Cyclist on trial for manslaughter- sentenced

Commuting, Day rides, Audax, Incidents, etc.
User avatar
The utility cyclist
Posts: 3607
Joined: 22 Aug 2016, 12:28pm
Location: The first garden city

Re: Cyclist on trial for manslaughter

Post by The utility cyclist »

Bonefishblues wrote:
The utility cyclist wrote:the bias jury will stitch him up like a kipper, if not on the manslaughter it'll be the lesser change. We already know how the general public and the police hate/loathe people on bikes and the way the prosecution have lied (he wasn't racing nor can an MTB stop in 3 metres) and stretched the truth about the events/him often with no relevancy to the case (his previous twitter about brakes on another bike from 2 years ago has ZERO relevance, his shouting at the deceased has no relevancy to the case) will be a certainty he'll be found guilty of something.

His defence should have got all the jurors to cycle at the speed he was alleged to have being doing and have someone step right into their path along their route so they have an idea as to how things really are.
I hope somehow these people have some semblance of sense and logic but I really can't see that happening.

A lot rests on the outcome, not just for this lad but for everyone on a bicycle, we are already held to a higher level of accountability than those that present thousands of times more danger as it is, as well as having our freedoms taken away plus removed safety and law enforcement abandoning us daily and government ignoring calls for justice to be on a par with other citizens.

Yes, get on a bicycle and you are treated far worse than any other group you care to name. You have the law applied differently or not applied at all (unlawfully so), attacked and threatened daily, abused, injured and killed far worse than any minority races, homosexuals, trans, bi or any other group one could name that are classed as out groups and/or targeted and mentioned in the news as being so. Bt co parison these groups have it easy.

I {naughty word self removed} love this country :twisted:

Biased jury.
Lying prosecution.
Hatred and loathing by police & public.
Evidence has no relevance.

That's your opening para.

Sorry, I still don't recognise your window. You should also be more careful with those completely unsubstantiated accusations - they are serious ones.

Okay, be blind to reality and fail to understand as most seem to do unless it suits their agenda.

If you don't think that the public and police generally have a disdain/hatred/loathing for people on bikes why are we treated as outcasts and attacked every single day more than any other group in society? Why are we failed by the so called justice system every day and in extreme cases blamed for our own deaths at the hands of killers, WAKE UP!!!!!

I've nothing to be 'careful' over, the prosecution stated he was "racing", that's a lie, the prosecution said an MTB rider could come to a dead stop in 3m from 18mph (not relevant in any case) from whence an unexpected event unfolds in front of you, that is a lie also.
Facts from the past that do not have bearing to the events are not relevant, or are you saying that because the accused once mentioned a few years ago that he was a thrill seeker/liked to tinker with his bike makes his actions premeditated?? Is the fact he reacted to being knocked off his bike relevant to the case, not in the slightest.
Debs
Posts: 1335
Joined: 19 May 2017, 7:05pm
Location: Powys

Re: Cyclist on trial for manslaughter

Post by Debs »

bigjim wrote: On my ride I tried braking from about 15mph just using the rear brake. It was quite easy. I don't think a front brake would make a difference.


You canna change the law of physics...
the braking dynamics of bicycles is similar to motorcycles, cars, trucks, busses, in that 80% of braking force is properly conducted by the front brake(s), and only around 20% from the rear. Although there is some limited braking effort on the rear brake it is more useful for steadying the bike [or vehicle] to promote stability in slowing down.
Ask any motor cyclist what it's like to slow down using only the rear brake and they will tell you it's very poor compared to the front, plus rear brake only can promote instability including rear wheel lock up. It's the same on a bicycle.
Bonefishblues
Posts: 11034
Joined: 7 Jul 2014, 9:45pm
Location: Near Bicester Oxon

Re: Cyclist on trial for manslaughter

Post by Bonefishblues »

@U.C.

Oh, yes, now you say it, I see. Thanks for the wake up...and yes, I was being sarcastic. I am sure that your views and approach will be successful in achieving the outcomes you wish (there I go again).

Actually, I think your views are calculated to harden and entrench attitudes as opposed to achieving change, and I'd prefer you didn't express them as I think they are wholly counterproductive.

Again, never a good idea to label legal counsel as liars, I suggest. I think the Judge is there for that sort of thing, rather than you.
User avatar
bigjim
Posts: 3245
Joined: 2 Feb 2008, 5:08pm
Location: Manchester

Re: Cyclist on trial for manslaughter

Post by bigjim »

Debs wrote:
bigjim wrote: On my ride I tried braking from about 15mph just using the rear brake. It was quite easy. I don't think a front brake would make a difference.


You canna change the law of physics...
the braking dynamics of bicycles is similar to motorcycles, cars, trucks, busses, in that 80% of braking force is properly conducted by the front brake(s), and only around 20% from the rear. Although there is some limited braking effort on the rear brake it is more useful for steadying the bike [or vehicle] to promote stability in slowing down.
Ask any motor cyclist what it's like to slow down using only the rear brake and they will tell you it's very poor compared to the front, plus rear brake only can promote instability including rear wheel lock up. It's the same on a bicycle.

I am a motorcyclist! Completely different concept. The bicycle is dominated by the riders weight who has more control. Other way round on a motorcycle.
Debs
Posts: 1335
Joined: 19 May 2017, 7:05pm
Location: Powys

Re: Cyclist on trial for manslaughter

Post by Debs »

bigjim wrote:
Debs wrote:
bigjim wrote: On my ride I tried braking from about 15mph just using the rear brake. It was quite easy. I don't think a front brake would make a difference.


You canna change the law of physics...
the braking dynamics of bicycles is similar to motorcycles, cars, trucks, busses, in that 80% of braking force is properly conducted by the front brake(s), and only around 20% from the rear. Although there is some limited braking effort on the rear brake it is more useful for steadying the bike [or vehicle] to promote stability in slowing down.
Ask any motor cyclist what it's like to slow down using only the rear brake and they will tell you it's very poor compared to the front, plus rear brake only can promote instability including rear wheel lock up. It's the same on a bicycle.

I am a motorcyclist! Completely different concept. The bicycle is dominated by the riders weight who has more control. Other way round on a motorcycle.


Nope, same dynamics and concept.

BTW, i'm an IAM trained motorcyclist.

If you don't need a front brake on a bicycle for stopping any quicker you must be endowed with supernatural powers :)
LollyKat
Posts: 3250
Joined: 28 May 2011, 11:25pm
Location: Scotland

Re: Cyclist on trial for manslaughter

Post by LollyKat »

CJ wrote:In case it's of any interest, and since nobody else commenting on here seems to have 'done the math', here's a reply I made earlier, to a posting on Facebook.

This 'Charlie' seems to accept he was going at 18mph (8m/s) and claims he could not have stopped using a front brake, in the time it took to shout twice and slow the bike to 10mph (4.5m/s) by thrusting back on his fixed wheel. So lets do the maths. According to Bicycling Science (THE book on the physics of bicycles) a bike can be decelerated about twice as hard if it has a front brake, than by rear-only braking and decelerations of 5m/s^2 and 2.5m/s^2 respectively, are about the best that may be achieved. Time = change in velocity / deceleration, so front braking will stop an 18mph bike in 8/5 = 1.6 seconds. That's not much time! I reckon it takes quite a bit more that 1.6 seconds to yell "Look out" [never mind a longer passage including F words!] twice. But I think it's reasonable to assume no deceleration during the first shout. Reactions and thinking time has to be allowed for, and one can't be braking for EVERY damn fool pedestrian who might possibly step off the pavement without looking!

Given a front brake however, the hand of the prudent cyclist will be moving to it at the same time as yelling. That's reaction time accounted for. There will then be no delay in applying that brake during the second shout. But improvident Charlie did not have a front brake, all he had was the facility to brake the rear wheel by stamping back on the pedals. That is arguably quicker to activate, given that one's feet are ALWAYS upon the pedals. But I maintain that it's just as quick to apply a brake that one's hand is already upon, as it is to reverse pedal thrust. So let's calculate how many seconds it should have taken Charlie to slow the bike from 18 to 10mph by rear-only braking. That's a 3.5m/s change in speed at 2.5m/s^2 = 1.4 seconds. Probably about the time it takes to yell a second warning! And how far will he have travelled? According to the Equations of Motion: distance s = (v^2 - u^2) / 2a. So that's 8.75m. And what could our provident cyclist have done with his front brake? A deceleration of 5m/s^2 in same equation yields a stopping distance of 6.4m.

QED: a cyclist equipped with a front brake comes to a complete stop in three quarters of the distance over which our fixed fanatic merely slows from 18 to 10mph.
....


From Chris Juden's post on page 15 above (my bold)
User avatar
bigjim
Posts: 3245
Joined: 2 Feb 2008, 5:08pm
Location: Manchester

Re: Cyclist on trial for manslaughter

Post by bigjim »

Still don't agree. I've been riding motorbikes for 50 years. My current VFR800 has linked brakes. I did not say that that he could have stopped as quick with one brake. Don't twist things please.
Debs
Posts: 1335
Joined: 19 May 2017, 7:05pm
Location: Powys

Re: Cyclist on trial for manslaughter

Post by Debs »

bigjim wrote:Still don't agree. I've been riding motorbikes for 50 years. My current VFR800 has linked brakes. I did not say that that he could have stopped as quick with one brake. Don't twist things please.


bigjim wrote:
On my ride I tried braking from about 15mph just using the rear brake. It was quite easy. I don't think a front brake would make a difference.
User avatar
bigjim
Posts: 3245
Joined: 2 Feb 2008, 5:08pm
Location: Manchester

Re: Cyclist on trial for manslaughter

Post by bigjim »

Debs wrote:
bigjim wrote:Still don't agree. I've been riding motorbikes for 50 years. My current VFR800 has linked brakes. I did not say that that he could have stopped as quick with one brake. Don't twist things please.


bigjim wrote:
On my ride I tried braking from about 15mph just using the rear brake. It was quite easy. I don't think a front brake would make a difference.

For crying out loud! A difference to the situation. Ok? I don't think a front brake would make a big difference. happy now?
User avatar
[XAP]Bob
Posts: 19801
Joined: 26 Sep 2008, 4:12pm

Re: Cyclist on trial for manslaughter

Post by [XAP]Bob »

And it makes no odds at all if you are aiming to swerve rather than brake.

Swerving has several obvious benefits (like the reduced chance of being rear ended, and the fact that you don't have to stop and start again), and to try and do both is to do too much with the limited tyre patch you have.

I *think* my trike brakes are legal, although they are probably legal because the law is unknowingly smart ('bents have seats low enough to probably fall under the exemption designed for children's bikes).
A shortcut has to be a challenge, otherwise it would just be the way. No situation is so dire that panic cannot make it worse.
There are two kinds of people in this world: those can extrapolate from incomplete data.
Debs
Posts: 1335
Joined: 19 May 2017, 7:05pm
Location: Powys

Re: Cyclist on trial for manslaughter

Post by Debs »

bigjim wrote:
Debs wrote:
bigjim wrote:Still don't agree. I've been riding motorbikes for 50 years. My current VFR800 has linked brakes. I did not say that that he could have stopped as quick with one brake. Don't twist things please.


bigjim wrote:
On my ride I tried braking from about 15mph just using the rear brake. It was quite easy. I don't think a front brake would make a difference.

For crying out loud! A difference to the situation. Ok? I don't think a front brake would make a big difference. happy now?


The facts of the physics dictate that having a front brake is far safer, and does make a huge difference for better braking performance :D
User avatar
[XAP]Bob
Posts: 19801
Joined: 26 Sep 2008, 4:12pm

Re: Cyclist on trial for manslaughter

Post by [XAP]Bob »

Debs wrote:
bigjim wrote:
Debs wrote:

For crying out loud! A difference to the situation. Ok? I don't think a front brake would make a big difference. happy now?


The facts of the physics dictate that having a front brake is far safer, and does make a huge difference for better braking performance :D


Only if you pull/push the appropriate lever.

Under normal circumstances you can simply brake a little earlier on your approach to traffic lights - if you are too close to stop then you proceed through them as they are still amber.

If someone steps out you adjust course to avoid a collision - and then they do something daft/unexpected...

The same happens at sea, albeit much slower...
http://taskandpurpose.com/fitzgeralds-watch-team-mine/amp/
A shortcut has to be a challenge, otherwise it would just be the way. No situation is so dire that panic cannot make it worse.
There are two kinds of people in this world: those can extrapolate from incomplete data.
User avatar
bigjim
Posts: 3245
Joined: 2 Feb 2008, 5:08pm
Location: Manchester

Re: Cyclist on trial for manslaughter

Post by bigjim »

Debs wrote:
bigjim wrote:
Debs wrote:

For crying out loud! A difference to the situation. Ok? I don't think a front brake would make a big difference. happy now?


The facts of the physics dictate that having a front brake is far safer, and does make a huge difference for better braking performance :D

But not in this instance. We are talking probably milliseconds here. I would imagine this guy was quite a skilled rider and could brake pretty well. I wonder how many fixies are rolling around London with no front brake ? I just think he made stupid mistake on the day by shouting instead of maybe a quick tap on the brake/pedal and steering around her. Something I have to do on just about every ride. No way, IMO, does this warrant a manslaughter charge.
User avatar
CJ
Posts: 3415
Joined: 15 Jan 2007, 9:55pm

Re: Cyclist on trial for manslaughter

Post by CJ »

bigjim wrote:I don't think a front brake would make a big difference. happy now?

Not happy. A front brake HALVES the stopping distance. That's big.
Chris Juden
One lady owner, never raced or jumped.
User avatar
CJ
Posts: 3415
Joined: 15 Jan 2007, 9:55pm

Re: Cyclist on trial for manslaughter

Post by CJ »

bigjim wrote:I wonder how many fixies are rolling around London with no front brake?

Oh I should think there are quite a number of idiots out there, pedaling around in blissful ignorance regarding the laws not only of the road but also physics!
Chris Juden
One lady owner, never raced or jumped.
Post Reply