In Court
 

I'm off to court tomorrow as a police witness. The driver who knocked me off my bike in October is pleading not guilty to a charge of dangerous driving. I'll let you know how it went.

Cheers
Beaver

Good luck Beaver.

Let's hope it gets what he deserves: a loss of license, a large fine and some jail time!

Good luck, Beaver! How does the legal system work down under? Will you appear before a magistrate or a judge and jury? Ten years ago, another gent and I were disqualified from a jury panel in a vehicular manslaughter case simply because we and the victim were bicyclsts. They ended up with a jury of 12 nonjogging, nonbicycling motorists who fortunately (and uncharacteristically) had the decency to convict the motorist. We would have much safer roads for everyone if the legal system were not so heavily biased in favour of motorists.

This local case of car murder ended today on a conviction and life sentance:

crime
http://www.hastingstoday.co.uk/fullstory.asp?storyid=6

and punishment
http://www.hastingstoday.co.uk/fullstory.asp?storyid=1

Good luck, Beaver.

Don't forget your neck brace!

Put a coat of vaseline under your eyes and around your mouth to show the misery you have endured since the accident.

If you are right handed, switch to using the left hand for awkward effect. This will be particularly dynamic if you have to write anything on a display board.

It's about ******** time!

I hope the convict that tosser too.

:(

Anyone who knocks a teacher off a bike, and won't admit guilt, is a shameful soul.

Please let us know how it goes. (Justice is larger than a courtroom...)

Interesting to note that the incident was caused by the car clipping the pedestrians friend!!, and that the driver was drunk.

Life sentence, out in 8 years. Not long enough.

Hi again. Had my three minutes in court. The driver was defending himself against a charge that carries a $100 fine and three demerit licence points. (That about $50 for you Yanks and £35 for the Brits! If you lose more than twelve points over three years, you lose your licence.) The hearing was before a Magistrate - no jury; not major enough. :rolleyes: I had to give the details of the accident from my POV and draw a diagramme of the accident site on a whiteboard. (I didn't think about using my left hand for that, Mike.But since I've been back riding for the last three weeks, it would have been a bit dishonest! ;) )

(Details of accident scene: double-lane highway with wide left shoulder (we ride on the left in Oz.) Coming up to left exit to another road via slip-lane. I intended to proceed straight ahead; driver wanted to exit via the slip-lane. He came around on my right and knocked me off.)

It was then the driver's turn to ask questions. However he started to talk at length about his POV, and was quickly pulled into line by the Magistrate, who told him the time for a statement was later. So he had two questions:

1) Had I seen him when he saw me look around prior to crossing the exit ramp from the highway? Answer: No, but because of the blow to my head via the helmet, I had very little recollection of events surrounding the accident. (Note: he saw me some time before the accident.)

2) Didn't I think I should stop before proceeding ahead? Answer: No, because I am a vehicle with the same rights as a car, and since I am simply continuing to travel forward, I have the right of way over a car turning off the road.

I will find out tomorrow afternoon what the outcome was, when I contact one of the people who was at the court. I didn't want to hang around and have any contact following the hearing. I will be terribly disappointed (:irritated) if it isn't what we all know it should be. I think he was starting to think he should just have paid the fine and been done with it. Meanwhile, a friend today went through a speed camera, and will probably have to pay double the fine that went with this guy's charge.

Thank for the messages of support. I'll let you know what the outcome was.

Cheers
Beaver

Here is our fundamental problem -- yet another motorist who does not comprehend traffic regulations as they pertain to bicycles. This is why I hate and fear high-speed, freely-flowing merges and diverges so much; they do not necessarily have to be dangerous, but they tend to be because of clueless motorists such as the one you encountered.

To put things in perspective, in California the fine for every MINOR traffic infraction is $271 (U.S.). The California motorists' handbook (freely available online at www.dmv.ca.gov, and, if I may boast a bit, a great model for other states and countries, thanks to content written and/or edited by the California Bicycle Coalition) also admonishes motorists to give bicyclists 3ft / 1m of clear space and to avoid cutting them off when crossing their path.


Same rights -- same rules -- same roads

Am I the only one here who thinks that running down a cyclist should carry a much greater penalty than this?

I'm with you, Chris. This case sounds pretty close to assault with a deadly weapon.

Well, guess what - :eek: the driver got off!!! The magistrate accepted the evidence from all the witnesses, and then decided that there was not enough evidence to be able to say definitely that he had driven without due care and attention. Because I didn't stay for the verdict and therefore have only a second-hand report of what happened (and also because I don't want to get into any contempt of court issues), I can't really say anything about this specific case. But it makes you wonder what is required to prove careless driving - a body???

At least it doesn't affect the medical and compensation side of things. But I'll be noting down every last Australian cents' worth of loss. (That's about equivalent to the old Italian lire, but still worth more than Turkish lire.;) )

I didn't think this could happen in Oz. On a different day it mightn't have. :rolleyes:

Thanks again for the helpful messages.
Beaver

Sorry about the outcome, it's maddening how cyclist just don't get the respect they are entitled to by law from the courts.

Destined to second class citizenship in that arena, it seems. :-(

Well at least it sounds llike you might have put a little awareness of cyclists into that particular driver's life. Small consolation and a painful way for you to have to increase this bozo's attention span.

Oops! Threadend, I forgot to mention that the driver told me he is connected to one of our premier cycling families which has included national representatives. Yet he still expected me to get out of his way!

In Australia, can you then take him to civil court and sue for damages?

In the USA, the civil awards are usually much much higher than the criminal fines.

AND, civil suits don't always turn out the same as criminal trials.

Good luck.

This is obviously because the judge is a nonbicycling motorist, thinking the same thing might have happend to him. What gets me is that this is a blatantly obvious case of his violation of your right-of-way, in the sense that he was changing direction; it's really no different than a motorist left-hooking (right-hooking in countries with Napoleonic, rather than Roman, traffic flow) a bicyclist at a driveway entrance or an intersection.

Personally, I think this decision is a load of ***** myself. How can someone be driving with due care and attention if they crash into somebody else?

In strict muslim countries, some crimes require one male witness or 2 female witnesses to convict. In the west we think this is barbaric and uncivilised. Instead, we have driving crimes in which the word of one driver is equal to the word of several cyclists or pedestrians.

In the only car-on-bike assault conviction in the UK, the significant witness was a motorcyclist who witnessed, comprehended what he saw , and followed the driver. The word of a cyclist alone is not sufficient to convict.