Cyclist runs into pedestrian in NYC Central Park - now she's brain dead
#126
Been Around Awhile
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Posts: 29,973
Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked 1,536 Times
in
1,045 Posts
Heck, don't try so hard to be politically correct, fess up what is really on your mind about this fellow, knowing all that you do about him and after viewing a snapshot.
#127
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 3,040
Bikes: Bacchetta Giro, Strada
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
The justice system in general. If you want to get picky about what needs to happen and in what order and who gets to demand what, fine, but that wasn't my point.
If the DA wants these GPS details, he'll ask for them, possibly politely at first. Maybe the police asked for such things at the scene? If a warrant or subpoena is required, they'll get it -- certainly, a court won't reject such a request if the purpose is to get data that is directly related to a crime they're investigating -- and how fast the cyclist was going will certainly be relevant here in deciding if this is to be treated as a crime or just an ordinary collision.
If the data was intentionally destroyed to keep the prosecutor from getting it, that's called things like tampering with evidence or obstruction of justice and yes, it's generally illegal.
Now, if it's prosecuted would probably depend on the situation and how easily it could be shown that the evidence was destroyed -- if the guy can claim that the evidence never existed in the first place, that might be hard to disprove. But certainly, destroying evidence that you know the police want in connection with a crime is generally illegal, even if the evidence would incriminate you. (That said, you don't have to volunteer that the evidence exists ... you do have the right to remain silent, but that doesn't give you the right to destroy evidence.)
In any event, I'm no lawyer, but if you find yourself in a situation like that of the cyclist here (I imagine it'll never happen, but just hypothetically ...), I'd suggest consulting a lawyer before destroying any evidence you may have about the collision, especially if the police have good reason to believe that it exists and you have it. (And in this case, the cyclist's extensive Strava use strongly suggests that it exists or at least existed.)
If the DA wants these GPS details, he'll ask for them, possibly politely at first. Maybe the police asked for such things at the scene? If a warrant or subpoena is required, they'll get it -- certainly, a court won't reject such a request if the purpose is to get data that is directly related to a crime they're investigating -- and how fast the cyclist was going will certainly be relevant here in deciding if this is to be treated as a crime or just an ordinary collision.
If the data was intentionally destroyed to keep the prosecutor from getting it, that's called things like tampering with evidence or obstruction of justice and yes, it's generally illegal.
Now, if it's prosecuted would probably depend on the situation and how easily it could be shown that the evidence was destroyed -- if the guy can claim that the evidence never existed in the first place, that might be hard to disprove. But certainly, destroying evidence that you know the police want in connection with a crime is generally illegal, even if the evidence would incriminate you. (That said, you don't have to volunteer that the evidence exists ... you do have the right to remain silent, but that doesn't give you the right to destroy evidence.)
In any event, I'm no lawyer, but if you find yourself in a situation like that of the cyclist here (I imagine it'll never happen, but just hypothetically ...), I'd suggest consulting a lawyer before destroying any evidence you may have about the collision, especially if the police have good reason to believe that it exists and you have it. (And in this case, the cyclist's extensive Strava use strongly suggests that it exists or at least existed.)
Last edited by dougmc; 09-20-14 at 10:56 PM.
#128
Been Around Awhile
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Posts: 29,973
Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked 1,536 Times
in
1,045 Posts
FYI you might take a look at High court: Police need warrant to search cell phones - CNN.com
#129
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 3,040
Bikes: Bacchetta Giro, Strada
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
Note that the legal beagles of BF previously did not restrict the definition of "they" to only representatives of the DA with search warrants in hand, and "they" could include anybody from nosy news reporters to lawyers foraging for data to use in a civil suit.
As for a civil suit, if one happens, I would expect any competent attorney to request all such information, and I see no reason for the judge to deny such a request, as it would be directly relevant to the case. There is a penalty for failing to comply with a subpoena too, but I was specifically referring to the potential criminal case.
FYI you might take a look at High court: Police need warrant to search cell phones - CNN.com
I imagine that had the police thought to do so (we looked him up on Strava, they may not have thought to do that), and had they been treating their investigation seriously ... they would have taken his GPS (or phone, if it's what he uses) as evidence -- they don't need a warrant to do that. If they need a warrant to read it, they'll get one. (Unless they're incompetent, which is certainly possible. And they might not need a warrant to read it -- he could have consented.)
#130
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Carlstadt, NJ
Posts: 404
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times
in
2 Posts
But those items happen to be My point. That and the wacky legal theory that individuals are forbidden to modify their own recordings and other electronic data because "they" might want to go on a fishing trip through the data to see what "they" can find. Note that the legal beagles of BF previously did not restrict the definition of "they" to only representatives of the DA with search warrants in hand, and "they" could include anybody from nosy news reporters to lawyers foraging for data to use in a civil suit.
FYI you might take a look at High court: Police need warrant to search cell phones - CNN.com
FYI you might take a look at High court: Police need warrant to search cell phones - CNN.com
#132
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: NYC, duh Bronx.
Posts: 3,578
Bikes: Salsa Ti Warbird- 2014/ November RAIL52s
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 67 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
The day after the incident was quite a bit cooler, and being that he's a professional saxophonist, if you knew anything about wtf you're talking about, you'd realize they tend to protect their throats from the weather.
#133
Senior Member
Cooler? Yeah, it went down to a bone chilling 72. He needs to protect his throat from the chill? Really? Is he a horn player or an opera diva?
#135
Senior Member
Yeah, I got in my car on the 19th and the exterior tempt gauge said 72, but I'm way down South in Hudson Co, which is practically next to Miami. I think it's you who needs to STFU.
#136
Been Around Awhile
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Posts: 29,973
Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked 1,536 Times
in
1,045 Posts
As for a civil suit, if one happens, I would expect any competent attorney to request all such information, and I see no reason for the judge to deny such a request, as it would be directly relevant to the case. There is a penalty for failing to comply with a subpoena too, but I was specifically referring to the potential criminal case.
I saw it when it came out, but why do you think it's relevant now? If "they" (my "they", the police/DA/criminal courts) need a warrant, they'll get a warrant. Certainly, I would not expect a judge to refuse to give a warrant for his recent GPS data under these circumstances.
I imagine that had the police thought to do so (we looked him up on Strava, they may not have thought to do that), and had they been treating their investigation seriously ... they would have taken his GPS (or phone, if it's what he uses) as evidence -- they don't need a warrant to do that. If they need a warrant to read it, they'll get one. (Unless they're incompetent, which is certainly possible. And they might not need a warrant to read it -- he could have consented.)
I saw it when it came out, but why do you think it's relevant now? If "they" (my "they", the police/DA/criminal courts) need a warrant, they'll get a warrant. Certainly, I would not expect a judge to refuse to give a warrant for his recent GPS data under these circumstances.
I imagine that had the police thought to do so (we looked him up on Strava, they may not have thought to do that), and had they been treating their investigation seriously ... they would have taken his GPS (or phone, if it's what he uses) as evidence -- they don't need a warrant to do that. If they need a warrant to read it, they'll get one. (Unless they're incompetent, which is certainly possible. And they might not need a warrant to read it -- he could have consented.)
Why exactly do the police need the cyclist's GPS information to establish the cyclist's location at the time of the accident? Is that somehow in doubt? What legal basis do the police/DA have to snoop in his phone for information for his previous track record in Central Park? Is it the same BF legal beagle principle used to snoop in every motorists' personal cell phone records to find out if they ever were speeding at any time in the past or present. IOW just hot air legal jive talk.
BTW how admissible (or accurate) is Strava data on a cell phone as legal evidence of a specific speed at any specific point in time?
Last edited by I-Like-To-Bike; 09-21-14 at 08:51 AM.
#138
Been Around Awhile
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Posts: 29,973
Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked 1,536 Times
in
1,045 Posts
There's a reason large law and accounting firms have shredders going constantly. They're destroying documents that could be subject to subpoena at a later date in an ancillary investigation ...and that's totally legal. Do it during an investigation and it's a crime. Do it to conceal a crime that's not been discovered yet and that's also a crime...also applies to electronic documents.
As for an individual, most don't do this, and certainly you aren't expected to keep things forever, but if you almost killed somebody yesterday and knew it, and then in a few days they ask for your GPS traces (or video evidence or whatever), and you say "sorry, I deleted it ... you can't expect me to keep this stuff forever!" and yet Strava is full of all your other rides ... that's probably a crime, and they'd have a good case to prosecute you for it.
Most states have laws against this, and this looks like the relevant law for New York -- and stuff on a computer is almost certainly "physical evidence". There's also federal laws against this sort of thing.
Most states have laws against this, and this looks like the relevant law for New York -- and stuff on a computer is almost certainly "physical evidence". There's also federal laws against this sort of thing.
#139
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: New Rochelle, NY
Posts: 38,716
Bikes: too many bikes from 1967 10s (5x2)Frejus to a Sumitomo Ti/Chorus aluminum 10s (10x2), plus one non-susp mtn bike I use as my commuter
Mentioned: 140 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5787 Post(s)
Liked 2,579 Times
in
1,430 Posts
+1, now that the thread has moved to stereotyping and a two person argument about what is or isn't evidence o evidence tampering, it belongs in P&R. Move or shutdown coming soon.
__________________
FB
Chain-L site
An ounce of diagnosis is worth a pound of cure.
Just because I'm tired of arguing, doesn't mean you're right.
“One accurate measurement is worth a thousand expert opinions” - Adm Grace Murray Hopper - USN
WARNING, I'm from New York. Thin skinned people should maintain safe distance.
FB
Chain-L site
An ounce of diagnosis is worth a pound of cure.
Just because I'm tired of arguing, doesn't mean you're right.
“One accurate measurement is worth a thousand expert opinions” - Adm Grace Murray Hopper - USN
WARNING, I'm from New York. Thin skinned people should maintain safe distance.
#141
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Indiana
Posts: 478
Bikes: 2015 Trek 7.3
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
#142
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Elevation 666m Edmonton Canada
Posts: 2,482
Bikes: 2013 Custom SA5w / Rohloff Tourster
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1237 Post(s)
Liked 321 Times
in
248 Posts
+1 This cyclist is a total TWIT and I gather so are hundreds of others in CP.
So this guy is making a sport of zooming thru the park like it is " Death Race 3000" ??? WTF ... Go play your sax at Sing Sing.
So this guy is making a sport of zooming thru the park like it is " Death Race 3000" ??? WTF ... Go play your sax at Sing Sing.
#143
Banned
It seems that whenever a cyclist starts to attain higher speeds, that still do not emulate ones that many motorists do regularly on residential streets and would be considered slow by their POV, the words like "speeding", and "reckless", seem to pop up in certain conversations.
Last edited by dynodonn; 09-21-14 at 10:12 AM.
#144
Been Around Awhile
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Posts: 29,973
Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked 1,536 Times
in
1,045 Posts
IOW, you aren't interested any more now that it has drifted into other areas, so shut it down, eh?
#145
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Northeast United States
Posts: 1,147
Bikes: Tarmac, Focus Urban 8, Giant Hybrid
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
When I ride this section I typically do anywhere between 20-25 mph safely. Usually, most peds. are cognizant enough to stay clear (not jaywalk) in this downhill and flat section as cyclists / carriages / vehicles can be clearly seen hundreds of feet away. There is however, a intersection near 59th St. which is a complete nightmare and total cluster.
As per withholding, or destroying evidence....not ever a good thing. And I same sure both parties are keeping quiet during this period. When it goes legal a lot of stuff will come out during discovery. Additionally, I have discovered that a common tactic used in court is "I don't remember." And in my particular legal proceedings (not involving bodily injury) it works.
#146
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: On the bridge with Picard
Posts: 5,932
Bikes: Specialized Allez, Specialized Sirrus
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 17 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
*ding ding*
That's the kitchen timer; this thread is done.
That's the kitchen timer; this thread is done.