Cyclist killed at South Brisbane

Barry said:

Hit by a bus apparently, anyone know more about this ?

When, today?

Here is a link from the News Ltd website.

http://www.news.com.au/story/0,10117,17744360-421,00.html

The bit about the cyclist is right at the bottom. A male cyclist, hit
by a bus on teh corner of Grey & Melbourne Streets at South Brisbane,
just after midday.......

🙁

Abby

more details:
http://www.couriermail.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5936,17750134%255E3102,00.html

it still doesn't explain how it really happened, but the council says
the driver "acted within the law". it implies that just because the
driver had just been through a green light, he did nothing wrong.

Absent Husband said:

Here is a link from the News Ltd website.

http://www.news.com.au/story/0,10117,17744360-421,00.html

The bit about the cyclist is right at the bottom. A male cyclist, hit
by a bus on teh corner of Grey & Melbourne Streets at South Brisbane,
just after midday.......

🙁

Abby

seems strange that a bus can 'clip him with the rear of the bus' and yet be 'driving within the law'.
I'm guessing Bus has changed lanes/sideswiped cyclist, altho far too little info to make any realworld assessment/assumption

flyingdutch said:

seems strange that a bus can 'clip him with the rear of the bus' and yet
be 'driving within the law'.
I'm guessing Bus has changed lanes/sideswiped cyclist, altho far too
little info to make any realworld assessment/assumption

Very bloody strange report in the CourierMail.

If a pedestrian staggers onto the road, drunk, not at a crossing, a car
driver is still at fault for not paying due care and attention. But if
a bus clips a cyclist, and kills him, after passing through a green
light the bus driver is not at fault.

There was a recent case decided by the courts where a truck driver ran
over a drunk who had fallen asleep on the road, (and if I am not
mistaken wearing dark clothes!), where the judge ruled against the
truck driver. The truck driver had been distracted by another drunk
behaving erratically on the edge of the road, and failed to see the
sleeping drunk. The court ruled the truckie was not paying due care and
attention! I’d like to see the same argument dished up to this BCC bus
driver!

justme said:

On 2006-01-07 08:26:29 +1000, flyingdutch

Quoted message said:

seems strange that a bus can 'clip him with the rear of the bus' and yet
be 'driving within the law'.
I'm guessing Bus has changed lanes/sideswiped cyclist, altho far too
little info to make any realworld assessment/assumption

Very bloody strange report in the CourierMail.

If a pedestrian staggers onto the road, drunk, not at a crossing, a car
driver is still at fault for not paying due care and attention. But if
a bus clips a cyclist, and kills him, after passing through a green
light the bus driver is not at fault.

There was a recent case decided by the courts where a truck driver ran
over a drunk who had fallen asleep on the road, (and if I am not
mistaken wearing dark clothes!), where the judge ruled against the
truck driver. The truck driver had been distracted by another drunk
behaving erratically on the edge of the road, and failed to see the
sleeping drunk. The court ruled the truckie was not paying due care and
attention! I’d like to see the same argument dished up to this BCC bus
driver!

oh great, so bus drivers can basically go out and just mow people down, fantastic, as long as "they acted within the law", WTF ?

I think I know that section of road though, I avoided it by all possible means as it is a bit of a bus thorough-fare, now excussing the negligence, I just personally avoided it all costs.

*sigh*

flyingdutch said:

seems strange that a bus can 'clip him with the rear of the bus' and yet
be 'driving within the law'.

Likely though no matter what that the council would be putting out
spin to try and manage the media and look after its and the drivers
interests.

If the bus had right of way and didn't see or couldn't avoid the
cyclist then that would be the case. Or the cyclist may have illegally
tried to cut up the side of the bus already changing lanes.
Then again the description is vague enough to allow for the
possibility that the cyclist ran a red light and rode into the back of
the bus.

As you say we await an accident report and coroners investigation.

dewatf.

flyingdutch said:

seems strange that a bus can 'clip him with the rear of the bus' and yet
be 'driving within the law'.
I'm guessing Bus has changed lanes/sideswiped cyclist, altho far too
little info to make any realworld assessment/assumption

Mmm.. beware, people -- "If you can't see my mirrors I can't see you."
should be read as "Even if it's midday and you can clearly see my face in
my mirrors then I probably won't bother looking for you before I turn
across you".

I've lost a bike this way, luckily i could unclip and jump off in time.

- m.

"flyingdutch" <[email hidden]> wrote in
message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

seems strange that a bus can 'clip him with the rear of the bus' and yet
be 'driving within the law'.
I'm guessing Bus has changed lanes/sideswiped cyclist, altho far too
little info to make any realworld assessment/assumption

--
flyingdutch

if he was cycling past the museum as the report mentioned, perhaps he was
heading straight ahead and the bus was turning left to cross the victoria
bridge. There is a turn left lane there but I often see cyclists sitting in
this lane when they are intending to go straight past the cultural centre.
But who knows....poor bloke.

Adam

Yeap there is a left turn lane there, but there is also a bizarre cycle
lane along that bit which I suppose we are legally obliged to use. I
don't use it though, I do have a vision of buses trying to turn left
into the bus lane while I have to go straight to get to the lights
(where I can turn left).

Ok that sounds a bit complex, but if you know the area you'll know what
I mean.

I rode through there a few hours ago, felt quite sad, and scared. But I
have ridden through there for 4 years now without incident, it really
isn't such a bad area (sorry to contradict MikeyOz). I'm not sure what
possible excuse there could be for this accident - it's either the
driver paying no attention or the cyclist doing something dangerous/illegal.

daniel.

adam85 said:

"flyingdutch" <[email hidden]> wrote in
message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

seems strange that a bus can 'clip him with the rear of the bus' and yet
be 'driving within the law'.
I'm guessing Bus has changed lanes/sideswiped cyclist, altho far too
little info to make any realworld assessment/assumption

--
flyingdutch

if he was cycling past the museum as the report mentioned, perhaps he was
heading straight ahead and the bus was turning left to cross the victoria
bridge. There is a turn left lane there but I often see cyclists sitting in
this lane when they are intending to go straight past the cultural centre.
But who knows....poor bloke.

Adam

@(none) said:

Yeap there is a left turn lane there, but there is also a bizarre cycle
lane along that bit which I suppose we are legally obliged to use. I
don't use it though, I do have a vision of buses trying to turn left
into the bus lane while I have to go straight to get to the lights
(where I can turn left).

Ok that sounds a bit complex, but if you know the area you'll know what
I mean.

I rode through there a few hours ago, felt quite sad, and scared. But I
have ridden through there for 4 years now without incident, it really
isn't such a bad area (sorry to contradict MikeyOz). I'm not sure what
possible excuse there could be for this accident - it's either the
driver paying no attention or the cyclist doing something dangerous/illegal.

daniel.

adam85 said:

"flyingdutch" <[email hidden]> wrote in
message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

seems strange that a bus can 'clip him with the rear of the bus' and yet
be 'driving within the law'.
I'm guessing Bus has changed lanes/sideswiped cyclist, altho far too
little info to make any realworld assessment/assumption

--
flyingdutch

if he was cycling past the museum as the report mentioned, perhaps he was
heading straight ahead and the bus was turning left to cross the victoria
bridge. There is a turn left lane there but I often see cyclists sitting in
this lane when they are intending to go straight past the cultural centre.
But who knows....poor bloke.

Adam

ehhhh dont worry about contradicting me! 🙂 as everything its all personal... when I lived up there, I avoided it like the plague....

(dewatf) said:

If the bus had right of way

No such thing as a right of way in Australia. Road users have a duty of
care to each other, a road user approaching a stop sign has a duty to
stop at the stop sign but there is no right of way.

Quoted message said:

and didn't see or couldn't avoid the
cyclist then that would be the case. Or the cyclist may have illegally
tried to cut up the side of the bus already changing lanes.

A cyclist can quite legally overtake another vehicle on the left as you
well know. Not always the safest course and a course that should be
exercised with caution. The overtaking vehicle, in this hypothetical
case the cyclist, has the higher duty of care in this situation.
--
Cheers | ~~ __@
Euan | ~~ _-\<,
Melbourne, Australia | ~ (*)/ (*)

--
Frank
[email hidden]
Drop DACKS to reply
"justme" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

flyingdutch said:

seems strange that a bus can 'clip him with the rear of the bus' and yet
be 'driving within the law'.
I'm guessing Bus has changed lanes/sideswiped cyclist, altho far too
little info to make any realworld assessment/assumption

Very bloody strange report in the CourierMail.

If a pedestrian staggers onto the road, drunk, not at a crossing, a car
driver is still at fault for not paying due care and attention. But if
a bus clips a cyclist, and kills him, after passing through a green
light the bus driver is not at fault.

There was a recent case decided by the courts where a truck driver ran
over a drunk who had fallen asleep on the road, (and if I am not
mistaken wearing dark clothes!), where the judge ruled against the
truck driver. The truck driver had been distracted by another drunk
behaving erratically on the edge of the road, and failed to see the
sleeping drunk. The court ruled the truckie was not paying due care and
attention! I'd like to see the same argument dished up to this BCC bus
driver!

The drunk on the road case was here in WA and got quite a bit of attention.
At first I thought it was bloody ridiculous too, but one of the regular
journos (Collen Egan, perhaps) wrote that it could have been a person who
was sick, a fallen cyclist or many other reasons for a person lying on the
road. That got my attention and I understand better why court ruled against
the driver. Let's face it, every time anyone does almost anything (driving
in particular, in this case) there's a risk involved. Sometimes the risk is
being in a situation where there are too many variables to cope with and an
accident occurs through the variable that wasn't noted.

I'm still peeved that the drunk got a substantial payout, though. The
driving without due care and attention I can understand, but I would have
thought the reason for lying on the road (drunken irresponsibility) would
have reduced the compensation payout substantially more than it did (close
to bugger all payment, if I was the judge!).

Cheers,

Frank

We still don't have many details given somebody was killed - anybody have any ideas as to how we can get some details this week.

Euan said:

(dewatf) said:

If the bus had right of way

No such thing as a right of way in Australia. Road users have a duty of
care to each other, a road user approaching a stop sign has a duty to
stop at the stop sign but there is no right of way.

Stop and give way. So this de facto gives an intended safe passage to other
vehicles.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

and didn't see or couldn't avoid the
cyclist then that would be the case. Or the cyclist may have illegally
tried to cut up the side of the bus already changing lanes.

A cyclist can quite legally overtake another vehicle on the left as you
well know. Not always the safest course and a course that should be
exercised with caution.

Neither legal nor safe if the vehicle being overtaken is a left-turning bus,
which it sounds like may have been the case here.

Cheers
Peter

Peter Signorini said:

Euan said:

(dewatf) said:

If the bus had right of way

No such thing as a right of way in Australia. Road users have a duty of
care to each other, a road user approaching a stop sign has a duty to
stop at the stop sign but there is no right of way.

Stop and give way. So this de facto gives an intended safe passage to other
vehicles.

De facto does not mean that it's correct. There is no such thing as a
right of way in the Australian road rules, just duty of care.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

A cyclist can quite legally overtake another vehicle on the left as you
well know. Not always the safest course and a course that should be
exercised with caution.

Neither legal nor safe if the vehicle being overtaken is a left-turning bus,
which it sounds like may have been the case here.

That depends entirely on when the bus a) indicated and b) commenced the
maneuver. Seems to me that for Australians indicating occurs after the
maneuver has started.

You don't know, nor do I so there's little fruit in debating further.
--
Cheers | ~~ __@
Euan | ~~ _-\<,
Melbourne, Australia | ~ (*)/ (*)

Euan said:

"Peter Signorini" writes:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Stop and give way. So this de facto gives an intended safe passage to
other
vehicles.

De facto does not mean that it's correct. There is no such thing as a
right of way in the Australian road rules, just duty of care.

Oh, I agree antirely. Just wish more people would do it.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Neither legal nor safe if the vehicle being overtaken is a left-turning
bus,
which it sounds like may have been the case here.

That depends entirely on when the bus a) indicated and b) commenced the
maneuver. Seems to me that for Australians indicating occurs after the
maneuver has started.

You don't know, nor do I so there's little fruit in debating further.

'Sokay! I just meant that there are all manner of possibilities in this
tragic incident. Don't want to tar the cyclist, nor the bus driver, who's no
doubt suffering plenty of angst and regrets.

Cheers
Peter

Absent Husband said:

Here is a link from the News Ltd website.

http://www.news.com.au/story/0,10117,17744360-421,00.html

The bit about the cyclist is right at the bottom. A male cyclist, hit
by a bus on teh corner of Grey & Melbourne Streets at South Brisbane,
just after midday.......

🙁

Abby

I see a lot of cyclists through there on old deadly treddlies, no
helmets, carrying shopping bags, etc... I hope it's not one of those
cases where people are going to stand up and b!tch about how unsafe the
cyclists are.

Tam

Euan said:

(dewatf) said:

If the bus had right of way

No such thing as a right of way in Australia. Road users have a duty of
care to each other, a road user approaching a stop sign has a duty to
stop at the stop sign but there is no right of way.

The road rules clearly set out who has to give way. The other vehicle
thus has right of way. Give way is never specifically defined, the
laws refer to the dictionary for meaning and state that slowing down
or stopping so as to avoid a collision is required in certain
circumstances.

Quoted message said:

A cyclist can quite legally overtake another vehicle on the left as you
well know. Not always the safest course and a course that should be
exercised with caution. The overtaking vehicle, in this hypothetical
case the cyclist, has the higher duty of care in this situation.

A cyclist can only overtake a stationary vehicle that is not
indicating it is turning left on leff.

dewatf.