Advocacy & Safety - Cyclist death officially ruled an accident

In this article we have an Medical Examiner ruling a cyclists death was "an accident" :wtf:


WASHINGTON - The D.C. Medical Examiner has ruled the death of bicyclist Constance Holden an accident.

Holden, 68, was killed in a collision with a 5.5-ton military truck driven by a D.C. National Guardsman. The truck was pulling into an intersection for a motorcade that was part of the Nuclear Security Summit.

According to the autopsy, Constance Holden was killed by multiple blunt impact injuries.

The accident is still under investigation by the Metropolitan Police Department.

Mark Segraves contributed to this report.

http://www.wtopnews.com/?sid=1935222&nid=25

"Multiple blunt impact injuries"

That makes wonder what the D.C. Medical Examiners' office was thinking when they signed that report. I wonder if world-renowned forensic pathologist Dr. Henry Lee would exonerate the dead cyclist.

To have 'multiple blunt impact injuries' one would think something intentional, and with malice, happened.

Are you all suggesting foul play was involved?

To have 'multiple blunt impact injuries' one would think something intentional, and with malice, happened.
No, "one" wouldn't necessarily think that. So, if you fall off of a cliff (accidentally), you'd only have one "blunt impact injury"? In this case, one can easily imagine two unintentional "blunt impact injuries".

Reminds me of the protester who laid down on the Union Pacific Railroad tracks to block a train load of Uranium fuel.
He lived, but his skull was broke open and he lost half his brain. That must've been twenty years ago. I think his family sued the railroad.

I think it is possible to find an alternate route for any bicycle ride. Don't get in the path of any motorcade, or anything that uses atomic power. Remember, in this forum we discuss pedal power versus petrol power. Nuclear power is in another ballpark.

For the medical report this sounds correct. The ME isn't usually one to lay fault, just cause and it's not like they were stabbed or shot. The real question is how the police are "investigating".

Sounds like possibility that the NG driving the truck was too much of a hurry trying to block the street, and not being attentive to what was happening on the his right side of his vehicle.

Are you all suggesting foul play was involved?

Actually, yes. Because they imply that the woman that was killed, was hit more than once or, that her body hit the military truck with several different parts of her body.

Actually, yes. Because they imply that the woman that was killed, was hit more than once or, that her body hit the military truck with several different parts of her body.
Truly bizarre!

Hit by truck, falls/tumbles on ground. That's at least easily-guessed two "blunt impacts"! I'm not sure why you think that getting hit by a truck is going to be a neat "one shot" deal.

No, "one" wouldn't necessarily think that. So, if you fall off of a cliff (accidentally), you'd only have one "blunt impact injury"? In this case, one can easily imagine two unintentional "blunt impact injuries".

In your example of falling off a cliff, 'multiple blunt impact injuries' is very possible. In the case of the cyclist, no.

If the truck hit her and ran over her, there's the possibility for a lot of blunt force trauma. If whomever was at fault in the traffic collision had not made their mistake, then there would be no incident and everyone would be happy.

Just because the military truck was headed to the nuclear summit doesn't mean it was carrying any kind of nuclear material.

In the case of the cyclist, no.
Bizarre.

It's very likely in the case of a vehicle and cyclist collision that there would be at least two "blunt impacts".

1) hit by vehicle, 2) hit the ground.

Just because the military truck was headed to the nuclear summit doesn't mean it was carrying any kind of nuclear material.

Really? ;)

It wasn't carrying nuclear material. Why would anyone even think that?

It wasn't carrying nuclear material. Why would anyone even think that?

See #5.

It wasn't carrying nuclear material. Why would anyone even think that?
Lunacy and /or conspiracy theory; and this thread has has more than its share of both.

Don't get in the path of any motorcade, or anything that uses atomic power. Remember, in this forum we discuss pedal power versus petrol power. Nuclear power is in another ballpark.While that's likely good advice, you are aware that trains don't use nuclear power, right? Even if they're carrying uranium?

I believe the only nuclear powered vehicles we currently have are some aircraft carriers (perhaps some other really big military boats?) and submarines. (Some spacecraft/probes have been powered by nuclear reactors as well, but the nuclear power doesn't actually provide the propulsion.)

But yes, staying out of the way of all of these things while on a bike is a good general plan.

See #5.

I know. I'm wondering where in the heck that came from: Why would anyone even think that? It's such an ignorant, uninformed statement (referring to Post #5, not yours).

I know. I'm wondering where in the heck that came from: Why would anyone even think that? It's such an ignorant, uninformed statement (referring to Post #5, not yours).
See post #16 for the answer to your question.

Are you all suggesting foul play was involved?

Are you suggesting that it was an unavoidable act of god?

The truth probably lies somewhere in between.

Some background stories...



By TheAthletesLawyer

On the way home from work this evening I was saddened by the news of a biker killed just blocks from the White House. Washington, D.C. Fire and Emergency Medical personnel revealed that a female bicyclist was dead after being hit by a moving motor vehicle in downtown D.C. this afternoon.

WTOP News reported that the accident occurred around 6 PM at the intersection of 12th Street and New York Avenue in NorthWest Washington, D.C. This is an intersection within the restricted area for the Nuclear Security Summit. A D.C. National Guard spokesman says the vehicle that struck the woman was a five-ton military truck. The truck was pulling into the intersection to block it off for a motorcade and failed to see the woman aboard her bike.

Military vehicles have different site lines in comparison to civilian cars and trucks. Army vehicles designed for desert warfare or rough terrain may have “blind spots” that are different than those experienced in passenger cars and pick up trucks. Perhaps when National Guard vehicles are recruited to provide security in civilian settings with high pedestrian and bicycling volumes, it would be safer to realign and/or add mirrors and site lines in accordance with US city street and foreseeable road users.
...
http://theathleteslawyer.com/uncategorized/bicyclist-killed-blocks-from-white-house-in-downtown-d-c-accident/

News coverage [video]: http://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local-beat/Deadly_Collision_Near_Nuclear_Summit_Washington_DC.html


By SHERRI LY - myfoxdc

WASHINGTON - Constance Holden was on her bike when she was struck and killed Monday night by a military vehicle that was along the motorcade route for the Nuclear Security Summit. The 68-year-old was an award-winning journalist and a talented artist.

Holden was a senior science journalist for the journal Science, a place she had worked for 40 years. Friends and co-workers say she was an adventurer, someone who never let anything stand in her way.

"She was absolutely original," said Caroline "C.C." Ramsay, a lifelong friend since their 20s.

Holden was like her works of art. Friends who called her “Tancy,” say there was no one else like her. She was killed riding her bike home from work after being struck by a National Guard truck that was part of security for the Nuclear Security Summit.
...
A "ghost bike" painted white now rests near the accident, a memorial to Holden and a reminder of the horrific collision.
...
The accident is still under investigation and the driver has not been charged. The truck was moving forward at slow speed to block an intersection for a coming motorcade when it collided with Holden on her bike. Friends remain in disbelief.

"I'm very sad. I just can't believe it. It's just like I can't believe it," said Ramsay.

On Tuesday, the commanding general of the D.C. National Guard offered his condolences to Holden's family, friends and co-workers.

The magazine where she worked has set up a memorial page on its website. David Grimm, Editor for ScienceNOW, wrote "today, we are silent because we are mourning the loss of a dear friend and colleague. Tomorrow, the office will be silent because the voice of one of its most outspoken and gregarious members is missing."

At 68-years old, Holden's was a life still cut too short.
http://www.myfoxdc.com/dpp/news/local/woman-killed-by-military-vehicle-remembered-041310

The memorial page for Constance Holden: http://www.sciencemag.org/extra/holden/

Are you suggesting that it was an unavoidable act of god?
No, of course not. He isn't suggesting that. He is reasonably declining to speculate about it.

It's the "wild speculation" of the "malice" comment that is being criticised.

Are you suggesting that it was an unavoidable act of god?

The truth probably lies somewhere in between.

No, I was just looking for clarification.

I know. I'm wondering where in the heck that came from: Why would anyone even think that? It's such an ignorant, uninformed statement (referring to Post #5, not yours).
I'd guess it was an attempt at humor (failed).

While that's likely good advice, you are aware that trains don't use nuclear power, right? Even if they're carrying uranium?

I believe the only nuclear powered vehicles we currently have are some aircraft carriers (perhaps some other really big military boats?) and submarines. (Some spacecraft/probes have been powered by nuclear reactors as well, but the nuclear power doesn't actually provide the propulsion.)

But yes, staying out of the way of all of these things while on a bike is a good general plan.

Yes, and maybe, just maybe, there are like armed guards in the motorcade, who are instructed, and have been drilled, to jump out of their Humvees with machine guns, ready to fire, in the event that the motorcade comes to an unplanned stop. That could panic the citizenry.

Update:


Medical Examiner "accident" finding causes confusion
from Greater Greater Washington


by David Alpert

WTOP created some consternation among cyclists last night with its brief news item entitled, "Cyclist death officially ruled an accident."

The article says that the Medical Examiner's office "has ruled the death of bicyclist Constance Holden an accident." At first blush, it looks like the city's investigatory apparatus has again dismissed a cyclist's death, and so quickly. However, this is not the conclusion of the crash investigation, which will take more time. This is just the medical examiner's classification.

Medical examiners assign a "manner of death" to each fatality, and it falls into a small number of fixed categories. In DC, those are "natural, accident, suicide, homicide, undetermined, and pending."

In short, when the Medical Examiner says "accident" here, they don't mean "accidental" as in "unpreventable," but "accidental" as in "not deliberate." There's no way for the M.E. to determine the circumstances that led to the victim being hit with "multiple blunt impact injuries." They are basically just concluding that, for example, Ms. Holden didn't also suffer a heart attack just before the crash, or that after the crash someone didn't also shoot her while she was still alive.

This is a particularly clear example of the problems with using the word "accident" to talk about traffic crashes. All the Medical Examiner determined was that the crash was the cause of Ms. Holden's death. Yet using the term "accident" as the manner of death implies that the M.E. has determined more than that; that they've also determined nobody was at fault. That's not what they are saying, but many people could and did jump to that conclusion upon reading a fairly non-insightful news article.

The problems with this medical examiner's classification scheme go beyond just traffic incidents. Last year, I sat on a jury in a murder trial. The decedent had died from falling and hitting his head on a step. The prosecution argued another man had hit him with an unknown object first, causing him to pass out and fall; the defense argued he was drunk and fell on his own.

The DC Medical Examiner classified the death a homicide. However, the defense argued that they had done so in part because they had seen the police report which talked about this other man. If there had been nobody else there, said the defense, would they still have ruled it a homicide? How did they really know? It was difficult to separate out how much of the M.E.'s conclusion came from scientific evidence and how much came from outside information.

The Public Defender Service brought in Delaware's Chief Medical Examiner, who said he would have ruled it an accident. Putting these classifications on seems to only serve to try to prejudice juries one way or the other. The scientific expert thinks it's a homicide, so it must be a homicide, some might think, even though that scientific expert is really just coming to that conclusion because that's what the police already think.

It does a disservice to Constance Holden to say that her death was "officially ruled an accident." Her death was officially determined to have occurred as a consequence of the injuries she sustained from her encounter with a large military truck. How that truck came to be in contact with her body, and whether that was blamelessly accidental, negligence, involuntary manslaughter (a form of homicide) or something else is for the police investigators to determine, not the Medical Examiner.

http://greatergreaterwashington.org/post.cgi?id=5550

^- this is what I said back in post #6.

The real question is how police are ( or are not ) investigating the death.

I'd guess it was an attempt at humor (failed).

See post #25. He ain't jokin', he's serious. Black helicopters are much safer for bicyclists, at least those who wear the appropriate tin foil head protection.