Originally Posted by
rydabent
mcon
I notice that you cherry picked a couple of cases out of Wisc. Even the were not conclusive.
In the wax an wane of life, probably most members of a jury are drivers. Right or wrong a good percentage of them hate cyclist. That means that they are liable right or wrong to take in to account the fact a cycist wasnt wearing a helmet.
I googled the phrase, cutting and pasting your wording exactly into Google.
Not one case in the USA came up, where you claimed there would be many.
I clearly attributed the quotes regarding WI to a lawyer's website, not "cherry picked" cases.
There were no cases to cherry pick from because apparently it's not an issue. You do the pro-helmet cause no good in this thread when you say stuff like this but can't back it up, and when investigated, actually proves false.
Please post a link to
one court decision where a cyclist was found at fault even a little bit because they were not wearing a helmet. You claimed there were many, this shouldn't be difficult.