Red light jumping cyclist convicted of careless cycling causing brain damage to pedestrian

Where does this hive-mind theory come from?

It pops up, not only when people wish to rant about cyclists, but also in discussions on immigration, sex/gender and age. Its a pretty sad indictment of society that we cannot see the bigger picture, that we're prone to these mad stabs in the dark.

Whilst repetition does not make truth - I think every cyclist who has ever ridden in traffic needs to make a stand - in person or in epistolary means. I suggest spamming the inbox of the Daily Mail - letters [at] dailymail.co.uk - and tell them:

- "I am no law breaker"
- "I have no respect for those that do"
- Stephen Glover glosses over the fact that killer driver very, very rarely get prison
- Glover glosses over the fact that the law is different between motoring and cycling because of the risks posed (at the same speed of 15mph a car can do far, far more damage - simply physics)
- Glover also falls prey to confirmation bias with regards the numbers he sees

- tell the Daily Mail that the comments left on the website, often in their letters and articles - make you feel for your safety. That such a population is out there, that is so vehemently against you simply riding, and so angered by our mere presence.

- tell the Daily Mail about the experiences you've had, despite following the rules.

At the very least it will tie up their inbox for a short time.

This is a sad story on both sides. Sorry to hear the extent of the pedestrian injuries. And the cyclist was wrong to jump a light – fellow cyclists please stop doing this, a case in point that you tar the rest of us with same brush.

However the comment about lycra wearing cyclists is so far off the mark. Thats like me saying negative against all drivers because a few jump zebra crossing outside my local school as people step into the road. Can we all except that there are bad drivers just like there are bad cyclists, and just all raise your game as someone else's live is on the end of our wrong decisions on both sides.

The only "6 lane junction" on Holborn Viaduct I know of is the circus and you have to go quite a bit out of your way to get to any pedestrian crossings to go round. It's bloody busy there at times and it's impossible to know for sure which road has a green light and which has a red to enter the roundabout, let alone see clearly where the traffic is coming from. It's one thing crossing at a red traffic light knowing nothing is coming and quite another when it's a multi-phased lighted junction with limited visibility. Personally I think if you try and sneak a shortcut across there you are taking your life into your own hands.

None of this is in defence of the cyclist who flouted the law, I just think it strange that it's somehow ok to step into the road like that.

If I step out onto the A406 and a car doing the usual 55mph when it's a 40 zone is unable to brake within the braking distance and hits me, who is most to blame? I thought he was doing 40 and could have got across in time if that were the case, but no.

I'm all for punishing those who jump red lights or other similar wrecklesness but I'm not so into the idea of obeying the rules so that others don't have to. Everyone needs to take responsibility of themselves.

What I don't understand is how the cyclist had time to shout out "Oi move" but not have time to avoid hitting the pedestrian, so he was aware of the poor victim but still hit him?

26mph not a bad sort of speed I wonder if he was on a carbon bike,
.............. Seriously tho a bike is a weapon at any speed we need to be carefull.

The guy was a dick and deserved more, but given you can kill a cyclist and get a £200 fine, the daily mail rantings are wildly out of touch with our warped criminal justice system!

I don't know exactly where on the road he stepped out, all the information that given is "Holborn Viaduct". Could be the middle of the road, could be under the lights, could be at a multiple entry crossroads with bad visibility, could be Holborn Circus where there's 6 or 7 roads meeting up and no crossings. Do you know the exact location? I'm not trying to excuse this guys actions either by the way, he's clearly guilty, just trying to give some balance and say that everyone needs to be on the lookout and not make bad decisions.

While the whole incident is unfortunate for everyone involved, there's also the fact that this guy stepped out into the Holborn Viaduct and not at a crossing. Had the light been green and his injuries were the same, the whole argument would be completely different. Had a car been travelling at 30mph and killed him that's a drivers life affected, I don't know how I'd cope with that kind of trauma. I do t like red light jumpers and I also don't like people stepping into the road without proper care. With a bit more attention from both parties this could have all been avoided.

I'm not convinced that a cycling test or licence is the right way to go about things, it goes against the right to use the public highway on foot or by self propelled mechanisms like bicycles. As soon as we start licensing cyclists it gives more weight to these nonsense "road tax" claims from those who do use the roads under licence in their motor vehicles and think cyclist should contribute, for some reason, to Vehicle Excise Duty.

Surely provenance, occupation, age or indeed any other material condition of the cyclist is not a factor in the application of law.

He ran the light, he hurt someone badly, of course he should be charged, there's no wiggle room on it. All vehicles and their drivers have accountability and responsibility, this guy is discovering that. He caused the victim *brain damage* not a graze.

It's not us guys, it's those guys over there. Yeah right. It comes down to ME at a moment of decision, knowing the law and making the choice.

And again we're back to the point of grouping disparate people together. 'Cyclists' don't have control over one another in any more meaningful sense than 'drivers' have control over one another. If an idiot decides to jump a red light, I can't stop him (much as I might like to try) - whether he's on a bike, motorbike or in a car. But I get lumped in with him just because I look vaguely similar on the road.

I actually wouldn't have an issue with the same penalties being applied to dangerous cycling as to dangerous driving - provided, of course, that the sentencing reflected the impact of the offence and also provided that the law was enforced consistently across all road users.

I am a keen road cyclist so I don't want to come across as hating cyclists, far from it, it is a passion of mine but the amount of so called cyclists (so called as in my opinion they are not cyclists just idiots on bikes) I see jumping red lights and going back and forth from pavement to road without looking is appalling!

I was nearly hit by a 2 men on cycles yesturday when going to cross the road, at a junction for whereby it was green man for me to cross, then a few yards down the road , they were on the pavement, weaving through a busy city centre pavement!! This is not on at all and something needs to be in place so people like this will be fined, this I think would start to put people off doing it, also you should have to pass a simple cycling test to be allowed on the road, it should be relatively cheap and last as long as the driving licence.

It really annoys me and readin this gets to me even more as it gives fuel to people's arguments who already hate cyclists. I, and many other law abiding cyclists, do not need this, I have already been hit twice by cars (both times not my fault and one was a hit and run incident) so do not need these idiots on bikes jumping red lights encouraging drivers to dislike cyclists!!

Who's this stain on humanity Glover, and who made him an authority? I can categorically state that Lycra clad roadies are the least likely to be caught hopping a red light, it's the fair weather/BSO riding/Barclays bike folk that meander through the stop signs due to a lack of road sense. Funilly enough these are also the ones who come over all Stephen Glover frothy mouthed when you ask them what they're playing at. I've long given up caring about these people, one less idiot to undertake me when they get taken out by a lorry.

The widows comments, while obviously driven by the circumstances, are still bang out of order. Riders should just be killed left right and centre until the minority obey the law? There's a reckless minority in every pastime and reckless drivers cause significantly more damage than cyclists. What would happen if the government said that they're not protecting pedestrians until they stop crossing roads where there isn't a pedestrian crossing?

Why even quote the daily hate in this article? Or in fact ever? Is it just in the name of balance because they represent the polar opposite to reason and objectivity?
The single positive for the mails existence is that it acts like flypaper for frothy mouthed loons that would otherwise trouble the rest of the internet with their twattery, no need to encourage anyone else to visit.

on topic - I have every sympathy for the victim but this is only a news story because it's such a rare occurence. I'd be curious to see how many pedestrians are killed or injured by pedestrians annually.

He may be sued, but if he has no third party insurance and few assets, then the victim, given the case is proved, will have a job to recover anything. A fact that from the victim's point of view is sad but true.
The comments by the victim's wife are understandable, as reported, but not entirely helpful, depending on how you read them.
So far as comments in some of the odder newspapers, just read the headline on any day and then figure out how daft they can make themselves.
The essence of the speed comment was poor, to qualify it with something like "inappropriate for the situation" would be better. We all know that speed is not of itself dnagerous, it's inappropriate speed - and use of it by ANY vehicle driver/rider - that is the issue.
Sadly a feed by the judge to the sillier media.

Stephen Glover, I've never hit a pedestrian yet but I'll watch out for you on the streets of London - and accelerate when I see you

Careless drivers are so common that they don't make the news alas. But it does seem that this cyclist was carelese. He will get sued and can expect a very large claim against him. I'm not very sympathetic to him. Despite what he claims, CCTV evidence did apparently suggest he had jumped the red light.

I thinks that's probably close to the maximum fine that could be imposed, and I'm sure that Mr Schipka will be sued by his victim in pretty short order.

£2000 fine for causing life changing injuries? After shouting "oi move"? Thats pathetic.....