EXACTLY! Motorist always assume cyclists are slow... and then take actions based on that assumption.

I don't know about you, but my bike computer is very well calibrated, and has been compared to GPS devices over 25 mile distances with no perceivable difference. When I claim I am doing 25MPH or averaging 18MPH... that is exactly what I am doing. :D

Are you unfamiliar with the story? From the quoted link...

Cyclist Christian Stoehr hit the back of Thompson's Infiniti sedan and went over the top into the other lane. His injuries included a grade-3 shoulder separation and road rash. Ron Peterson went through the rear window; the impact broke his nose, nearly severing it, and shattered several of his teeth. More than 90 stitches were required to reattach his nose.

[QUOTE=genec;9928744]snip... Plus it shows that the driver had no patience for even full law abiding cyclists.

snip.QUOTE]

I like that point, especially in a civil suit, which I pray the file after this case, but my point stands that the cyclist aren't on trial and the only thing that matters is what this nutcase did to them, how he did it, why, and any relevant history of his nutsoness.

You are right. The cyclists are NOT on trial... except in the mind of every other nutcase out there.

See the problem is that far too many motorists are ready to condemn the cyclists for:

a) being on the road
b) being too slow
c) harassing the driver
d) being aggressive
e) wearing lycra
f) not driving like everyone else
g) not paying gas tax
h) et. al.

Only technically true, the defense will try everything possible to put the cyclist on trial. Showing that the cyclist are completely innocent, goes a long ways to proving the doctor is completely guilty.

Morally yes, I don't know if the Hippocratic Oath has any legal obligation to offer aide. If it doesn't in most states the "Good Samaritan" laws should protect him. Put he doesn't seem like the type of doctor I'd want to have work on me.

And I'm sure to the dismay of a lot of motorists I've been able to reach 30MPH's on straight/flat roads.

I've been on juries and seen the judge continually tell the lawyers to get to the point, as the judge is focused on the law and the charges against the perp. I don't believe the cyclists will get any opportunity to show they are "completely innocent."

Yeah, I read that in the initial 911 call and have been wondering if that's come up, or if the DA is waiting to see if his lawyer puts him on the stand to ask him that on cross.

Not in his mind, they didn't.

"First do no harm" is the first rule of medicine. Usually seen in Latin.

When he eventually looses the case, I'm sure that he'll file an endless string of appeals.

Hello I heard about this both on here and a show on NPR. I think this shows just how awful we Americans have become. no one has any respect or patience for one another. I am not condoning what the doctor did I just think that way to many of us have a self important attitude these days.

OH and I can't imagine what the 'the good Doctor" would do if this was him.


OH I feel the Dr should loose his license for a year (both driving and medical) and be forced to walk or bike everywhere

[QUOTE=thdave;9928828]And given the statements that he made to the 911 operator, and to the cop I think that he's done a pretty good job of that.

Maybe his lawyer should have gone with the diminished capacity defense. Of course that might impact his ability to keep his doctor's license. Or run a medical records business.

Goofy. Asault with a deadly weapon, and you want the guy to "be forced to walk and bike?" He's going to spend several years in jail, if convicted. Not sure what planet you're on, but this is a very serious charge with serious jail time.

I feel that we are not nearly strict enough with removing the driving privilege from drivers who have shown that they are not capable of driving without endangering the lives of others on the road. I feel that drivers who cause injury in crashes such as this, or who commit reckless acts such as driving while under the influence should not be tolerated. If I were a judge, I would be much more prone to taking away the right to drive for life from someone who causes injury through negligence. If I were feeling particularly lenient in a case like this, I might consider giving the Dr back his license to drive once there are no visible scars left on either of his victims.

As for his medical license, how much injury should a Dr be allowed to inflict while being allowed to retain a license to act as a healer? Assuming he intentionally committed an act which resulted in injury to others, he should never be allowed to practice medicine. How many times do we allow a school teacher to molest a child before we take away their right to teach children?

If he does need transportation; give him a fixed geared bike.


Doesn't CA have a statute that covers "failer to render aid"?

Most states wouldn't require a passive observer to assist but since he was actively involved I am not sure how he could "excuse" himself from aiding. If he identified himself as a DR to the 911 operator and claimed that there were no injuries that certainly wouldn't help with the medical review board.

I really doubt he will serve any time.

Most likely he will be fined and wrist slapped.

But I doubt he will actually spend any time in jail for this.

In spite of our horror over this, nobody died.

Now perhaps in the civil suit he may end up paying quite a bit of pain and suffering for the cyclist that "lost his nose."

But in the end, I doubt there will be anything more than fines levied. Perhaps probation. (I am not sure that "probation" is the right term for what I mean, which is a jail sentence granted, but not served, but held over the guilty party should they ever do something like this again) (damn brain farts)

The cyclists didn't want him treating them. Another doctor happened across the incident and rendered aid to the cyclists.

Yep, we need to be stricter with drivers. And let 'em see that there are indeed consequences to their actions. As well as reminding drivers that driving is a privilege, and not a right. Which it appears is something that this "good" doctor has forgotten.

And make sure that it's one with a low gear ratio.

One would think that that would/should help with the medical review board. And given his callousness he should have both licenses revoked.

I think you're looking for suspended sentence.

I cannot agree with you more, sauerwald; the only problem with OUR belief is the reality of it.

Yes, take away licenses; how do you stop them from just saying, "F it, I'm driving anyway"? The confiscation/required sale of the vehicle would have to be included, and presentation of a VALID AND VERIFIABLE driver's license also required for the purchase of a vehicle, whether private or through a dealer. Good luck on the apparatus for that. It's just not there, or likely to develop any time soon.

There is no way, in our 'enlightened, progressive society', to police people already punished for what amounts to a pattern of misconduct. While it WOULD nearly eliminate the unemployment problem (putting all the job-seekers to work in this aforementioned monitoring apparatus), where's the money for it coming from? About the only way to pay for that much government would be for the government to stop the war ON drugs, and fight a war FOR drugs, basically taking over the trade! I jest, but.....

Dangerous drivers should be forbidden from driving.
Child molesters should be kept away from children.
Habitual violent criminals should be kept away from society.

Let's just figure out how to make that happen. Obviously, more prisons don't work; there's pretty much a 'waiting list' to get into them!

I can't say that I blame them. I don't think that I'd want him treating me either.

Wasn't sure. Thanks.

Perhaps I am just naive but we require proof of insurance before purchasing/registering a car in many states. I think that if you were caught driving with no license or a suspended license and the car you were driving were confiscated, with the proceeds of the auction going to the police department, it would make it nearly impossible for someone without a license to purchase a car, or to borrow one from family or friends.

Your welcome.