Yes... But you're not getting it...
Yes, the statutory definition of a vehicle excluded a bicycle...
BUT when a "Driver" of a bicycle is ON THE ROADWAY... (Meaning NOT the shoulder - the shoulder is NOT PART of the roadway)..
First part....
Bicyclists do not have special privileges (WHEN) on a roadway’’s shoulder.
Meaning they don't have the "privileges" of a vehicle when ON THE SHOULDER..
But when they ARE on the ROADWAY (Remember the shoulder is NOT the roadway), they DO get special privileges.. Here it is again as plainly as I can..
Every person riding a bicycle upon a roadway shall be granted all of the rights and shall be subject to all of the duties applicable to the driver of a vehicle by chapter four of Title 39 of the Revised Statutes
Do you see the difference? When riding on the shoulder, a bicycle is NOT a vehicle, BUT on the ROADWAY they ARE!
It's a matter of law... Basically the county got away with "depraved indifference", because of a legal loophole..
Law is funny that way... Unfortunately... ;(