smasha

"A bus driver will lose his job over an off-duty incident which was captured on the bike cameras of the cyclist he tailgated aggressively."

Wellington roads will be safer with tailgating driver off them, says cyclist
Wellington roads will be safer with tailgating driver off them, says cyclist | Stuff.co.nz

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WtxWId-w1Ic

Chris0516

Good

dynodonn 

Another incident where a video camera proved useful. If like the US, this motorist will be driving again, probably another bus as well..... just thinking of the cabby that went on a rage with a cyclist in New York City a few years back.

Cabbie Who Maimed Tourist In Midtown Is Driving Taxi Again: Gothamist

Chris0516

I forgot about the cab driver. I agree with you. It is like both the bus driver, and the cab driver. Just got a slap on the wrist.

ItsJustMe

the driver "thought the cyclist should be in the bus lane..."

It doesn't f'ing well matter what you think someone else on the road "should" be doing. You're not the cops. Even a cop wouldn't use his vehicle to intimidate and force a driver to do something.

howsteepisit

Unless you are a regular on the BF A&S. Then its ok to act like the police and/or take a lane to force other road users to bend to your iron will.

genec

"Bend to your iron will" or merely change lanes? It is just amazing to see motorists that just refuse to simply signal, check mirrors, ensure it is safe, then move to another lane... it is as if their vehicle is a slot car and only works in the one lane.

In Washington state they proposing "lane cameras" to some highways to catch the motorists that move into the left (passing only) lane and then just sit there. That lane sitting issue causes congestion when vehicles block the passing lanes and do not allow other motorists to pass.

Washington State bill would fine left-lane hogs for going too slow

Is it really all that damn difficult to just change lanes... whether you are behind a cyclist or a slow moving cement truck?

Digital_Cowboy

It's a good thing that he had the cameras, too bad the fourth one wasn't working. How does the bus driver claim that the video was edited?

+100

+100

That cabby should have been charged, I mean didn't he admit to doing the crime? So why wasn't he charged and prosecuted?

Hopefully the bus driver won't be able to get a job driving a bus again. The article didn't say what sort of bus driver he was. Was he a school bus or a public or private bus driver?

Digital_Cowboy

And unless I missed something it's a BUS not a BIKE lane.

It also amazes me how many motorists just have to "race us" to get to either the red light or stop sign first, what the smeg is up with that?

Seattle Forrest

I hope you realize there's a minor difference between intimidating people and slightly inconveniencing them.

Leisesturm

Dave, I agree with you yet again. I watch that video and think to myself, that that situation would never have happened to me because I would not have been attempting to make any attempt to educate the driver of an SUV about the finer points of lane etiquette. We are really sliding down a slippery slope when evidence prepared by the prosecution is the sole arbiter in a legal case! I am all for impartial video evidence of incidents like this. One day there will be a network of surveillance cameras monitoring our roads. I don't drive, most of you do. Wouldn't you want impartial treatment of drivers, on the off chance that you are the driver implicated in a cyclist/car accident?

That driver just lost his livelihood. No trivial thing. Yes, he was an ***hat. So was the cyclist. IMO the cyclist being the bigger one, because all he had for protection was a video camera. Sorry, three cameras. Did anyone on the defense side wonder openly about the overall state of mind of a cyclist that rocks three cameras. Did anyone say at the trial that if the driver had really wanted to he could have done a LOT more to that cyclist than he did?

I was on a road I know well, with a left turn coming up. I knew that a left turn from the bike lane was impossible, so I got into the vehicle lane because it was going to split into left and straight through in about 100 feet. Up from behind comes rager cager. He beeped me just like the idiot in the video. I moved to the left so he could pass. And he did. Close. Unnecessary, he had plenty of room on the right, but that's the kind of cager he was. We met at the light. This would be the point at which some of you start lecturing the driver about cyclists rights. I said nothing. He said nothing. The light changed. I made my left. He went straight. We will meet again some day, but I won't know it. One white SUV is not much different from the dozens I see everyday. I otoh am rather unique, if I do say so myself. Captured on camera, that incident might have caused some serious consequences for that driver. I don't know. I'm happy not to have been hurt. So grateful, in fact, that I'm willing to let him keep his job!

Lets really turn up the heat so that the stakes get really reductio ad absurdum, then drivers will want make sure the cyclist is dead, and their camera good and flattened before they drive off in a shower of sparks into the dark of night.

genec

Here is the biggest problem with your argument... just how is it that the motorist somehow has a priority over the same space that a cyclist is using? The fact is they are both humans, and if both were walking would we tolerate someone coming up behind you, yelling at you and walking right on your heels just to get their way? Of course not, so why tolerate that same sort of bad behavior just because one human has a car and the other human has a bike?

Maybe the cyclist, or the person in front, could be a bit more courteous, but then certainly the driver, or person behind also had that same choice.

alathIN

Right. Because if the dude's defense was "I could have squashed him like a bug, if I'd really been mad!" then everyone would see at once that he's just the kind of stable, mature personality you want driving a bus.

You should be a defense attorney. "F.U., I could have committed a much worse crime if I wanted to" is a novel defense that will certainly revolutionize our justice system.

Digital_Cowboy

We must have watched two different videos. I didn't see a cyclist trying to "teach" a motorist a lesson. What I saw was a person who was trying to get home operating in what was a legal and safe manner.

The motorist on the other hand was a raging crash waiting to happen type of driver. Actually he had four cameras one was not working.

Where do you get that only the prosecutor presented evidence? I didn't see that mentioned anywhere in the article. The only thing I saw mentioned about the video(s) is that the defendant claimed that they were somehow "doctored."

And as a bus driver, someone who is responsible for countless lives and as a professional driver why shouldn't he lose his job if he engages in irresponsible actions while on the road even if he's off of the clock? Would you feel comfortable riding with that driver?

Oh, and as far as a "blanket" of "surveillance camera's" let's not forget that the UK is reported to have MORE CCTV cameras up then they have residents. And we recently had a post on here about a cyclist who was basically left holding the bag as it were when he was hit and both authorized operators of the car in questioned denied being behind the wheel at the time of the crash.

Digital_Cowboy

+1,000

Exactly, why does being inside of a "metal cage" give them more "right" to be on the road then someone on a bike?!?!

I don't think so, I think that the bully would have been called on their bullying behavior and told to "step off."

How so, I'm pretty sure that I saw in the video that the cyclist was trying to wave the motorist by. Now I don't know what the law is where this happened, but I do know that here in the states that the following vehicle has an obligation to:

a) NOT hit vehicle in front of them
b) to pass in a safe manner

Neither of which this particular motorist choose to do. Well granted they didn't actually hit the cyclist, but it appears not from a lack of trying.

+1,000

That motorist should have their license permanently revoked.

Leisesturm

How so, I'm pretty sure that I saw in the video that the cyclist was trying to wave the motorist by. Now I don't know what the law is where this happened, but I do know that here in the states that the following vehicle has an obligation to:

I think I saw where this took place in New Zealand. Similar legal structure to the UK but probably fewer CCTV cameras around. I also don't know this for a fact, but, in most of the civilized world, cyclists are to ride as close to the edges of vehicle lanes as safety permits. I know, for some cyclists, safety never permits this but... there you are. The cyclists waved the motorist by but he never gave up his control of the lane. I wasn't suggesting that he leave the lane.


Neither of which this particular motorist choose to do. Well granted they didn't actually hit the cyclist, but it appears not from a lack of trying.

It is interesting that you say this because in at least one account I read the cyclist alleges contact from the passing car. Given that the cyclist stayed upright through the entire ordeal I am wondering how much contact there could have been, but again, I don't know. Given that in the U.S. cyclists are killed and very little happens to the driver, I am not going out there armed with a battery of cameras to document contact with motorized road users. I will continue to seek to minimize both contact and conflict with drivers. Should I fail in this, I will depend upon the skill and resourcefulness of my legal counsel to present a compelling case in the absence of corroborating video evidence. I'm sure it can be done.



+1,000

That motorist should have their license permanently revoked.

I don't know... maybe... but then we will need to figure out what to do with drivers who did what the NYC cabbie did to the British tourist. I mean... that is much, much worse don't you think?

genec

The thing is, it is the cyclist that gets to determine what is safe for them... not the motorist behind them, not some bystander 40 feet away. The cyclist, that is right there dealing with the width of whatever tires they have and the conditions of the potholes and glass in the road, is who gets to determine what is safest.

We don't use a "might makes right system..." otherwise, every cement truck driver, every bus driver, every delivery truck and long haul truck driver could easily take out all the darn pesky little cars in their way... but that is NOT how it works.

FBinNY

I tend to be more on the "**** happens" side of things and more understanding of things like close passes on crowded roads. IMO this was different, in that i wasn't about passing since there was plenty of room to do so, and the driver didn't complete a pass and move on when he easily could have.

So, this was pretty clearly about road rage, and called for something more than a small fine. The six month suspension was on the high side of what I would have given if I were the judge, but it's not outlandish given that this was intent, not error. As for losing his job driving, I'm sympathetic to the company which might have felt it was too much liability risk to let this person drive a vehicle they were responsible for.

Digital_Cowboy

That is the impression that I got as well, that this occurred in New Zealand. Actually more and more states are passing laws that clearly state that we as cyclists are allowed to use the full lane. Just like cars and motorcycles or even those scooters. IF the cyclist in this incident had been using a motorcycle or a scooter would you still be criticizing their choice of lane position?!?!

Normally, I don't agree with a person loosing their job over something that happened off of the clock, but this is a case/situation that is the exception to that rule. Especially given what the motorists job is. I mean how comfortable would you be in the back of bus with a road raging driver? How comfortable would you be in allowing that person to take your child to and from school?

This motorist had to know what they were doing was wrong, and had to know that it would come with consequences. And as I said, I don't normally advocate one loosing their job over something that happened off of the job, but there has to be room for exceptions.

Or if this motorist had been on the job and did this would you still say that their loosing their job was "too much?" Or would you think that it was a fit punishment?

+1,000

This bus driver was clearly pi$$ed at having to share the road with a bicycle, and I don't know what NZ law is in regards to operating a bicycle on the sidewalk, but I have to say that I agree with their choice to move over to the sidewalk.

Again, as I've said before I don't normally agree with a person loosing their job for something that happened off of the clock, but this is a case that is the exception to the rule. This time it was their own private vehicle, but if they'd kept their job next time they could have both been on the clock and could have killed the cyclist. So in this case I do not think that the bus driver loosing their job was excessive. And if I am not mistaken the reason they lost their job was primarily because of the fact that their license was suspended.

Also think about this, this time it was a cyclist who was just trying to get home to their loved ones. It could have just as easily been a passenger on their bus that they took a disliking to. This person clearly has both road rage and anger issues, it was probably only a matter of time before something like this happened. And how do we know that it hadn't happened before and they got away with it because their victim didn't have one or more cameras mounted on their bike?

The sad thing is that there is so much animosity on the roads that we as cyclists NEED to have not just one but multiple cameras rolling so as to protect ourselves.

So, yes, in this case I think that the motorist got just what they deserved.

Or as the great Sammy Davis, Jr. sang in the theme song of Beretta, "Don't do the crime, if you can't do the time." As a bus driver, i.e. a PROFESSIONAL driver he should be held to a higher standard. And if no matter if it's on the job, off of the job or whenever, and wherever that it is that as a driver and it's driving related they should lose their job. But also as I said, if I'm not mistaken his loosing his job wasn't a direct result of what he did, rather it was as a result of having temporarily loosing his license.

And I am also pretty sure that there was some clause in his employment contract informing him that he could lose his license over something along these lines. And given that he was a bus driver and even though it didn't happen in the either Florida or anywhere in the USA I am glad that he lost his job over this. As given the responsibility of being a bus driver there is NO ROOM for this kind of behavior.

cobyrne

I suspect the driver did not lose his job directly because of the incident. His license was suspended because of his actions, but to do his job probably required him to maintain a valid license. He couldn't do his job, so he was fired.

I have a friend (here in NZ) who worked as a delivery driver. He refused to pay his parking tickets (that he received on his personal car, not his work truck) so his license was suspended for three months. Because he didn't have a valid license, he couldn't perform his job, so his employer fired him.

smasha

In NZ, "BUS LANE" is for buses, bicycles, motorcycles, and mopeds.

If it's marked "BUS ONLY", then it's bus-only.

In any case, at the time of the incident, that lane was occupied by parked cars and thus not available to moving traffic.

The video was submitted with the complaint, long before a prosecutor ever saw it. Since no 3rd-party video was entered into evidence, that's all we've got. If the driver had a dash-cam, that could've been entered into evidence. So basically as evidence we've got the video provided by the cyclist, the cyclist's version of events (which is consistent with the video evidence), and the driver's version of events (which is not consistent with the video evidence).

Without the video, it would've been (yet another) case of "he said, she said", and there would not have been sufficient evidence to pursue a prosecution.

The fact that my video may serve to defend me against a charge is one more reason I ride with a helmet-cam and drive with a dash-cam. Not that it would've done any good, but the driver in this case chose not to use a dash-cam, and instead the court had to rely on video from the cyclist he targeted.

It was noted by the judge at trial that the cyclist was keeping "as far left as practicable", in accordance with the law, considering that there were cars parked in the bus-lane. In this case, "as far left as practicable" happened to be more or less in the middle of the left-most lane.

Prosecution generally requires evidence, more than just contested testimony of one person. In this case, the driver refused to cooperate with the police investigation. Without video, the only thing the police could have done is to remind both parties to "be careful out there". A case of "he said, she said" without any other evidence is a waste of police resources, and a waste of court resources. To put it simply, without video, this case never would've been more than a file in a cabinet.

It was revealed at trial that this driver had at least one other recent "incident" with a cyclist. The investigating officer told the driver that police received a complaint from a cyclist, and police identified him as the driver, and what would he like to say about it? So the driver started talking about a different incident with a cyclist, at a different time and place. When the investigating officer told the driver that the complaint was about a different incident, the driver refused to answer any more questions without a lawyer.

In general, most transportation jobs require employees to maintain a clean/valid license as a condition of employment, even if a license isn't strictly necessary to perform the job. Obviously, someone employed as a bus driver needs to hold a valid license as a condition of employment. As for future employment as a bus driver, this driver has likely proven himself to be too much of a liability for anyone to hire him in any driving job. This is the universe telling him to pursue a new career path.

On the bright side, there's likely a driving job available. Hopefully it will be filled by someone who can drive safely and considerately.

Digital_Cowboy

Exactly, I'm pretty sure that most jobs that require some sort of driving also require a "clean driving" record. I wouldn't be surprise if there were some jobs out there that don't require much in the way of driving, but still require the employee to hold a clean drivers license. And in this particular case this motorist I think that it is safe to say no longer has a "clean driving" record.

Thank you for clarifying that. Not being from NZ I'm not familiar with the laws down there. Not that I wouldn't enjoy visiting, but sadly I don't have the finances to do so.

Sadly, that happens far too often. Here in Florida I've had to deal with lawn care crews parking their trucks and trailers in the bike lane, people pulling over to use their cell phone and stopping in the bike lane and while I'm glad that they've pulled over before using their cell phone do they have to block the bike lane to do so?

I suspect that if the motorist had had a dash-cam that when they realized that it further help to convict him that it would "magically" disappear as it were. And that he was probably hoping that his job as a bus driver would carry more weight with the court then the word of a cyclist.

And sadly, this is a prime example of why one sadly needs to record their trips on their bikes. Sadly, NOT as a deterrent as I suspect that there are far too many people out there who if they feel that they're in the right are going to go out of their way to prove it regardless of who or what is watching them.

I suspect the same thing, that even if the motorist had had a dash-cam that it would have contradicted what he was saying. And quite possibly could have netted him a charge of perjury as well. So in an ironic twist it might have been a good thing that he didn't have a dash-cam.

I'm impressed a judge who actually backs up the cyclist. That at the very least appears to be a rare thing.

Yep, which again is a very good reason for having a helmet or what have you cam when one is on their bike. It's sad that we have to do that though.

That was probably the smartest thing that this motorist did, i.e. "lawyering up" after he'd incriminated himself in a previous incident. And sadly, something tells me that these are probably NOT the only times that he's done something like this. Just the only time that he'd got caught and inadvertently confessed to previous misdeeds while behind the wheel of an automobile.

It also sounds as maybe the court should have ordered some anger management classes for him as well. And hopefully he won't take out his frustrations on the next cyclist that crosses his path, after he gets his license back.

That is what I was thinking. That as a bus driver he'd be required to have/keep a clean driving record as well as having a current and valid license. Neither of which he currently has. Do you all have a commercial or chauffeur's drivers license down there? Hopefully he'll find something new and not blame his victim for "ruining" his life. As it was his actions that had ruined his life not the cyclists.

Sadly, I'm out of the running living in the USA, and not having a drivers license.

smasha

re the bus-lane, I should note that at the time of the incident, that lane was legally available for parking. Signs designate it as a bus lane only during certain times.

Some jobs require a valid license, and some jobs require varying degrees of "clean" license... When I worked on the RR in the US, there was no legal requirement to have a driving license for train operations, nonetheless maintaining a "valid" driving license was a condition of employment. Among other things, if someone couldn't maintain a license they could be fired, regardless of whether it's related to DUI, vision test, or any other reason. When I drove a taxi in NC, a valid driving license obviously is a legal requirement, and (IIRC) one would lose their NC license with 12 points; one could hold a taxi driving permit from the city with up to 8 points. Plenty of taxi drivers would have to take "leave" because of too many tickets, or DUIs.

Yeah, driving a vehicle with more than 11 passengers requires a special license in NZ. I'm not sure if other license endorsements are required for driving a passenger bus, eg for commercial passenger transport, large vehicles, etc.

Apparently that's not the case. I can't go into too many details, but the driver completely fails to accept any responsibility for doing anything wrong, blaming the cyclist, the police, and the court. At trial, under oath, he stated "I didn't do anything wrong. I didn't do anything aggressive." In his mind, it seems he's just an innocent victim of the system, who was just in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Digital_Cowboy

Thank you for clearing that up. So even if the cyclist wanted to he wouldn't have easily been able to use the bus lane consistently as a bike lane.

I'm sure that all around the world that there are plenty of jobs that don't require driving yet ironically require a clean and valid drivers license. I'd guess that part of the rational is that if they're not responsible enough to keep a clean drivers license they're probably not responsible enough to maintain company property. As for having to maintain a valid driver's license, that I do not think should be a requirement as there are plenty of people out there who are responsible individuals but for medical reasons cannot drive an automobile.

That isn't too surprising. As it is a big responsibility to drive the public.

Sadly, that isn't very surprising and I feel sorry for the next cyclist that he encounters. As he might take out his frustrations out on them. Do you know if the court had ordered him to undergo some sort of anger management classes? As it really sounds like this guy has an anger issue. And it may have only been a mater of time before he went off on someone on his bus.

And as I said/asked before we know of these two incidences:

• one because the cyclist filed a complaint
• two because the motorist was "dumb" enough to incriminate himself
• three I think that it is safe to presume that these are NOT the only two cases involving this motorist

I wonder what other career field he is considering going into. Whatever it is, I think that given the publicity that this case has hopefully received that he's probably going to find it difficult to find a job just about anywhere. As who is going to want this "hothead" on their payroll?

kickstart

While the cyclist could have done things differently, and possibly avoided the situation altogether, the conditions were such that it shouldn't have mattered where he rode. Personally I would have been making more use of the bus/bike lane as it was mostly clear, but there was so little traffic it's obvious the driver was intentionally seeking a conflict.
I think its unreasonable to say the cyclist was provoking the driver, but I do wounder how much having 2 cameras did influence his decisions.