Cycling and bicycle discussion forums. 
   Click here to join our community Log in to access your Control Panel  


Go Back   > >

Advocacy & Safety Cyclists should expect and demand safe accommodation on every public road, just as do all other users. Discuss your bicycle advocacy and safety concerns here.

User Tag List

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 10-25-11, 02:54 PM   #1
Don in Austin
Don from Austin Texas
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Austin, Texas
Bikes: Schwinn S25 "department store crap" FS MTB, home-made CF 26" hybrid, CF road bike with straight bar, various wierd frankenbikes
Posts: 1,181
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
In Austin Texas a drunk girl rams pedicab repeatedly -- arrested

http://www.kxan.com/dpp/news/crime/w...t-with-vehicle

This part of Austin is the pits of hell as far as I am concerned -- particularly at 2:00 AM. Kind of like the French Quarter in N. Orleans during Mardi Gras. Good to see the drunken girl did get busted.

Don in Austin
Don in Austin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-11, 03:26 PM   #2
Doohickie 
You gonna eat that?
 
Doohickie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Fort Worth, Texas Church of Hopeful Uncertainty
Bikes: 1966 Raleigh DL-1 Tourist, 1973 Schwinn Varsity, 1983 Raleigh Marathon, 1994 Nishiki Sport XRS
Posts: 14,460
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 43 Post(s)
Underage drunk, no less.
__________________
I stop for people / whose right of way I honor / but not for no one.



Originally Posted by bragi "However, it's never a good idea to overgeneralize."
Doohickie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-11, 03:55 PM   #3
genec
genec
 
genec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: West Coast
Bikes: custom built, sannino, beachbike, giant trance x2
Posts: 24,771
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 456 Post(s)
Yup, but time and time again we see that motorists are being busted not for the abuse of cyclists, but for the abuse of some substance. One has to wonder how this might have gone if alcohol was not involved... your typical "oh it was just an accident." Or worse, "well, that's what you get by mixing bikes and cars... "

Time and time we see that cyclists don't fare well, even though they act like drivers of vehicles.
genec is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-11, 05:17 PM   #4
Don in Austin
Don from Austin Texas
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Austin, Texas
Bikes: Schwinn S25 "department store crap" FS MTB, home-made CF 26" hybrid, CF road bike with straight bar, various wierd frankenbikes
Posts: 1,181
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by genec View Post
Yup, but time and time again we see that motorists are being busted not for the abuse of cyclists, but for the abuse of some substance. One has to wonder how this might have gone if alcohol was not involved... your typical "oh it was just an accident." Or worse, "well, that's what you get by mixing bikes and cars... "

Time and time we see that cyclists don't fare well, even though they act like drivers of vehicles.
This was pretty egregious -- hit the pedicab three times! Hard to call that accidental. That part of town is teaming with drunks -- both in cars and on foot -- @ 2:00 AM. Extreme congestion and nothing moving very fast.

Should be attempted homicide, but we can only be glad for whatever we get.

Don in Austin
Don in Austin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-11, 07:21 PM   #5
mnemia
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Bikes:
Posts: 747
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Agree that this should be attempted murder charges, just like it should be whenever motorists intentionally use their vehicle to hit a cyclist or pedestrian. Using a car or SUV to hit someone is no different from indiscriminately firing a gun at them, in my book. I cannot at all understand why police, prosecutors, and courts disagree in cases where there is clear evidence of intent.
mnemia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-11, 07:35 PM   #6
dynodonn 
Senior Member
 
dynodonn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Bikes:
Posts: 7,326
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 51 Post(s)
Sounds like a case of a spoiled little girl who wasn't getting her way.

Mom and dad will probably be fronting some big bucks on a lawyer in getting their little girl the lightest sentence possible.
dynodonn is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-11, 05:18 AM   #7
joewey
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Bikes:
Posts: 92
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
There seems to be a pretty unhealthy attitude towards cyclists in certain parts of the US.
joewey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-11, 07:37 AM   #8
KD5NRH
Senior Member
 
KD5NRH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Stephenville TX
Bikes:
Posts: 2,538
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 106 Post(s)
Should at least be two counts of aggravated assault and one of AA causing bodily injury; the pedicab operator and the uninjured passenger seem to be getting ignored. Tacking on criminal mischief for any damage to the pedicab itself wouldn't be out of line either.
KD5NRH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-11, 10:28 AM   #9
hotbike
Senior Member
 
hotbike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Long Island, New York
Bikes: a lowrider BMX, a mountain bike, a faired recumbent, and a loaded touring bike
Posts: 2,875
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
This story is one of the most bizarre stories I have read in many months.
hotbike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-11, 12:20 PM   #10
Don in Austin
Don from Austin Texas
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Austin, Texas
Bikes: Schwinn S25 "department store crap" FS MTB, home-made CF 26" hybrid, CF road bike with straight bar, various wierd frankenbikes
Posts: 1,181
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by dynodonn View Post
Sounds like a case of a spoiled little girl who wasn't getting her way.

Mom and dad will probably be fronting some big bucks on a lawyer in getting their little girl the lightest sentence possible.
Exactly! Not going to be easy to put a good spin on her actions in this case, however.

Don in Austin
Don in Austin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-11, 12:36 PM   #11
San Rensho 
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Bikes:
Posts: 5,548
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 19 Post(s)
I love the comment that says "she didn't do anything wrong because she's hot. Hot chicks are allowed to d whatever they want, everyone knows that."
__________________
Il faut de l'audace, encore de l'audace, toujours de l'audace

1980 3Rensho-- 1975 Raleigh Sprite 3spd
1990s Raleigh M20 MTB--2007 Windsor Hour (track)
1988 Ducati 750 F1
San Rensho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-11, 12:52 PM   #12
mnemia
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Bikes:
Posts: 747
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by San Rensho View Post
I love the comment that says "she didn't do anything wrong because she's hot. Hot chicks are allowed to d whatever they want, everyone knows that."
Sad thing is that they might be right, as far as criminal charges and penalties.
mnemia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-11, 03:21 PM   #13
Chris516
24-Speed Machine
 
Chris516's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Wash. Grove, MD
Bikes: 2003 Specialized Allez 24-Speed Road Bike
Posts: 6,054
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Can someone say attempted murder.
Chris516 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-11, 11:43 PM   #14
KD5NRH
Senior Member
 
KD5NRH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Stephenville TX
Bikes:
Posts: 2,538
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 106 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris516 View Post
Can someone say attempted murder.
Same offense class, and aggravated assault/deadly weapon is easier to prove, since you don't need to show intent to kill.
KD5NRH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-11, 01:22 AM   #15
mnemia
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Bikes:
Posts: 747
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by KD5NRH View Post
Same offense class, and aggravated assault/deadly weapon is easier to prove, since you don't need to show intent to kill.
I get that, but how is repeatedly ramming a pedicab with your car not intent to kill? Maybe doing it once could be dismissed as an accident, but the repeated ramming shows that it was intentional. At that point, I don't see how it's much different from using some other weapon like a gun. Could someone repeatedly shoot at someone and then say that they didn't mean for them to die? If not, then why can they get away with that using an SUV as the murder weapon? Are we supposed to believe that people view intentionally hitting someone with their car as unlikely to kill or seriously harm them, or that it's no big deal to use your car as an extension of your fists just because you're frustrated or angry? If that's a widespread view, then society needs to reevaluate its assumptions.

I'm not questioning the legal judgement, but I have to wonder WHY it's so hard to establish intent in these cases. It seems like a problem of erroneous popular assumptions to me.
mnemia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-11, 07:58 AM   #16
dynodonn 
Senior Member
 
dynodonn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Bikes:
Posts: 7,326
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 51 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Don in Austin View Post
Not going to be easy to put a good spin on her actions in this case, however.
No it wont be, but I'm sure that mom and dad will make sure that they will get the best spin for their buck.

Last edited by dynodonn; 10-27-11 at 08:39 AM.
dynodonn is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-11, 08:39 AM   #17
ItsJustMe
Seņior Member
 
ItsJustMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Michigan
Bikes: Windsor Fens, Giant Seek 0 (2014, Alfine 8 + discs)
Posts: 13,119
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 81 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by mnemia View Post
I get that, but how is repeatedly ramming a pedicab with your car not intent to kill?
By simply applying sufficient stupid. "I didn't want to kill him, I wanted to get him to move." She just didn't CARE if he died. Not the same as intending to kill. Prosecutors have to be very careful to only ask for what they know they can prove.
__________________
Work: the 8 hours that separates bike rides.
ItsJustMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-11, 09:18 AM   #18
KD5NRH
Senior Member
 
KD5NRH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Stephenville TX
Bikes:
Posts: 2,538
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 106 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by ItsJustMe View Post
By simply applying sufficient stupid. "I didn't want to kill him, I wanted to get him to move." She just didn't CARE if he died. Not the same as intending to kill. Prosecutors have to be very careful to only ask for what they know they can prove.
Actually, in TX, if you actually do kill someone while attempting to only cause serious bodily injury, that's enough to convict for murder. Attempted (unsuccessful) murder does require intent, though.
KD5NRH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-11, 09:26 AM   #19
himespau 
Senior Member
 
himespau's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Louisville, KY
Bikes:
Posts: 9,580
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 113 Post(s)
What's that about them getting hit with ice cream right before the attack?
himespau is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-11, 09:46 AM   #20
genec
genec
 
genec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: West Coast
Bikes: custom built, sannino, beachbike, giant trance x2
Posts: 24,771
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 456 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by mnemia View Post
I get that, but how is repeatedly ramming a pedicab with your car not intent to kill? Maybe doing it once could be dismissed as an accident, but the repeated ramming shows that it was intentional. At that point, I don't see how it's much different from using some other weapon like a gun. Could someone repeatedly shoot at someone and then say that they didn't mean for them to die? If not, then why can they get away with that using an SUV as the murder weapon? Are we supposed to believe that people view intentionally hitting someone with their car as unlikely to kill or seriously harm them, or that it's no big deal to use your car as an extension of your fists just because you're frustrated or angry? If that's a widespread view, then society needs to reevaluate its assumptions.

I'm not questioning the legal judgement, but I have to wonder WHY it's so hard to establish intent in these cases. It seems like a problem of erroneous popular assumptions to me.
Imagine trying to find a balanced jury for such a case...
genec is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-11, 10:29 AM   #21
Keith99
Senior Member
 
Keith99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Bikes:
Posts: 5,866
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by mnemia View Post
I get that, but how is repeatedly ramming a pedicab with your car not intent to kill? Maybe doing it once could be dismissed as an accident, but the repeated ramming shows that it was intentional. At that point, I don't see how it's much different from using some other weapon like a gun. Could someone repeatedly shoot at someone and then say that they didn't mean for them to die? If not, then why can they get away with that using an SUV as the murder weapon? Are we supposed to believe that people view intentionally hitting someone with their car as unlikely to kill or seriously harm them, or that it's no big deal to use your car as an extension of your fists just because you're frustrated or angry? If that's a widespread view, then society needs to reevaluate its assumptions.

I'm not questioning the legal judgement, but I have to wonder WHY it's so hard to establish intent in these cases. It seems like a problem of erroneous popular assumptions to me.
Let's see, because all but the last were taps? If I punch yuo and kick you in the cajones it does not show intent to kill. Intent to injure yes, not to kill.

Nothing in the story shows intent to kill. Plenty to add Reckles endangerment and a few more things.

Her best chance of getting off is to have attempted murder charges files and a good defense lawyer playing the jury with a theme of her being persecuted.
Keith99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-11, 10:43 AM   #22
dougmc
Senior Member
 
dougmc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Austin, TX
Bikes: Giant OCR2, Bridgestone RB-T, Bike-E, Vision R-40, Novara Safari
Posts: 3,029
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by joewey View Post
There seems to be a pretty unhealthy attitude towards cyclists in certain parts of the US.
Perhaps, but Austin isn't really such a place. We've got a lot of cyclists here (about double the national average that I can tell) and lots of advocacy going on, and for the most part, motorists treat cyclists appropriately -- it may or may not be "respect", but they yield when they have to (and often when they don't), don't run cyclists over, etc.

Of course, there's exceptions, but I don't think Austin has more of them than other places.
dougmc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-11, 11:24 AM   #23
Don in Austin
Don from Austin Texas
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Austin, Texas
Bikes: Schwinn S25 "department store crap" FS MTB, home-made CF 26" hybrid, CF road bike with straight bar, various wierd frankenbikes
Posts: 1,181
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by dougmc View Post
Perhaps, but Austin isn't really such a place. We've got a lot of cyclists here (about double the national average that I can tell) and lots of advocacy going on, and for the most part, motorists treat cyclists appropriately -- it may or may not be "respect", but they yield when they have to (and often when they don't), don't run cyclists over, etc.

Of course, there's exceptions, but I don't think Austin has more of them than other places.
Hi Doug...

I hesitated even doing the original post, but figured if I didn't someone else would, so why not be first? I'm not sure that what was going on this loser girl's "mind" at the time really had much to do with cyclists. More a general drunken rage. And we don't know if she had a grudge on the passengers in the pedicab or what was the catalyst for the whole thing. What transpired earlier is not very clear or whether or not it involved the owner or occupants of the pedicab.
Of course, when someone is as wasted as she appears to have been, you can't expect anything to make sense.

And yes, Doug, I agree the vast majority of motorists in this town do not want to injure a cyclist. I see a much greater problem with ignorance -- cyclists and motorists equally -- than malice.

Don in Austin
Don in Austin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-11, 11:35 AM   #24
ItsJustMe
Seņior Member
 
ItsJustMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Michigan
Bikes: Windsor Fens, Giant Seek 0 (2014, Alfine 8 + discs)
Posts: 13,119
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 81 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by KD5NRH View Post
Actually, in TX, if you actually do kill someone while attempting to only cause serious bodily injury, that's enough to convict for murder. Attempted (unsuccessful) murder does require intent, though.
I don't think you could even prove intent to cause serious bodily injury here though. She can just say "I wanted him to get out of the way."
__________________
Work: the 8 hours that separates bike rides.
ItsJustMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-11, 12:18 PM   #25
mnemia
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Bikes:
Posts: 747
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by ItsJustMe View Post
By simply applying sufficient stupid. "I didn't want to kill him, I wanted to get him to move." She just didn't CARE if he died. Not the same as intending to kill. Prosecutors have to be very careful to only ask for what they know they can prove.
Right, I understand this, and I agree that given normal assumptions about how a jury would be likely to view the case, it doesn't make strategic sense to go for the greater charge. However, again, I have to ask how this is different from firing a gun at someone who pisses you off in traffic? In the case of the gun, couldn't the person argue the same thing ("I didn't want to kill him; I just wanted to get him to move.")? At some point, we do have to assume that the person likely DID want to kill them, and I think it's somewhat subjective where we draw that line. Most people would probably agree that someone firing a gun at someone is intent to kill, but what I'm saying is that I think that there isn't really a big difference between that and intentionally hitting someone with your SUV. Both are deadly weapons, and both are intentional acts that are meant to seriously harm someone. You could argue in either case that there is no intent to kill, but that argument sounds silly to me. But I recognize that my opinion on this is probably outside the mainstream, since most of the population believes that traffic collisions caused by negligence are mere "accidents" that "could happen to anyone" and that they are some unavoidable fact of life. I disagree, especially when we're talking about an intentional collision with someone in a far more vulnerable position.
mnemia is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:38 PM.