am i? Its not like i was given a license by an authority and mandated to operate a vehicle safely. 

And another thing, they really should mandate that lake or pond water ive driven in too many of them to be my fault.

nappe wrote:

Going by Street view, there are long sections without street lights. If I rode that as part of my commute, I'd be lit up like a Xmas tree. Though even a cheap rear flasher, assuming the batteries are checked regularly would have been visible enough for the driver. Again reflectives, on a road like that would be quite easily picked out by headlights. Nobody deserves it, however if Mr Trotman had paid some attention to his own safety, he'd still be here. A man died for the sake of spending a tenner on some cheap kit, a damned shame.

Yawn. 

nappe wrote:

8.40pm in October, so it'll have been dark.

Oh, OK: i missed that, even looking at the original news story link. Doubt the victim didn't have lights, mind...