This case does show why the law needs to clearly state that using the bike lane is optional for cyclists. It sounds like many Portlanders have the attitude, "We built you these lanes, now get out of our way." A change in the bike lane law would be a nice first start.
Here, I fault the cyclist for chosing to ride in the wrong part of the traffic lane. If he thought the bike lane was not usuable, he should probably have been in the middle of the right traffic lane. It would have discouraged (but maybe not prevented) the driver from passing so closely.
[potential thread-jack comment deleted by author]
And of course, the driver was at fault for passing to close and for opening the door. The thug was also at fault. It's weird that no one has ID'd him from the video or that he wasn't stupid enough to have bragged about it at work.
EDIT: Someone in the commuting forum added
a link to letters to the editor of the paper's blog. Pretty much everybody agrees that cyclists don't belong in traffic, especially when bike lanes have been provided. Brian, is this representative of non-cycling Portlanders?
SECOND EDIT: According to
this article, the statute of limitations is about to expire. I've heard of prosecutors indicting a DNA fingerprint to stay within the statute of limitations, why can't they indict a picture?