LAW THREAD OF BIKES

~~~~this is not a thread to ask for personal legal advice, as none will be given~~~~

so i've been following a discussion of this on another board, and some of yr more aggro fundie bikers are howling for blood, and saying the AG should be getting serious jailtime. i, on the other hand, think that from the picture described by the article, it sounds like the cyclist may have committed assault (just by being drunk and threatening) and that it was reasonable for the AG to want to get away from him, ASAP. should the cyclist have held on? no. should the AG have tried to aggressively shake the cyclist, instead of just slowing down? no. so clearly he's responsible for the cyclist's death, but not in a premeditated way.

here, it looks like this might catch an involuntary vehicular manslaughter charge. in canada, it looks like a culpable homicide charge (according to wikipedia), which is distinct from both manslaughter and murder.

what say you, board lawyers?

also ITT discussions of bike law in the news. NOT from yr personal life, u rube, get a lawyer

an assembleyman hit a biker here a few days ago and isn't being charged with anything (other than running a red light): http://www.dane101.com/current/2009/09/02/cyclist_and_driver_share_blame_in_hamiltonwebster_crash_but

video (not fun to watch) is in the comments.

gbx what are you asking? i think that would be more than involuntary ms but i dunno

imo he should go to jail for a while

i guess i'm not sure what i'm asking?

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/baltimore-city/bal-city-bicyclist-death0821,0,3966912.story

I think the AG might make a successful defence (I'm not a lawyer). But the cyclist was drunk, not wearing a helmet (which is the law in TO I think), and hanging onto the AG's car while he tried to drive away after some kind of argument. Unless I misread the paper yesterday, the cyclist has 61 charges against him in Alberta and had done prison time, though not for assault. Plenty of good material to claim self-defence.

Oh, and eye witnesses say that the cyclist grabbed the wheel of the car as it was driving along.

:-/

i'm confused, he wasn't even on his bike when he grabbed the car, right?

he got "bumped" by the car, threw his bag down on the hood, and came around to the driver's side door and grabbed the hood while, yeah, presumably on foot.

:(

Plenty of good material to claim self-defence.

plenty of ways of "self-defence" without driving recklessly and killing someone

also fwiw the victim's not wearing a helmet and having been to prison mean about 0 for self-defense purposes

it's not like the AG looked up his record and decided he was dangerous before *dragging him behind a car*

I kind of don't see how the AG can avoid jail time here. (Well, I can, but not without some fantastic Cochran-level character assassination of the dead guy.)

Cochrane-level character assassination may not be very difficult to achieve. Driving recklessly while a drunk wrestles the wheel from you hands could be possible to excuse. The car was an open-top so I can see them characterizing the cyclists behaviour as an assault. The cops had already attended to the cyclist shortly before because of drunken behaviour. The AG (who was stone-cold sober) and his wife have, I presume, excellent character witnesses etc whereas what is being reported about they cyclist suggests the opposite.

The prosecuter in the case is going to be Richard Peck, the lead counsel for the defence of the Air India bomber.

I don't know, "I was scared" doesn't seem like a strong enough justification for dragging someone down the street and running them over. Then again, I don't know Canadian law.

Some more information here. This was the dude's third fight of the evening and he had been arrested 45 mins earlier but released without charge.

okay maybe "Cochran-level" was reaching

perhaps "Cousin Vinny-level"

The National Post (Canada's "Other" broadsheet of bullshit) is likening it to The Bonfire of the Vanities which sort of makes sense until you start questioning whether bikes vs. cars in the 00s is as politically charged as NYC race issues in the 80s.

http://velonews.com/article/99475/defense-attorney-cross-examines-cyclists-in-la-road-rage

lol lawyers

On Monday, Swarth finished Stoehr’s cross-examination, with questions largely centered on details of his cycling clothing.

some straight known to be gang-related assos shit, bitches

crips wear rapha

According to Rodriguez, Thompson said, “I just live up the road. I was driving to go to work. The bikers were in front of me, three across. I honked my horn and yelled ‘ride single file.’ The bicyclists flipped me off and yelled back. I passed them up and stopped in front to teach them a lesson. I’m tired of them. I’ve lived here for years and they always ride like this.”

when the shoe is on a different wheel. but then, philly.

don't ride on the pavements.

cyclists on sidewalks make me apoplectic

nearly shoved a guy once (in my imagination, at least), i was so irritated

mpls, fwiw, actually suffers from over-courteous drivers....or drivers who have been sensitized to horrible cyclists, maybe. i can be rolling up to a four-way stop sign and the car that is ~already there~ will wait as i slowly travel half a block, and then wave me through. i was gonna stop, lady! it's ok!

The Annoying Samaritan: "Motorized human that cedes right of way to a cyclist when said right of way should not be ceded. The annoying Samaritan does not please the cyclist, who was fully prepared to wait his turn, but rather annoys other motorized humans who direct their ire at the cyclist."

^^^

^^^^^^^ hate this.

i know most SF cyclists are dicks/douches but this gets TIRESOME.

when this happens, i usually just give a tight smile and a curt wave, and go. otherwise it turns into a cold war of mn manners with ppl waving and dipping their heads, or the driver just gets back on the phone and mutters '...you try to be ~nice~' and shakes their damn head

really wish those proposed "stop signs are yield signs, and red lights are 2-ways" bike laws would actually make it into the books

^ this is the law in Idaho (where I ride somewhat frequently) and it's pretty great and makes a lot of sense. It's the only state in the country with this law, right?

I've never shoved anyone riding by me on the sidewalk but I have blatantly stopped walking and stood in the middle as bikers have approached me, forcing them to try to squeeze around me. Fucking heathens.

I occasionally position myself in such a way when walking to prevent red light jumpers. I'm a passive agressive douchebag.

oh cmon dont do that

shakin my damn head

waht an ahole

yup

http://www.treehugger.com/files/2009/11/man-gets-120-days-shooting-cyclist-head.php

incredible:

http://www.vaildaily.com/article/20101104/NEWS/101109939/1078&ParentProfile=1062

incredible case. incredible impeneterable faux-legalese the story is written in.

http://www.bikeleague.org/blog/2010/11/conn-driver-in-fatal-accident-sues-parents/

uh, REALLY incredible?

lol. he filed this one on his own, right?

http://velonews.competitor.com/2010/12/news/colorado-judge-oks-controversial-plea-deal-in-vail-hit-and-run_153281

bomb vail

pretty astonishing, imo.

chances are good, however, that this will succeed in a civil court, i'd think? at least in a way that will allow dr milo to be loosed of the fetters of the thankless workaday world of anesthesiology in one of america's wealthiest towns

j/k, it's outrageous imo, but mostly to my principles.

Ed OTM.

http://velonews.competitor.com/2010/12/news/the-explainer-thoughts-on-erzinger-and-why-i-wont-boycott-vail_153394

holy shit victims father in law is tom marsico. he could just ruin erzinger and call it even.

actually, the most amazing thing about this whole thing for me is the link to this:

http://www.denverpost.com/recommended/ci_15043329

1) man, this da
2) omfg i dated that girl in the 90s

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/landis-reported-to-have-worn-wire-in-meeting-with-michael-ball

floyds hijinks should be a movie imo

waaaaau @ identity swap story!