ax0n

Full Story via WIStv.com

Discuss. I have my own theories, but someone's definitely not telling the whole story.

fordfasterr

Those f-ing bastards.....

Unless they have witnesses, its going to be his word against the drivers... I have no idea who wins in those types of situations...

If everything goes in favor of the cyclist, then hopefully the judge would say " nobody is at fault " and drop the ticket, but since the driver ran this guy over, I would assume that his insurance would have to cover the damages ... hopefully.....

ivegotabike

thats a fairly busy intersection, and its in a part of town where it is ILLEAGAL to ride on the sidewalks, so technically he was at fault.

dobber

Love this part

And then later

Sounds pretty straigh forward, he was riding the sidewalk and he hit the SUV. Again, he hit the SUV.

Sorry folks, nothing to defend here.

Az B

"A Columbia police spokeswoman says an officer did speak with Dandridge before he went in for X-rays. His attorney said if the light was indeed red, anyone in the crosswalk would have the right of way, whether riding a bike or on foot."

This seems pretty clear. I know peds always have the right of way in a xwalk, wasn't sure about someone riding a bike across, but this clarifies that question.

I would be interested in the where the damage was on the SUV.

Az

fordfasterr

Let me take a wild guess, UNDERNEATH !!!!! ******************** LOL

JoebikerLa

He was in the crosswalk. If I understand crosswalks, they are in the street, not the sidewalk. The light was red and the Explorer was making a turn. (I'll assume a right turn) He was in the street, in the crosswalk and a driver must stop before making a right on red turn.

I seems to me that the driver made the call to the police to get their story out first. I guess all you have to do is be the first to call and the Colombia police will go with your story and do no further investigation.

dobber

Or they called the police to summon help, report an accident.

Was he riding the bike? If so, then he was essentially a vehicle that was now in the wrong place for someone making a legal turn.

rando

sounds like he may have been riding against traffic on the sidewalk. a very similar thing happened to me once. the drivers don't look your way, they look at the cars coming from their left. just as I was about to cross the sidewalk, the guy pulled right up in front of me into the crosswalk. I hit him! and I got tickets!

CB HI

Watch the video, it shows the ticket with a quick shot of the accident drawing. The drawing appears to indicate a motor vehicle making a right turn and the collision occurring in the crosswalk. With the drawing, the only question is, who had the red light.

A good example why cyclist should not ride on the sidewalk, especially in the wrong direction.

rando

couldn't get the video to load. I feel sorry for the guy, that could have been me. that is the first and last time I ever rode against traffic on the sidewalk.

dobber

https://digg.com/offbeat_news/Dude_Ri...s_Him_A_Ticket

Trek_Rider_05

I would just like to point out here, that you dont HAVE to be riding on the sidewalk to be in a crosswalk. Often, when people are riding in the road, they will ride to the right hand side, with the flow of traffic. That being the case, that puts those cyclists in line w/ any street crossing/ crosswalk, and also in line for right hand turning traffic, left hand turning (oncoming) traffic, and possibly right hand turning traffic coming from the cyclists right, on the opposite side of the street.

Given that, It is my view, that the MOTORISTS are the ones responsible to YEILD to those cyclists, and pedestrians crossing the street in the vicinity of the cross walk. Its the law here, period, and I dont see why it wouldnt be the law everywhere, and I dont see why that wouldnt be applied in this case.

This case, makes the police department of Columbia SC, look like a bakwards bunch of lazy jackasses, IMHO. I guess they are just too busy in the big hub that is Columbia SC, with other big city crimes, to handle this sort of investigation correctly.


I can tell you that had that happend where I live, the MOTORIST would have b een the one who had gotten the ticket, and my have faced jail time for assault with a vehicle. Even when there are NO stoplights present here where I live, motorists are REQUIRED BY LAW to STOP for pedestrians in the cross walks, period, no questions.

dobber

Using your scenario, he'd be even more at fault for passing on the right.

remsav

Sounds like he was riding with traffic where the blind spot is rear/right not against. I almost hit a SUV walking across a crosswalk taking a step-in... and he barely missed me when he turned. Obviously he didn't look right and we both had green light. Now I wait a second or 2 to make sure I don't get run over. Although eye witness is notoriously inaccurate in this case it should be a simple matter to figure out who had the right of way.

Daily Commute

Peds have the right of way in crosswalks, but I have not seen any law that gives cyclists the right of way in crosswalks when we are barred from the sidewalk. The cyclist's attorney claims that the cyclist had the right of way, the cop says otherwise. We'll see who's right.

Yes, the SUV driver should have been more careful, but the cyclist should have been more careful, too. If the cyclist wanted to be on the sidewalk and in the crosswalk, he should have been walking his bike. At a minimum, the cyclist should have checked for turning traffic. [The cop said the SUV was going 15 mph, which is not exactly a blazing pace. (Edit: As the next post correctly states, this sentence is wrong. The cop said the cyclist was going 15 mph.)]

Generally, cyclists don't belong in crosswalks.

CB HI

The cop said the cyclist was going 15 mph when the cyclist hit the SUV.

In most states, a driver turning right on red must yeild to everyone else.

dobber

If the cyclist was riding on the sidewalk and entered the crosswalk at speed, there would be no expectation that the motorist should have yielded.

remsav

Not if it's legal to ride on the sidewalk and the driver had the red light (yield to everyone). If that was the case then the driver was facing north with red light, turning east (right turn) while the cyclist was heading west with green light (in which case he would be facing against traffic unless it was one-way street).

In any case the driver should have been fined for not yielding on red.

red house

haha.. that'll teach him to ride a bike . . -on a SIDE WALK.

dobber

Wait, I'm turning right on a red and someone on a bike, riding on the sidewalk and, according to your description, was on the wrong side collides with me and I'm at fault?


I'm expecting the next thing we'll find out is it was oh-dark thirty and he was dressed in ninja black.

Blue Order

If the cyclist is in the crosswalk, and you hit him, you're at fault. The only exception would be if you were turning before he entered the crosswalk.

dobber

So if I stop at a light, check the crosswalk, begin my turn and somebody leaps out in front of me, I'm a fault?

remsav

Yeah you are supposed to yield when turning right on a red light. The driver obviously didn't check both ways (check the right side) which is a common practice when making a right turn on red. It doesn't matter if it's illegal to cycle on the sidewalk or the rider was wearing all black in the dark, the driver is supposed to look both ways and yield on red.

Blue Order

Read what I said. It answers your question.