Another Annetts case to emerge?



J

JohnB

Guest
In this weeks' Basingstoke Gazette;

Brief summary:

"AN 11-year-old schoolboy cyclist from Basingstoke was yesterday in a
"critical but stable" condition in hospital after he was involved in a
collision with a van on the A33 at Chineham.

The youngster - who comes from the Chineham area but whose name has not
been released by police - sustained multiple injuries, including head
injuries, in the incident at Thornhill Way traffic lights at 4.30pm on Tuesday.

Sergeant Paul Plews, of Hampshire Roads Policing Unit, said: "The van
was travelling along the A33 and it appears that a child has ridden out
on a bike. The van braked hard, but an impact occurred."

Paul Troughton, from Southampton, was driving along the A33 a short
distance behind the van when the accident happened. He said that the
schoolboy was not wearing a cycle helmet.

The A33 was closed in both directions until 8pm, causing long jams to
build up on the diversion route through Chineham village.

"We understand this caused major disruption for people in the area. We
apologise, but this was a serious incident and we owe it to the family
of the victim to investigate it fully."

The 52-year-old driver of the Emcor Ford Escort van involved in the
collision was not hurt."
++++

Full report at:
http://www.thisishampshire.net/hampshire/basingstoke/news/BASINGSTOKE_NEWS_NEWS3.html

John B
 
JohnB wrote:

> Paul Troughton, from Southampton, was driving along the A33 a short
> distance behind the van when the accident happened. He said that the
> schoolboy was not wearing a cycle helmet.


But neglected to say whether the boy was cycling safely or whether the van
driver was driving carefully.

The fact that he was not wearing a helmet is not signifcant.
 
Simonb wrote:
>
> JohnB wrote:
>
> > Paul Troughton, from Southampton, was driving along the A33 a short
> > distance behind the van when the accident happened. He said that the
> > schoolboy was not wearing a cycle helmet.

>
> But neglected to say whether the boy was cycling safely or whether the van
> driver was driving carefully.


Par for the course :-(

> The fact that he was not wearing a helmet is not signifcant.


John B
 
JohnB wrote:

> In this weeks' Basingstoke Gazette;
>
> Brief summary:
>
> "AN 11-year-old schoolboy cyclist from Basingstoke was yesterday in a
> "critical but stable" condition in hospital after he was involved in a
> collision with a van on the A33 at Chineham.
>
> The youngster - who comes from the Chineham area but whose name has not
> been released by police - sustained multiple injuries, including head
> injuries, in the incident at Thornhill Way traffic lights at 4.30pm on Tuesday.
>
> Sergeant Paul Plews, of Hampshire Roads Policing Unit, said: "The van
> was travelling along the A33 and it appears that a child has ridden out
> on a bike. The van braked hard, but an impact occurred."


Almost identical, but fatal, incident reported here:

http://www.thisiswiltshire.co.uk/wiltshire/archive/2004/06/19/swindon_news2ZM.html

No mention of the H-word, but again the young victim was riding *across*
the road. Ironically there is an underpass for use by cyclists and peds
about 20 yards away from the accident site.
 
On Sat, 18 Sep 2004 20:19:39 +0100, Zog The Undeniable
<[email protected]> wrote:


>
>Almost identical, but fatal, incident reported here:
>
>http://www.thisiswiltshire.co.uk/wiltshire/archive/2004/06/19/swindon_news2ZM.html
>
>No mention of the H-word, but again the young victim was riding *across*
>the road. Ironically there is an underpass for use by cyclists and peds
>about 20 yards away from the accident site.
>
>


Not sure what is ironic about that. Assuming it's your standard issue
UK underpass[1], it's hardly suprising that the boy avoided using it -
along with everyone else.

[1] Primary design criteria being uninterrupted motor traffic flow
even if that means sending peds on long, long unpleasant and unsafe
detours.
 
[Not Responding] wrote:

> Not sure what is ironic about that. Assuming it's your standard issue
> UK underpass[1], it's hardly suprising that the boy avoided using it -
> along with everyone else.
>
> [1] Primary design criteria being uninterrupted motor traffic flow
> even if that means sending peds on long, long unpleasant and unsafe
> detours.


It goes under a busy roundabout with traffic lights and 6 exits, two of
which are dual carriageways, and links up with useful cycle routes (a
rarity, I know) on both sides. I use it myself at busy periods. Never
seen any broken glass/tramps/yobs in there.
 

Similar threads