spare_wheel

IMO, the investigation is of no real consequence because the violent homicide of a pedestrian is typically seen as just another case of human road kill by our society and legal system.

spare_wheel

He apparently set a personal record cycling in central park that very same day:

Jason M. | Cyclist on Strava
Strava Segment | CPE to CPS

I wonder whether he achieved a #2 on the central park segment before or after he killed someone.

I-Like-To-Bike

No need for specifics, facts or any kind of investigation when the bottom line answer is hysterical rhetoric.

spare_wheel

As long as you don't flee the scene (or admit that you ran them over intentionally) the chances of vehicular homicide being treated as a crime is virtually zero.

Irving Schachter Killed By Cyclist in Central Park Earlier This Month | Streetsblog New York City

Not charged.


San Francisco Cyclist to Get Probation, Community Service in Pedestrian Death | KQED News Fix

Probation.

walrus1

all the news reports and witness statements apparently collaborate that he was going fast. We KNOW he was going well above walking speed. You can't logically argue against this. To claim otherwise would appear to be desperate attempt to clear the cyclist of wrong doing. I also know from pervious experience some of the spandex crowd go way way too fast given how crowded Central Park is. I don't think we can argue against his speed being an underlying cause to this crash. I maintain that if you know the road conditions and are going too fast to accommodate them your going too fast. At the end of the day we are legally required like drivers to protect pedestrians. The cyclist failed in this and hit and killed a woman. Unless she veered into his lane directly in front of him he should have been going a speed that allowed him to avoid her.




Lets quickly review some absolute truths about Central Park.
1. It is always crowded.
2. The crowd always consists of tourists and pedestrians who regularly don't pay attention to their surroundings.
3. Some of the above might not understand the different lanes.
4. Some might not understand written or spoken English.
5. The law requires that like drivers we exercise caution around pedestrians.
6. The park is especially crowded on weekends and during tourist season.
7. The park is extremely crowded on nice days such as today.
8. Several different types of users utilize the park (tourists, runners, semi-pro cyclists, weekend warriors, tourists on bikes and occasional cyclists.)
9. The speed of some of those on road bikes routinely break the 25 MPH speed limit. This has been an ongoing issue.


From the above we can gather a great deal of caution is needed to navigate it safely. An experienced local cyclist or anyone cyclist with common sense would know that they must not go full speed and must be ready to come to a full stop. It is thus very probable he failed to exercise due caution.


I know that even going a reasonable speed Central Park can be tricky. I just avoid it.

Also the guy was setting serval personal and area speed records according to the link provided by sparewheel. So yes speed was definitely a major factor here.

Looigi

When you spray a bug with Raid, it's insecticide. When you accidentally step on a bug, it's involuntary insectslaughter. Big diff.

People would know this if they watched Lawn Order.

squirtdad

in your second example the cyclist pleaded guilty to felony vehicular manslaughter with sentence of 1000 hours of community servers and 3 years probation. Felony Vehicular manslaughter is a crime

Cyclosaurus

In NYC in 2013, 134 pedestrians were killed by automobiles. However, "Only once in 2013 was a sober driver charged with homicide for killing a pedestrian or cyclist in a crash that did not involve a personal dispute or fleeing police."

Right or wrong, neither cyclists or drivers are generally held criminally liable for killing pedestrians.

dougmc

"Probation" is a punishment for a crime, not a traffic infraction.

I mean, I agree with you -- such things are very rarely treated as real crimes unless somebody is drunk or flees the scene, but your second link actually disproves your point rather than proves it. But it's very much the exception rather than the rule.

dougmc

10 mph in a very crowded area is fast. A cyclist going 25 mph is fast to a pedestrian, but slow to a driver behind them who wants to go faster. "Fast" depends on the situation.

I wasn't trying to say he was going walking speed -- I was saying that we don't know how fast he was going.

I hadn't seen the Strava stuff when I made that post, and he appears to have locked down his Strava account or deleted some rides or something since sparewheel made his post. But if he had a #2 in Central Park and that puts his average speed on that segment at 37 kph -- 22 mph -- that probably will be used against him, as it suggests that he likes to go fast in Central Park and that he likes to go faster than most everybody else there.

22 mph isn't that fast, but it's an average speed for an extended segment with lots of pedestrians (so I'm told), and it's #2 on Strava ... that puts him in the top 1-2% on that segment, and that sounds very bad for a courtroom, even if the average was below the speed limit.

Given how avid of a Strava user he is, he was probably recording his ride at the time of the crash, so unless he deleted that data, the police probably have exact data on how fast he was going. And if he did delete it, doing so is probably a crime if they can prove it.

This could very well turn into another situation like Chris Bucchere's where Strava is likely to get involved. If they've got evidence that he likes to race through Central Park ... he may be another cyclist hit with criminal charges after (practically) killing somebody.

Chris516

Yes, While there is no brain activity. The heart may still be fully functional.

FBinNY 

This is just another hyperbolic exaggeration.

Yes, most accidents, including ones with fatalities are not treated as homicide under the law, mainly because they aren't as defined by the law. A homicide charge requires either intent, or criminal negligence. Accidents resulting from misjudgement, miscalculation, events not under one's control (such as mechanical failure), or simply unavoidable because of the specific circumstances (pedestrian darts in front of moving vehicle) are not criminal acts.

I have no idea if the rider was negligent or careless, or the details of exactly what happened, (nor does anybody not there at the time), so I won't speculate about cause, fault or criminality. That accidents happen and people die from them without criminal charges being files does not mean that nobody cares, it just means that the law recognizes that these things can and do happen even when folks are exercising reasonable care.

Let's avoiding spraying gasoline on this fire.

LesterOfPuppets

Well, he stayed on scene and was taken to hospital for some minor hand and shoulder injuries after the incident, so I think we can safely assume that he got his second best result for the CPE to CPS segment before the accident.

LesterOfPuppets

I don't think he got a Second Overall, he just got his second best time. Strange that his name doesn't show up in the leaderboard for that segment. I think he may have made his rides private, thus not showing up on the Leaderboard.

dougmc

Ahh, you're right ... that means it's his second best time. Which means nothing without knowing his other times.

Actually, going through that segment (he's on page five), his personal best time for that segment is 12.2 mph, making him 107/154 -- that would work out in his favor, as 1) that's not very fast (though it's an average, and therefore includes time stopping for lights and people) and 2) puts him below average for Strava using cyclists here.

I'll bet the police/DA/etc. subpoena Strava for his data. If it all looks like this ... it'll probably help his defense rather than hurt it, as that's not an excessive speed.

Though I wonder if he's cleaned up his Strava data, removing fast runs and leaving slow runs for us to find? Either way, the police/DA can probably get it all if they try.

LesterOfPuppets

Dang, I didn't think to look back that far. He's as slow as I am!!!!

dougmc

Legally, there's a huge difference.

That said, brain dead tends to turn into completely dead, and at that point the difference goes away. But if they keep the victim on life support for a long time, that can make a pretty big difference legally.

If the police do their job properly, they'll treat this as a possible homicide -- the victim is still alive, but probably won't be for long.

vol

I think that part of the loop is a big stretch of downhill.

dougmc

Everybody is slow on this segment, probably because of all the pedestrians. Looks like there's only about 50 feet of climbing in that mile, so it shouldn't be the hills that are slowing everybody down.

In any event, it does suggest that he's not normally a speed demon, at least not on that one segment. I'll bet that his GPS data is key in whatever happens to him -- it may (partially) exonerate him or it may crucify him. Especially if he was recording at the time of the collision.

Note that I made a mistake ... his average speed on his personal best on that segment was 12.2 mph, not kph. (I didn't realize that the units changed when I logged into Strava.)

spare_wheel

Bah. I'm going to link to cyclosaurus' comment above:

https://www.bikeforums.net/advocacy-s...l#post17145591



what motivation is there to exercise reasonable care when this society shrugs it's shoulders at pedestrian fatalities.

FBinNY 

So, not counting DUI, or fleeing police, or intent based on a personal dispute, it's rare for a driver or cyclist to be criminally charged. True. but I don't have a problem with that, though you seem to.

So the question is, where should the bar for criminality be set? EDIT - I withdraw the question since you've answered it in the new thread you started. I wish you the best, and hope you someday get to live in a world governed by rules of your own design, ---- and I don't.

Vintage_Cyclist

The bar for criminality is set in the NY State Penal Law. Sometimes things are really just accidents, even if the cyclist or driver contributed to the accident through negligent behavior. If the elements of the written law aren't met, you don't have a crime. This will probably end up with just a lawsuit against the cyclist and NYC.

There are multiple reports on this in the media, several of them state he was actually in the bike lane and swerved into the car lane to avoid a group of pedestrians, striking the woman who was by herself. From the pictures of his bike, it looks like it has brakes. Prudence would have dictated getting off the tri-bar extensions and being brake-ready when cycling through a pedestrian heavy stretch of Central Park.

Going forward, the issue of safety and city liability will further drive enforcement action. The fact that this happened in Central Park heightens the media attention, as it always does. If it happened on some tertiary street in the outer boroughs it wouldn't have even been noticed by the press. Annually, there are over 1,000 cyclist-pedestrian collisions requiring hospitalization in NYC; 99% of them nobody hears about.

As far as her being in the roadway, it doesn't matter if she had the light or not. A pedestrian in the roadway always has the right of way, even when they are crossing against a light or otherwise jaywalking. Why? Because a pedestrian tends to get badly injured or killed when vehicles run them over.

What the cyclist should have done is stop or proceeded slowly until she was out of his way. That's just the way it is. Just because a pedestrian has his or her head up their ass, doesn't mean it's alright for a cyclist or driver to have their own head up their ass also.

I drive and cycle in NYC and there are some areas of the city you almost need a cow-catcher on the front of your vehicle. A lot of people walking around out there are either oblivious or just don't give a crap.

spare_wheel

Word.

Fissile

Yup, even if you have the right of way, the law requires you take evasive action if possible. "Right of way" doesn't mean you can escalate a bad situation. It's no different than if a cyclist is obstructing the right of way of a motorist. The motorist must take evasive action if possible "Right of way" does not give anyone a right to run you down.

JoeyBike

The victim is partly to blame. She stepped off of a curb into a roadway without looking both ways. This is not criminal but it is potentially deadly. Does not matter one hoot who is right or wrong. The result is the same. Paying attention to her surroundings ABSOLUTELY would have saved her. If you pay attention I won't have to feel sorry for you since only meteorites, falling airplanes, and hit men are likely to kill you. The cyclist was THERE and visible to any human being. This particular human being did not look. She likely trusted some stupid light that said "Walk". She is legally right, and almost legally dead. If she could have a do-over I think she would pay closer attention while crossing that road.

You are sleeping in your bed and a dump truck loses control and crashes through the wall of your bedroom and kills you - THEN you are an innocent victim.

We must make an attempt to NOT be a victim when out of out beds or we are partly to blame for the results.