Police kill cyclist

Helen Deborah Vecht said:

Gonzalez <[email hidden]>typed

Quoted message said:

"Two officers inside the car were treated for shock and minor
injuries."

Quoted message said:

I doubt the officers suffered any injury at all. I expect they were
carted off to hospital to be examined as a matter of routine, and a
senior policeman told the press it was for "shock and minor
injuries".

Quoted message said:

I'd like to know a lot more detail about this incident.

Just looking at AutoRoute and adding details given on website:

Road is A631, east of Junction with M18(J1). There's a Little Chef
and a couple of petrol stations (oldish AutoRoute so might not still
be) on the roundabout of the junction. If details given in report
are correct, cyclist would have been going west.

Ah. Minor injuries plus proximity of Little Chef equals spilt tea equals
minor scalding ;-)

Not that Plod would /ever/ consider driving while consuming tea, Coke,
water, burgers or Chocolate Hob-Nobs, because that's /illegal/ and we can
and will nick you for it. Signed: Plod's Mgt.

--

Dave Larrington - http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk/
===========================================================
Editor - British Human Power Club Newsletter
http://www.bhpc.org.uk/
===========================================================

It's a wonder nobody has suggested that the cyclist had no lights ?? Just
to throw something else into the works !! It is impossible to come to a
conclusion unless you were a witness or you visited the scene and noted
things just as the police accident investigator would have done. This would
include damage to the vehicle and the cycle, the positions of the vehicles
on the road and any skid marks left, not to mention where debris might have
ended up. It's all very high tec this accident investigation and speeds can
be calculated from marks left in the carriageway. I suggest everyone 'watch
this space' instead of accumulating a load of wild guesses.

Andy Howes
"Dave Larrington" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Helen Deborah Vecht said:

Gonzalez <[email hidden]>typed

Quoted message said:

"Two officers inside the car were treated for shock and minor
injuries."

Quoted message said:

I doubt the officers suffered any injury at all. I expect they were
carted off to hospital to be examined as a matter of routine, and a
senior policeman told the press it was for "shock and minor
injuries".

Quoted message said:

I'd like to know a lot more detail about this incident.

Just looking at AutoRoute and adding details given on website:

Road is A631, east of Junction with M18(J1). There's a Little Chef
and a couple of petrol stations (oldish AutoRoute so might not still
be) on the roundabout of the junction. If details given in report
are correct, cyclist would have been going west.

Ah. Minor injuries plus proximity of Little Chef equals spilt tea equals
minor scalding ;-)

Not that Plod would /ever/ consider driving while consuming tea, Coke,
water, burgers or Chocolate Hob-Nobs, because that's /illegal/ and we can
and will nick you for it. Signed: Plod's Mgt.

--

Dave Larrington - http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk/
===========================================================
Editor - British Human Power Club Newsletter
http://www.bhpc.org.uk/
===========================================================

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

Quoted message said:

It's a wonder nobody has suggested that the cyclist had no lights ?? Just
to throw something else into the works !! It is impossible to come to a
conclusion unless you were a witness or you visited the scene and noted
things just as the police accident investigator would have done. This would
include damage to the vehicle and the cycle, the positions of the vehicles
on the road and any skid marks left, not to mention where debris might have
ended up. It's all very high tec this accident investigation and speeds can
be calculated from marks left in the carriageway.

Yeah, and when did the police last do any "high tec" investigation
into the death of a cyclist? Since "didn't see him" is treated as a
valid excuse rather than admission of guilt, the fine details hardly
matter.

Quoted message said:

I suggest everyone 'watch
this space' instead of accumulating a load of wild guesses.

My "wild guess" is bland exoneration and shrugged shoulders all round.
But I'd love to be proved wrong.

James

Simon Brooke said:

in message <7tlucc.887.ln@ahahahooey>, Trevor Barton

(') said:

However, common usage of the word accident doesn't imply guilt on any
party, and although you might justifiably argue that most road
accidents are not accidents, your posting seemed to assume that the
car drivers
were responsible in your opinion. This is both unfair and unjustified
given the information you have.

In most car/bike impacts the car driver is indeed primarily at fault.
Whether it is reasonable to induce the fact that the police driver was
at fault in this in this incident is another matter.

I know that's often assumed here, and indeed I think it's probably
true too, but is it backed up by anything more substantial?

Certainly, the bike rider comes off worst always, or at least it'd be
hard to imagine an accident where that wasn't the case. Does that lead
to a perception that the car driver is usually primarilly at fault,
rather than a fact?

For example, anecdotally in this group we tend to hear a lot of stories
about some [censored] driver nearly killing one of us, and far less about
one of us nearly causing an accident. That might be (a) because drivers
cause more cycle/vehicle accidents than cyclists, (b) because few people
like to own up to their own stupidity, or (c) there are more cars than
bikes, so statistically there is more likely to be fault on the car
driver's side over the entire population of accidents.

I dunno if (c) makes (statistical) sense?

--
Trevor Barton

James Annan said:

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

Quoted message said:

It's a wonder nobody has suggested that the cyclist had no lights ?? Just
to throw something else into the works !! It is impossible to come to a
conclusion unless you were a witness or you visited the scene and noted
things just as the police accident investigator would have done. This would
include damage to the vehicle and the cycle, the positions of the vehicles
on the road and any skid marks left, not to mention where debris might have
ended up. It's all very high tec this accident investigation and speeds can
be calculated from marks left in the carriageway.

Yeah, and when did the police last do any "high tec" investigation
into the death of a cyclist? Since "didn't see him" is treated as a
valid excuse rather than admission of guilt, the fine details hardly
matter.

Your confusing the police with the courts. The police always do a "high
tec" investigation into any road death, the courts just ignore the evidence
and decide that not being about to drive the kids to school is too much of
a hardship.

Steve