horizon wrote:thelawnet wrote:The story claims the 4-year-old was given free rein because the road was safe and pedestrianised.'He was visiting Windsor and enjoying the privileges of a cycle-free zone, so his parents did not insist on holding his hand.
'You came cycling down that street at some speed, in breach of this pedestrianisation.
'In the CCTV footage, it is apparent you are unable to brake when Matteo runs into your path. You collided with him and he was trapped in the arch of your bicycle.
This does not appear to be the case
https://firstname.lastname@example.org ... 312!8i6656
I wonder if a loading vehicle had killed the boy who had run out into its path whether any action would have been taken.
Can you elaborate - as you say, it doesn't appear to be a non-cycling zone.
It is a non-cycling zone at all times, as denoted by the separate sign, however motor vehicles are permitted 6am to 10am and 5pm to 8pm.
It appears that the incident occurred at 8:10pm http://www.windsorobserver.co.uk/news/1 ... _accident/, so it seems to me that there was some prospect of motor vehicles being present at this time.
There are certainly vans visible on the street view if you scroll back through the historical photos.
So apparently it is ok for commercial vehicles with diesel engines and four wheels to use the road.
But commercial vehicles with two wheels https://www.windsorexpress.co.uk/galler ... entre.html
are a 'severe problem'.
There are others also cycling on the road:
http://www.windsorobserver.co.uk/news/1 ... /?ref=ebln