Originally Posted by
CB HI
Plus, the jury would likely believe that the cyclist were obstructing the Dr without the hard evidence. The jury consist of motorist who generally believe cyclist are slow and could never be traveling at the 30 mph limit. Having GPS proof of the cyclist speed claim, shows the jury that the cyclist told the truth about something they find hard to believe. That can only add credibility to the cyclist in other areas that the jury might find hard to believe.
It also reduces the Dr’s credibility.
Morally yes, I don't know if the Hippocratic Oath has any legal obligation to offer aide. If it doesn't in most states the "Good Samaritan" laws should protect him. Put he doesn't seem like the type of doctor I'd want to have work on me.
And I'm sure to the dismay of a lot of motorists I've been able to reach 30MPH's on straight/flat roads.