Delaware: OK to kill cyclists not "as far to the right" as roadwayallows

[Robert J. Matter]

http://www.delmarvanow.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050628/NEWS01/506280315/1002

Bicyclist killed in collision with truck on Route 13

By Deborah Gates
Daily Times Staff Writer

SALISBURY -- A city man cycling to work in the wrong traffic lane was
fatally struck by the driver of a company truck who was apparently
blinded by scant visibility from Monday's early morning rain, state
police said.

Investigators blame pedestrian error and poor visibility for the 3:44
a.m. accident on northbound Route 13 near Clover Street that killed
cyclist Charles Curtis Campbell, according to Maryland State Police
spokesman Sgt. Keith Johnson. The 39-year-old Salisbury resident was en
route to his job at the Target department store in north Salisbury.

"The pedestrian was at fault," Johnson said Monday of initial police
findings.

The driver of the Herr's snack-food truck that struck the victim,
Stephen Richard Sprankle, also of Salisbury, had not been charged Monday
morning, police said. The accident continues to be investigated.

By law, cyclists are required to move with traffic "as far to the right"
as roadway allows, Johnson said.

Campbell was struck as he rode the bicycle in the passing, or fast lane,
near Clover Street, Johnson said.

"He was in the fast lane, closer to the center median," Johnson said.
"Riders should be to the far right on the shoulder, or if there is no
shoulder, to the extreme right side."

The bicycle had a reflector but it was unclear what the victim was
wearing at the time of the accident, Johnson said.

"There was a small reflector on the back of the seat. It was raining
hard at the time and visibility had something to do with it," -- another
factor in the crash, he said.

At the time of the accident, rain poured over much of the Lower Shore,
and Sprankle, whose age was not available, was behind Campbell in a
company delivery truck. On the job to deliver products to an area
business, the driver backed up the truck to the scene to see what was
struck.

"They were both heading north when the truck hit. I don't think he even
realized what he hit," Johnson said. "He backed up and saw a man in the
center of the median by the guard rail. (Campbell) was knocked from the
bike."

Campbell died at the scene and within yards of Target, police said.

Mia Fox, manager for the Salisbury Target, said employees were saddened
by the news.

"(Campbell) was a team member and we are sad about the situation," she said.

# Reach Deborah Gates at 410-845-4641 or [email protected].

Originally published June 28, 2005

 

[rdclark]

Robert J. Matter wrote:
> http://www.delmarvanow.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050628/NEWS01/506280315/1002
>
> Bicyclist killed in collision with truck on Route 13
>
> By Deborah Gates
> Daily Times Staff Writer
>
> SALISBURY -- A city man cycling to work in the wrong traffic lane was
> fatally struck by the driver of a company truck who was apparently
> blinded by scant visibility from Monday's early morning rain, state
> police said.
>
> Investigators blame pedestrian error

"Pedestrian?"

Pretty clear that the officials being quoted, while they think they
understand the letter of the law, do not comprehend the rationale of
the law.

There's also the question of whether the cyclist was preparing to make
a left turn, unanswered in this article.

I would like to hear Bob Hunt's take on whether a driver should be
exonerated solely because the cyclist wasn't all the way to the right,
even if he wasn't preparing to turn left. Is the reduced visibility
from the rain any sort of defense?

At the same time, I will say that on such a road (and I ride frequently
on Rt 13, which goes right by my house, although not that part of it) I
ride with the assumption that drivers will not see me no matter what I
do. Commercial strips with no center lane, no bike lane, no shoulder,
and nothing but commercial/retail buildings and driveways and parking
lots, offer maximum distraction to drivers. Pouring rain doesn't help.
I don't know if the layout of Rt 13 is exactly like that at the point
where this fatality occurred, but it is in many places.

RichC

 

[jj]

On 28 Jun 2005 08:16:47 -0700, "rdclark" <[email protected]> wrote:

>
>
>Robert J. Matter wrote:
>> http://www.delmarvanow.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050628/NEWS01/506280315/1002
>>
>> Bicyclist killed in collision with truck on Route 13
>>
>> By Deborah Gates
>> Daily Times Staff Writer
>>
>> SALISBURY -- A city man cycling to work in the wrong traffic lane was
>> fatally struck by the driver of a company truck who was apparently
>> blinded by scant visibility from Monday's early morning rain, state
>> police said.
>>
>> Investigators blame pedestrian error
>
>"Pedestrian?"
>
>Pretty clear that the officials being quoted, while they think they
>understand the letter of the law, do not comprehend the rationale of
>the law.
>
>There's also the question of whether the cyclist was preparing to make
>a left turn, unanswered in this article.
>
>I would like to hear Bob Hunt's take on whether a driver should be
>exonerated solely because the cyclist wasn't all the way to the right,
>even if he wasn't preparing to turn left. Is the reduced visibility
>from the rain any sort of defense?
>
>At the same time, I will say that on such a road (and I ride frequently
>on Rt 13, which goes right by my house, although not that part of it) I
>ride with the assumption that drivers will not see me no matter what I
>do. Commercial strips with no center lane, no bike lane, no shoulder,
>and nothing but commercial/retail buildings and driveways and parking
>lots, offer maximum distraction to drivers. Pouring rain doesn't help.
>I don't know if the layout of Rt 13 is exactly like that at the point
>where this fatality occurred, but it is in many places.
>
>RichC

The driver didn't see the cyclist not because of the rain, but because he
was distracted. If it was raining -that- hard the driver should have been
going 5mph, not speeding (by definition, 'too fast for conditions').

I hope the family gets a PI and sues the company.

jj

 

[Robert J. Matter]

Correction: The subject line should be

"Maryland: OK to kill cyclists not "as far to the right" as roadway allows"

-RJM

 

[The Wogster]

Robert J. Matter wrote:
> http://www.delmarvanow.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050628/NEWS01/506280315/1002
>
>
> Bicyclist killed in collision with truck on Route 13
>
> By Deborah Gates
> Daily Times Staff Writer
>
> SALISBURY -- A city man cycling to work in the wrong traffic lane was
> fatally struck by the driver of a company truck who was apparently
> blinded by scant visibility from Monday's early morning rain, state
> police said.
>
> Investigators blame pedestrian error and poor visibility for the 3:44
> a.m. accident on northbound Route 13 near Clover Street that killed
> cyclist Charles Curtis Campbell, according to Maryland State Police
> spokesman Sgt. Keith Johnson. The 39-year-old Salisbury resident was en
> route to his job at the Target department store in north Salisbury.
>
> "The pedestrian was at fault," Johnson said Monday of initial police
> findings.
>
> The driver of the Herr's snack-food truck that struck the victim,
> Stephen Richard Sprankle, also of Salisbury, had not been charged Monday
> morning, police said. The accident continues to be investigated.
>
> By law, cyclists are required to move with traffic "as far to the right"
> as roadway allows, Johnson said.
>

First of all, at 3:44Am, in most places, it's pretty dark, there is no
indication as to whether the cyclist had ANY lights. There is no
indication either as to why he could have been in that lane.

Sgt. Johnson, seems fairly clueless as well, a bicycle operator is not a
pedestrian, most jurisdictions consider a bicycle a vehicle.

> Campbell was struck as he rode the bicycle in the passing, or fast lane,
> near Clover Street, Johnson said.
>
> "He was in the fast lane, closer to the center median," Johnson said.
> "Riders should be to the far right on the shoulder, or if there is no
> shoulder, to the extreme right side."
>
> The bicycle had a reflector but it was unclear what the victim was
> wearing at the time of the accident, Johnson said.
>
> "There was a small reflector on the back of the seat. It was raining
> hard at the time and visibility had something to do with it," -- another
> factor in the crash, he said.
>
> At the time of the accident, rain poured over much of the Lower Shore,
> and Sprankle, whose age was not available, was behind Campbell in a
> company delivery truck. On the job to deliver products to an area
> business, the driver backed up the truck to the scene to see what was
> struck.

So, the cyclist was running without lights, at a quarter of 4 in the
morning, in pouring rain, with only a tiny rear reflector. Was probably
wearing dark clothing as well. Gee, I wonder why the truck hit him.

One of a cyclists most important activities is to make sure that others
can see them, whether that's a motor vehicle, pedestrian or other
cyclist. Lights at night and in poor weather helps, so does bright
clothing, or using one of those construction vests at night and in poor
weather helps, they are quite light and compact, when not in use.

Would be interesting to see, after the accident investiagtion team files
their final report, as to what is determined. A patrol sargeant often
has only part of the story....

W

 

[rdclark]

The Wogster wrote:

> One of a cyclists most important activities is to make sure that others
> can see them

While I certainly agree with this, it's important to understand that
assuring that others *can* see you is no guarantee that they *will.*

My wife was driving her Dodge Caravan on an urban arterial last week
when she was broadsided by a driver who ran a stop sign and never even
slowed down. After the vehicles came to rest he exited the passenger
side of his car and ran away.

I ride on the same street on my way home (in fact had ridden through
that same intersection about two hours earlier).

That driver didn't see a freaking mini-van. He wouldn't have seen me,
no matter how I was dressed or how many lights I had (it was daylight
anyway). It doesn't matter why he was driving the way he was; he's not
unique.

I ride as if the drivers are blind. I never make assumptions about what
they will do, unless it's to assume they will do the most stupid and
irresponsible thing possible. This doesn't mean they're *not*
responsible -- that most certainly are -- but I'd rather swear at them
after they fail to hit me than after they put me in the hospital.

(My wife was very lucky; bruises and contusions only. The car was
totaled.)

RichC

 

[rdclark]

The Wogster wrote:

> One of a cyclists most important activities is to make sure that others
> can see them

While I certainly agree with this, it's important to understand that
assuring that others *can* see you is no guarantee that they *will.*

My wife was driving her Dodge Caravan on an urban arterial last week
when she was broadsided by a driver who ran a stop sign and never even
slowed down. After the vehicles came to rest he exited the passenger
side of his car and ran away.

I ride on the same street on my way home (in fact had ridden through
that same intersection about two hours earlier).

That driver didn't see a freaking mini-van. He wouldn't have seen me,
no matter how I was dressed or how many lights I had (it was daylight
anyway). It doesn't matter why he was driving the way he was; he's not
unique.

I ride as if the drivers are blind. I never make assumptions about what
they will do, unless it's to assume they will do the most stupid and
irresponsible thing possible. This doesn't mean they're *not*
responsible -- that most certainly are -- but I'd rather swear at them
after they fail to hit me than after they put me in the hospital.

(My wife was very lucky; bruises and contusions only. The car was
totaled.)

RichC

 

[Bill Sornson]

rdclark wrote:

> My wife was driving her Dodge Caravan on an urban arterial last week
> when she was broadsided by a driver who ran a stop sign and never even
> slowed down. After the vehicles came to rest he exited the passenger
> side of his car and ran away.

{snippage}

> (My wife was very lucky; bruises and contusions only. The car was
> totaled.)

Did the other guy actually OWN the vehicle that hit her? Or had he stolen
it or something? IOW, did they catch the mofo?!?

Hope so, BS (no, really)

 

[Dave Vandervies]

In article <[email protected]>,

>That driver didn't see a freaking mini-van. He wouldn't have seen me,
>no matter how I was dressed or how many lights I had (it was daylight
>anyway). It doesn't matter why he was driving the way he was; he's not
>unique.

A while back, somebody in another newsgroup I read quoted a friend of
his who was a volunteer firefighter as saying, to a motorcyclist who
had been complaining about other drivers not seeing him, something not
entirely unlike:
"You can be ten feet high, twelve feet wide, painted fire engine red
(because, y'know, you ARE a fire engine), with lights flashing and sirens
going, and there will *STILL* be people who don't see you."
(I'm probably butchering the quote quite badly, but it does carry
the meaning.)
There's nothing that you can possibly do to make yourself visible to
somebody who doesn't look.


>I ride as if the drivers are blind. I never make assumptions about what
>they will do, unless it's to assume they will do the most stupid and
>irresponsible thing possible. This doesn't mean they're *not*
>responsible -- that most certainly are -- but I'd rather swear at them
>after they fail to hit me than after they put me in the hospital.

I recently had a (non-cyclist) friend of mine try to tell me that the
safest way to ride on the road was to follow the principle of least
surprise. That *should* be good advice, but it doesn't work when the
least surprising thing you can do is act in the stupidest and most
dangerous way possible. Ride through a pedestrian crosswalk against a
don't-walk light? Ride in a bike lane on the left side of the street
(facing oncoming traffic)? I saw other cyclists doing both of those
on the same ride as some idiot in a car behind me leaning on his horn
because I wasn't riding far enough to the right for him to pass me on
the left so he could cut me off making his right-hand turn.


dave

--
Dave Vandervies [email protected]
It's either #2, which makes you look like a clueless moron, ... or #3,
which makes you look like a clueless moron ... Now go and get hit by
a bus. Quickly. --Joona I Palaste roasts a troll in CLC

 

[Just zis Guy, you know?]

At Tue, 28 Jun 2005 14:56:31 GMT, message
<[email protected]> was posted by "Robert J.
Matter" <[email protected]>, including some, all or none of the
following:

>"Riders should be to the far right on the shoulder, or if there is no
>shoulder, to the extreme right side."

In order to maximise their chances of being winged, presumably, which
is why Effective Cycling recommends not doing that...

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

85% of helmet statistics are made up, 69% of them at CHS, Puget Sound

 

[dgk]

On Tue, 28 Jun 2005 12:25:48 -0400, The Wogster <[email protected]>
wrote:

>Robert J. Matter wrote:
>> http://www.delmarvanow.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050628/NEWS01/506280315/1002
>>
>>
>> Bicyclist killed in collision with truck on Route 13
>>
>> By Deborah Gates
>> Daily Times Staff Writer
>>
>> SALISBURY -- A city man cycling to work in the wrong traffic lane was
>> fatally struck by the driver of a company truck who was apparently
>> blinded by scant visibility from Monday's early morning rain, state
>> police said.
>>
>> Investigators blame pedestrian error and poor visibility for the 3:44
>> a.m. accident on northbound Route 13 near Clover Street that killed
>> cyclist Charles Curtis Campbell, according to Maryland State Police
>> spokesman Sgt. Keith Johnson. The 39-year-old Salisbury resident was en
>> route to his job at the Target department store in north Salisbury.
>>
>> "The pedestrian was at fault," Johnson said Monday of initial police
>> findings.
>>
>> The driver of the Herr's snack-food truck that struck the victim,
>> Stephen Richard Sprankle, also of Salisbury, had not been charged Monday
>> morning, police said. The accident continues to be investigated.
>>
>> By law, cyclists are required to move with traffic "as far to the right"
>> as roadway allows, Johnson said.
>>
>
>First of all, at 3:44Am, in most places, it's pretty dark, there is no
>indication as to whether the cyclist had ANY lights. There is no
>indication either as to why he could have been in that lane.
>
>Sgt. Johnson, seems fairly clueless as well, a bicycle operator is not a
>pedestrian, most jurisdictions consider a bicycle a vehicle.
>
>> Campbell was struck as he rode the bicycle in the passing, or fast lane,
>> near Clover Street, Johnson said.
>>
>> "He was in the fast lane, closer to the center median," Johnson said.
>> "Riders should be to the far right on the shoulder, or if there is no
>> shoulder, to the extreme right side."
>>
>> The bicycle had a reflector but it was unclear what the victim was
>> wearing at the time of the accident, Johnson said.
>>
>> "There was a small reflector on the back of the seat. It was raining
>> hard at the time and visibility had something to do with it," -- another
>> factor in the crash, he said.
>>
>> At the time of the accident, rain poured over much of the Lower Shore,
>> and Sprankle, whose age was not available, was behind Campbell in a
>> company delivery truck. On the job to deliver products to an area
>> business, the driver backed up the truck to the scene to see what was
>> struck.
>
>So, the cyclist was running without lights, at a quarter of 4 in the
>morning, in pouring rain, with only a tiny rear reflector. Was probably
>wearing dark clothing as well. Gee, I wonder why the truck hit him.
>
>One of a cyclists most important activities is to make sure that others
>can see them, whether that's a motor vehicle, pedestrian or other
>cyclist. Lights at night and in poor weather helps, so does bright
>clothing, or using one of those construction vests at night and in poor
>weather helps, they are quite light and compact, when not in use.
>
>Would be interesting to see, after the accident investiagtion team files
>their final report, as to what is determined. A patrol sargeant often
>has only part of the story....
>
>W

Hate to pile on but riding in the left lane in the rain without any
mention of lights, at 3:45 AM. It is unlikely that I would have seen
him had I been driving. He very well may have been drunk.

 

[[email protected]]

Another dumb P.O.B. rides poorly no lights at night gets hit.. I bet
wearing dark clothes too. Oh well. Quit blaming motorists when
p.o.b.'s get hit.

 

[Robert J. Matter]

The cyclist had a rear reflector. He may have had amber pedal reflectors
too, but that wasn't mentioned in the article.

Cyclists are not prohibited from occupying the left lane. He might have
been in the left lane because the right lane may have been flooded or
covered with deep puddles or pot holes or who knows what. Maybe he was
going to make a left turn up ahead for something before going to work.
And since he was going to work, I doubt if he was drunk.

Sounds like a typical commercial vehicle driver driving too fast for
conditions. The first paragraph even says the driver was "apparently
blinded by scant visibility from Monday's early morning rain."

-Bob Matter
-----------
Chicagoland Folding Bike Society
http://www.geocities.com/rjmatter/
Dedicated to the promotion of folding bicycles
and enhancement of the folding bike experience.

 

[[email protected]]

A tiny reflector is useles in the rain. Anyone riding at night should
be as well lit as posible. The dead P.O.B. worked at target. They sell
light there. Use the emp. discount and buy some. I'm still convinced
that most people killed on bikes contribute in a big way to their own
demise

 

[Just zis Guy, you know?]

On 29 Jun 2005 05:26:29 -0700, [email protected] wrote:

>I'm still convinced
>that most people killed on bikes contribute in a big way to their own
>demise

Studies in the UK show that in 2/3 - 4/5+ of cases where a cyclist is
injured by a car, the car driver is to blame.


Guy
--
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

"Let’s have a moment of silence for all those Americans who are stuck
in traffic on their way to the gym to ride the stationary bicycle."
- Earl Blumenauer

 

[[email protected]]

>>Studies in the UK show that in 2/3 - 4/5+ of cases where a cyclist is
injured by a car, the car driver is to blame<<

That the UK where they drive on the wrong side . All kidding aside, in
the US most fatalities are are kids and P.O.B.'s, neither groups is
known for proper cycling . Wrong way riders, no lights, kids flying
out of driveways all are clearly the cyclists faul;t

 

[[email protected]]

[email protected] wrote:
> >>Studies in the UK show that in 2/3 - 4/5+ of cases where a cyclist is
> injured by a car, the car driver is to blame<<
>
> That the UK where they drive on the wrong side . All kidding aside, in
> the US most fatalities are are kids and P.O.B.'s, neither groups is
> known for proper cycling .

Do you have data that supports that contention? Please give us a
source.

> Wrong way riders, no lights, kids flying
> out of driveways all are clearly the cyclists faul;t

Those are, indeed, the cyclist's fault. I'm curious about data telling
what percentage of cycling fatalities are caused by those (and similar)
cylcist actions.


- Frank Krygowski

 

[The Wogster]

rdclark wrote:
>
> The Wogster wrote:
>
>
>>One of a cyclists most important activities is to make sure that others
>>can see them
>
>
> While I certainly agree with this, it's important to understand that
> assuring that others *can* see you is no guarantee that they *will.*
>
> My wife was driving her Dodge Caravan on an urban arterial last week
> when she was broadsided by a driver who ran a stop sign and never even
> slowed down. After the vehicles came to rest he exited the passenger
> side of his car and ran away.
>
> I ride on the same street on my way home (in fact had ridden through
> that same intersection about two hours earlier).
>
> That driver didn't see a freaking mini-van. He wouldn't have seen me,
> no matter how I was dressed or how many lights I had (it was daylight
> anyway). It doesn't matter why he was driving the way he was; he's not
> unique.

There are probably 100 things that can distract a driver, especially at
that time of day, the top 5 are probably cell-phone or radio, lighting a
smoke, the time of day, what happened yesterday, what your hoping will
happen today, etc. This time of year, when short short and short skirts
are popular, there are even more distracting things walking about. So
you still need to do as much as you can to be visible. Heck I saw a few
riders last night, wearing dark clothing, no lights, riding at dusk
(around 9:00PM), almost completely invisible. Add in some rain, and a
bike not where you would expect it, and even if you are concentrating on
driving, and most people are not totally concentrating on driving, and
you have an accident waiting to happen.

W

 

[[email protected]]

http://www.bicyclinginfo.org/bc/types.htm

Shows that clearly half or more of all cyclist fatalities are due to
misconduct on the part of the cyclist

 

[Just zis Guy, you know?]

On 29 Jun 2005 07:22:51 -0700, [email protected] wrote:

>http://www.bicyclinginfo.org/bc/types.htm

>Shows that clearly half or more of all cyclist fatalities are due to
>misconduct on the part of the cyclist

Motorist fault:

Motorist turns left into cyclist: 12.1%
Motorist overtaking: 8.6%
Cyclist hit from behind while turning: 7.3%
Motorist fails to yield: 21.7%

total 49.7%

Cyclist fault:

Cyclist failed to yield at intersection: 16.8%
Cyclist failed to yield at midblock: 11.7%

total 28.5%


Guy
--
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

"Let’s have a moment of silence for all those Americans who are stuck
in traffic on their way to the gym to ride the stationary bicycle."
- Earl Blumenauer