Advocacy & Safety - Download a ringtone + kill a cyclist =improper lane usage + unsupervised probation

Un-freaking believable. This kid had already worked up quite a record before killing a guy on the shoulder with the drivers side of her car.... DA calls it "improper lane usage". She gets slightly less than a slap on the wrist.

http://www.news-gazette.com/news/local/2006/11/30/woman_is_sentenced_for_bicyclists_death

It's funny how easily people are willing to take full responsibility for their actions when that responsibility doesn't have any consequences.

I'd like to comment but gentlemanly standards appropriate with polite society prevent me.

Richard

Someone should put a hit on Jennifer Stark of Urbana.

Eye for an Eye.

I'd like to comment but gentlemanly standards appropriate with polite society prevent me
+1 What is justice?

Stark hit him with her car because she was downloading ring tones to her cell phone instead of paying attention to driving.

Inattentive driver. The worst kind. This and other similar cases are why I say that the inattentive driver is the most dangerous situation for us out there now.

Motorists that don't think we should be on the road and those that hassle us at least see us and generally avoid us.

These inattentive drivers are not even looking... there is nothing a cyclist could do to prevent one of these texting/downloading/chatting drivers from hitting us... no matter of "Powerweaving" or even the brightest lighting could have prevented this.

Un-freaking believable. This kid had already worked up quite a record before killing a guy on the shoulder with the drivers side of her car.... DA calls it "improper lane usage". She gets slightly less than a slap on the wrist.

http://www.news-gazette.com/news/local/2006/11/30/woman_is_sentenced_for_bicyclists_death


Come on folks...do you HONESTLY expect people to be outraged that someone who had 'already worked up quite a record iwas still free and able to kill someone? We release ******* early (our new Massachusetts governor writes them letters of apology), and parole murderers, and I am supposed to get worked up over a lady with a bad driving record?

One reason why I believe that bicycles were, are, and always will be, secondary road users is simply because of stories like this. If you had been in a cage (i'll use the term, ironically) you would have shielded much better from this kind of impact.

roughstuff

http://azbikelaw.org/carlaw/homicide.html

http://azbikelaw.org/carlaw/homicide.html

Seems like this:
Negligent Homicide, Felony class 4, Criminal Negligence

" 'Criminal negligence' means... that a person fails to perceive a substantial and unjustifiable risk...

should apply to cases like this where someone fails to perceive the risk of downloading or texting or attending to other distractions while in the operation of a motor vehicle.

Come on folks...do you HONESTLY expect people to be outraged that someone who had 'already worked up quite a record iwas still free and able to kill someone? We release ******* early (our new Massachusetts governor writes them letters of apology), and parole murderers, and I am supposed to get worked up over a lady with a bad driving record?


roughstuff

Not at all, only that her driving record, short and full of charges, obviously wasn't considered in her sentencing. She'd been officially warned & sanctioned by the state via her previous tickets, fair warning that her behaviour was dangerous, but she dismissed these warnings and it killed a man. the point is not that she was free to do it, but that she shouldn't be free now, for many reasons, including the fact that she was warned.

While the family who lost a loved one undoubtedly should proceed as they see fit, I would be highly tempted to sue the driver. Not to keep any money, of course, but rather to ensure that a substantial penalty was paid. The money could go to charity. Perhaps there ought to be a national fund to help dependents of those cyclists killed in auto accidents.

http://www.news-gazette.com/news/local/2006/09/24/hope_resolve_live_on_after_sons_biking_death

Read this, she did this & didn't have the decency to pay society back in the only manner acceptable. The State Troopers words are particularly noteworthy.

This is not going to make me popular, but here goes: According to the first article, the cyclist was "way off to the side of the road". I think it's possible that if he had been nearer the lane, Ms. Stark may have seen him in time. I'm not saying for sure, but maybe.

I'm in no way placing any blame on Mr. Wilhelm, it obviously is squarely on the driver's shoulders. It's good that Mr. Wilhelm was wearing a helmet (even though it wasn't enough in this case), and that he always wore bright colors. I'm just suggesting that the better visibility enabled by being nearer to the car lane may, more often than not, result in greater total safety even though you are closer to the car traffic. You could say the visibility leads to a greater margin for error in terms of time, even though it is decreased in terms of space. Obviously, every case is different, and there's no way to know for sure if that would have been the case here.

Condolences to the Wilhelm family.

he was on a highway, not a road, & she saw nothing, not even where she was in relation to every other object in her windscreen LOS, because her LOS was her palm & device.

I think the discussion is related more to regulatory matters, crime & punishment, equality etc, but if you want to make it a discussion of highway lane position I'll be there to laugh at you.

This is not going to make me popular,
Your are right with this statement, but more than likely wrong with the other guesses.
Driver was not only out of lane and in shoulder, but going off road practically. It was the drivers side of vehicle that hit.
I don't thik the driver was looking at the road at all.
Al

This is not going to make me popular, but here goes: According to the first article, the cyclist was "way off to the side of the road". I think it's possible that if he had been nearer the lane, Ms. Stark may have seen him in time. I'm not saying for sure, but maybe.


When I read that line I had assumed he moved over because there was a car going off-road in his direction... She was so involved with her cell phone that she managed to hit him with her drivers side door! Just think about it, she didn't just go off road a little bit with her two right side tires and hit a bicyclist riding on the shoulder, she got her whole car off the road then swung back around to hit him with the left side of her car. That is seriously messed up! If he was reportedly "way off to the side of the road" and she still hit him with the left side of her car then that was a seriously wide shoulder or he had been forced to ride to the right of the shoulder.

This is not going to make me popular, but here goes: According to the first article, the cyclist was "way off to the side of the road". I think it's possible that if he had been nearer the lane, Ms. Stark may have seen him in time. I'm not saying for sure, but maybe.

I'm in no way placing any blame on Mr. Wilhelm, it obviously is squarely on the driver's shoulders.
Yeah sure. Who needs HH when a similar I'm not blaming the cyclist but... expert is available to offer wingy speculation casting blame/fault on the victim?

I did state that my speculation may not apply to this case specifically (see last sentence), I merely wished to raise the issue. I don't know what definition of "highway" versus "road" SamHouston is using, but looking back at the article, it says "Illinois 130", which I took to mean a state road. I take "highway" to mean an Interstate or other limited access road. But, I did not GoogleMap the location, so I could be wrong.

I did not take into account that the cyclist may have deliberately been taking evasive action, in which case, never mind. But I believe that in the general case, my comments still apply.

ILTB, I'm not going to engage in an "are too/are not" argument. Possible contributing factor <> Blame. If you disagree, okay, let's agree to disagree and end it there, please.

ILTB, I'm not going to engage in an "are too/are not" argument. Possible contributing factor <> Blame. If you disagree, okay, let's agree to disagree and end it there, please.
I took the comment from the state trooper as genuine:

They were able to talk to Tom Lillard, the state trooper who handled the collision.

"He said, 'Your son did everything right. He did nothing wrong.' Those were his exact words," Gloria said.

I really don't think there can even be an argument here. I mean, unless you just decide to start one that doesn't relate to the issue at hand. The cyclist could have been a 50 storey office building and still have been hit; the girl literally drove right off the road because she wasn't looking -- visibility and positioning is a non-issue here.

This is not going to make me popular, but here goes: According to the first article, the cyclist was "way off to the side of the road". I think it's possible that if he had been nearer the lane, Ms. Stark may have seen him in time. I'm not saying for sure, but maybe.

I'm in no way placing any blame on Mr. Wilhelm, it obviously is squarely on the driver's shoulders. It's good that Mr. Wilhelm was wearing a helmet (even though it wasn't enough in this case), and that he always wore bright colors. I'm just suggesting that the better visibility enabled by being nearer to the car lane may, more often than not, result in greater total safety even though you are closer to the car traffic. You could say the visibility leads to a greater margin for error in terms of time, even though it is decreased in terms of space. Obviously, every case is different, and there's no way to know for sure if that would have been the case here.

Condolences to the Wilhelm family.


Well since the cyclist WAS at some point right in front of the totally inattentive driver, I doubt that if the cyclist was in front of her 300 yards away it would have made any difference what so ever. This girl ran all the way off the road (so even the road did not matter to her) and then hit the cyclist on the driver's side.

Just goes to show that some motorists can be so inattentive beyond the means that any mere cyclist can draw attention to, through simple lane positioning.

I know HH and others believe that lane positioning is the answer to all our problems... but all matter of "grabbing attention" methodology still depends on someone actually looking out their window... down the road.

If a motorist has their head stuck in a cell phone, PDA, GPS, Game, DVD player, etc... then you could be a 600 lb purple gorilla, dancing on the road, and still be invisible to the motorist.

As long as motorists chose to allow themselves to be distracted by whatever, and the legal system silently condons this through their lack of proper action, AND the auto industry encourages this by adding more distractions... then no one is safe without a "full metal jacket."

Lane positioning is not about staying in lane as vehicle approaches from behind in lane. It is about staying in lane and observing approaching vehicle's driver reaction and responding accordingly. Also in-lane positioning only applies if there are significant gaps between vehicles.

Al

Well since the cyclist WAS at some point right in front of the totally inattentive driver, I doubt that if the cyclist was in front of her 300 yards away it would have made any difference what so ever. This girl ran all the way off the road (so even the road did not matter to her) and then hit the cyclist on the driver's side.

Just goes to show that some motorists can be so inattentive beyond the means that any mere cyclist can draw attention to, through simple lane positioning.

I know HH and others believe that lane positioning is the answer to all our problems... but all matter of "grabbing attention" methodology still depends on someone actually looking out their window... down the road.

If a motorist has their head stuck in a cell phone, PDA, GPS, Game, DVD player, etc... then you could be a 600 lb purple gorilla, dancing on the road, and still be invisible to the motorist.

As long as motorists chose to allow themselves to be distracted by whatever, and the legal system silently condons this through their lack of proper action, AND the auto industry encourages this by adding more distractions... then no one is safe without a "full metal jacket."

If you look at the picture of the road in the second link where they show the memorial, the shoulder itself is not very wide. The car did not have to drift very far before it would be pointed right at a cyclist riding on the edge of the shoulder (unless he was riding in the gravel but that seems unlikely). The point is that it would only take a few seconds of inattention to drift less than a lane's width to the right. This girl obviously paid enough attention to the road to be able to drive down it as far as she did without going off into the ditch on the side of the road. She was paying an adequate (until she came upon the cyclist) amount of attention to the road ahead of her. Since the cyclist off to the side was not part of the road ahead of her, he easily was ignored. The cyclist is not to blame for the collision because he was riding in the shoulder but it should seem pretty likely that he would have been noticed if he was riding in the driver's intended path.

To say that he was in front of the car right before he got hit and still was not noticed is missing the point. I hope you were joking with that statement.

Lane positioning is not about staying in lane as vehicle approaches from behind in lane. It is about staying in lane and observing approaching vehicle's driver reaction and responding accordingly. Also in-lane positioning only applies if there are significant gaps between vehicles.

Al

Yeah, so what happens when vehicle pursues cyclist outside of the lane?

Dynamic lane positioning is intended to "alert" a motorist that there is something they need to pay attention to... but that "alert" is limited to and based upon someone actually looking down the road. If the motorist is on "autopilot" and fixated or worse, such as this case and the texting case, NOT even looking... then dynamic lane postion buys you nothing.

I am not against the principle of dynamic lane positioning at all... I use it when and where it might work, but it depends on motorists actually looking and having control of their vehicle... not playing with some mickymouse toy when they should be responsible for controlling their 3000 pound "missle."

Distractions within autos have increased dramatically in recent years due to the increased use of complex portable electronic devices behind the wheel... the motorist using such devices may as well be driving with their eyes closed.

Dynamic postitioning, in front of a driver who has their eyes closed, is a useless activity. Now perhaps the cyclist, while looking back, may have noticed the auto was out of control... But that is just speculation.

To say that he was in front of the car right before he got hit and still was not noticed is missing the point. I hope you were joking with that statement.

I was being sarcastic, but my point is, she DID run off the road, so even the road wasn't "important" enough to her... much less a "mere" cyclist... but even more important, the prosecutor did not feel her actions were "off base."

Yeah, so what happens when vehicle pursues cyclist outside of the lane?

Dynamic lane positioning is intended to "alert" a motorist that there is something they need to pay attention to... but that "alert" is limited to and based upon someone actually looking down the road. If the motorist is on "autopilot" and fixated or worse, such as this case and the texting case, NOT even looking... then dynamic lane postion buys you nothing.

I am not against the principle of dynamic lane positioning at all... I use it when and where it might work, but it depends on motorists actually looking and having control of their vehicle... not playing with some mickymouse toy when they should be responsible for controlling their 3000 pound "missle."

Distractions within autos have increased dramatically in recent years due to the increased use of complex portable electronic devices behind the wheel... the motorist using such devices may as well be driving with their eyes closed.

Dynamic postitioning, in front of a driver who has their eyes closed, is a useless activity. Now perhaps the cyclist, while looking back, may have noticed the auto was out of control... But that is just speculation.
Right. If dynamically positioned in lane and noting no driver response (one or more of: slowing, turn signal, moving left biased in lane, honking) then one can only assume you are not seen at all. That is information to respond to and depending how far back vehicle is and relative speeds response can vary from doing something to get attention (swerving, hand signals) or take or begin to take evasive action of variying degrees of magnitude ranging from moving a bit right to ditching road completely in a controlled crash.
Given that driver was not looking at all and likely not at all for a fairly long period of time, that driver went completely out of lane and my estimate of relative speeds on a state road like this I don't think there would be time to note lack of driver reaction and time and lateral space for any evasive action to be peformed. Hence my original comment to JohnB that I didn't think his comments were applicable.
Al

The State's attorney is a complete WUSS and should be fired immediately for incompetence.

I did state that my speculation may not apply to this case specifically (see last sentence), I merely wished to raise the issue. I don't know what definition of "highway" versus "road" SamHouston is using, but looking back at the article, it says "Illinois 130", which I took to mean a state road. I take "highway" to mean an Interstate or other limited access road. But, I did not GoogleMap the location, so I could be wrong.

I did not take into account that the cyclist may have deliberately been taking evasive action, in which case, never mind. But I believe that in the general case, my comments still apply.

ILTB, I'm not going to engage in an "are too/are not" argument. Possible contributing factor <> Blame. If you disagree, okay, let's agree to disagree and end it there, please.

I believe its classed as a secondary highway, which doesn't require limited access i.e. ramps/exits et al
I didn't search it either, not that it matters as such things are left to the people in Illinois.

I guess if your comments still apply all we'd need to know now is how lane positioning could prevent accidents involving inattentive motorists. I could've sworn this thread was about the DA & sentencing, but JB wants lane positioning to be a factor, so back too the question he's volunteered to answer;

How can lane positioning, any method, including none, prevent accidents involving incredibly inattentive motorists that kill. I can only think of one, the anti-bike pro-car side would like it, but no one here would.

John?

It looks like killing cyclists isn't important to State's Attorney Julia Rietz (mailto:statesatty@co.champaign.il.us):



URBANA – A Rankin man who admitted driving while drunk, which led to the death of an Urbana man, faces penalties ranging from probation to three to 14 years in prison when he is sentenced next month.

Brandon E. Leonard, 26, pleaded guilty last Thursday before Champaign County Judge Thomas Difanis to a charge of aggravated driving under the influence, admitting that on Aug. 8, he was driving at a time when his blood alcohol level was 0.13 percent. The limit for an Illinois motorist to be presumed intoxicated is 0.08.

State's Attorney Julia Rietz agreed to dismiss an equally serious charge of reckless homicide and a less serious charge of driving under revocation against Leonard, but made no agreements about what his sentence should be.

Difanis will decide that on Feb. 3.

According to Rietz, Robert Barrett, 34, was riding a bicycle north on U.S. 45 just south of Thomasboro about 10:50 p.m. Aug. 8 when he was hit from behind. Leonard was driving about 55 to 60 mph when he heard a thud and had a tire go flat. He called his brother to help him and the pair called 911 after they found Mr. Barrett, who had been fatally injured. Mr. Barrett was pronounced dead at Carle Foundation Hospital in Urbana.

Champaign County sheriff's deputies found beer cans in the bed of the pickup truck Leonard was driving, Rietz said. The passenger side of the windshield was shattered.

Because aggravated DUI is a probationable offense, Leonard's attorney, Assistant Public Defender Scott Schmidt, asked that he be evaluated for drug treatment and intensive probation supervision.

Court records show Leonard has two previous convictions for driving under the influence and one for driving under revocation since 2003.

Rietz said about six members of Mr. Barrett's family were present to see Leonard enter his guilty plea. Leonard's mother was also present, Rietz said.

State highways here in AZ are often 65mph, narrow lanes, sometimes divided sometimes not with or without shoulders and sometimes a rumble strip outside of fog/shoulder line.
Al

Isn't it odd that someone can go through law school, get a degree, qualify and get a job as a public prosecutor and still be a total idiot.

Isn't it odd that someone can go through law school, get a degree, qualify and get a job as a public prosecutor and still be a total idiot.

Isn't it weird that George W. Bush is president of the United States?

Thread closed, please continue discussion in this thread:
http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=249365
Thank you

hi565
Mod