Driver doesn't give way and almost kills cyclist - $400 fine
- Cheesewheel
- Posts: 1209
- Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2011 9:22 pm
Driver doesn't give way and almost kills cyclist - $400 fine
Postby Cheesewheel » Thu Jan 10, 2013 7:12 pm
John Rainbow, 41, of Croydon, pleaded guilty at Ringwood Magistrates' Court on Monday and was convicted of failing to give way at an intersection when turning right.
Andrew Dick, 49, was crossing Burwood Highway near his home in Vermont South to access a bike track at 6.50am on August 7 when he was struck by a silver Ford stationwagon driven by Rainbow.
Police who attended the scene said Mr Dick came off his bike and on to the car's windscreen, which caused it to crack.
Rainbow, who was not represented in court, received the maximum penalty possible from the magistrate.
Mr Dick, who spent five months in hospital, also suffered a collarbone fracture and sternal fracture, and couldn't move for a month.
He has slowly learned to walk and do things for himself again.
Law change urged after cyclist suffers brain injury in Vermont South incident
-
- Posts: 9810
- Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 11:48 am
Re: Driver doesn't give way and almost kills cyclist - $400
Postby human909 » Thu Jan 10, 2013 7:23 pm
-
- Posts: 749
- Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2010 10:33 pm
- Location: Sydney (Rhodes to City Commuter)
Re: Driver doesn't give way and almost kills cyclist - $400
Postby Sydguy » Thu Jan 10, 2013 7:45 pm
Attitudes to driving need to change.
JM
-
- Posts: 1192
- Joined: Tue Jul 01, 2008 4:01 pm
- Location: Bass Hill, NSW
Re: Driver doesn't give way and almost kills cyclist - $400
Postby r2160 » Thu Jan 10, 2013 8:13 pm
cheers
Glenn
"Pain is temporary. It may last a minute, or an hour, or a day, or a year, but eventually it will subside and something else will take its place. If I quit, however, it lasts forever" Lance Armstrong
-
- Posts: 1494
- Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2010 8:10 pm
- Contact:
Re: Driver doesn't give way and almost kills cyclist - $400
Postby high_tea » Thu Jan 10, 2013 8:33 pm
The article does not mention why he wasn't charged with dangerous driving. I gather this occurred in Victoria, so I gather the relevant law is s64(1) of the Road Safety Act 1986(Vic):Glen Waverley Acting Sergeant Ryan Burns, who attended the accident, said police decided to pursue the matter in court, rather than giving Rainbow an on-the-spot fine, because of Mr Dick's serious injuries.
Seems arguable to me, so why didn't they go with that? Disclaimer: I know nothing about Victorian traffic law, so there may be some compelling reason. The article sure doesn't mention one...64. Dangerous driving
(1) A person must not drive a motor vehicle at a speed or in a manner which is
dangerous to the public, having regard to all the circumstances of the case.
-
- Posts: 9810
- Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 11:48 am
Re: Driver doesn't give way and almost kills cyclist - $400
Postby human909 » Thu Jan 10, 2013 8:55 pm
Because the police don't care. There is a notion that driving accidents are normal and it is the cyclists fault they are not protected. It sadly is quite true that if there isn't speed or alcohol involved then it isn't considered a serious offence.high_tea wrote:Seems arguable to me, so why didn't they go with that? Disclaimer: I know nothing about Victorian traffic law, so there may be some compelling reason. The article sure doesn't mention one...
-
- Posts: 3056
- Joined: Tue Jan 05, 2010 2:54 pm
Re: Driver doesn't give way and almost kills cyclist - $400
Postby zero » Thu Jan 10, 2013 9:53 pm
That is not strictly true. Thus far his medical bills will have been covered by the TAC and when its clear what his permanent injuries are, he will be able to make a claim for that, or raise a lawsuit to get it.Cheesewheel wrote:Bit of an eye opener if you thought that injury in the case of driver negligence of road rules translates into harsher penalties. John Rainbow gets a traffic infringement (not even a criminal charge) and Andrew Dicks gets permanent brain damage with zero compensation.
I've said before that I believe that after the compensation and medical bills are sorted (so that victims are covered), the insurance system should seek to recover (capped) amounts from at fault drivers. That would reduce premiums for drivers that do not cause accidents, and act as a far more genuine deterrent for those that do. The full 100% indemnity system absolutely encourages complancency regarding accident risk.
- il padrone
- Posts: 22931
- Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 11:57 pm
- Location: Heading for home.
Re: Driver doesn't give way and almost kills cyclist - $400
Postby il padrone » Thu Jan 10, 2013 10:37 pm
"An unjustified and unethical imposition on a healthy activity."
- jules21
- Posts: 10555
- Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 11:14 pm
- Location: deep in the pain cave
Re: Driver doesn't give way and almost kills cyclist - $400
Postby jules21 » Fri Jan 11, 2013 1:22 pm
i would guess - it's harder work for the prosecutor to prove. offences with higher penalties, such as dangerous driving compared with failing to yield, have higher burdens of proof. to me, the act of not bothering to look before turning right across other road users is appallingly dangerous.high_tea wrote:Seems arguable to me, so why didn't they go with that? Disclaimer: I know nothing about Victorian traffic law, so there may be some compelling reason. The article sure doesn't mention one...64. Dangerous driving
(1) A person must not drive a motor vehicle at a speed or in a manner which is dangerous to the public, having regard to all the circumstances of the case.
in victoria, i think there are 3 general duties offences - careless, dangerous and culpable driving - in order of increasing seriousness. at a minimum, i would have thought the driver could be pinged for careless driving.
the other problem is that, and this is personal opinion, police often gravitate towards clear-cut rules and interpretations, and are uncomfortable with more 'abstract' offences like those mentioned above. in other words - turning right across someone is failure to yield - job done. "we don't set the penalties, don't complain to us if you think they're too lenient".
-
- Posts: 9810
- Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 11:48 am
Re: Driver doesn't give way and almost kills cyclist - $400
Postby human909 » Fri Jan 11, 2013 2:38 pm
When it comes to burdens of proof it is unarguable that this driver was driving carelessly, dangerously and is culpably for the accident.
- jules21
- Posts: 10555
- Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 11:14 pm
- Location: deep in the pain cave
Re: Driver doesn't give way and almost kills cyclist - $400
Postby jules21 » Fri Jan 11, 2013 2:58 pm
culpable driving requires proof of intent. but certainly careless driving would seem to be more practicably demonstrated with these cases.human909 wrote:When it comes to burdens of proof it is unarguable that this driver was driving carelessly, dangerously and is culpably for the accident.
- il padrone
- Posts: 22931
- Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 11:57 pm
- Location: Heading for home.
Re: Driver doesn't give way and almost kills cyclist - $400
Postby il padrone » Fri Jan 11, 2013 3:32 pm
"An unjustified and unethical imposition on a healthy activity."
- jules21
- Posts: 10555
- Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 11:14 pm
- Location: deep in the pain cave
Re: Driver doesn't give way and almost kills cyclist - $400
Postby jules21 » Fri Jan 11, 2013 3:55 pm
- greyhoundtom
- Posts: 3023
- Joined: Sun May 31, 2009 6:28 am
- Location: Wherever the sun is shining
- Contact:
Re: Driver doesn't give way and almost kills cyclist - $400
Postby greyhoundtom » Fri Jan 11, 2013 5:51 pm
-
- Posts: 1498
- Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2009 4:50 pm
Re: Driver doesn't give way and almost kills cyclist - $400
Postby cp123 » Mon Jan 14, 2013 1:45 pm
this driver may be remorsely sorry and might have never driven a car again for all we know. he may be deeply affected and in all honesly might' not've "seen him". what is adequate??? I don't know. Is it now up to the injured party to sue him civilly or something for compensation?
- Cheesewheel
- Posts: 1209
- Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2011 9:22 pm
Re: Driver doesn't give way and almost kills cyclist - $400
Postby Cheesewheel » Mon Jan 14, 2013 2:41 pm
all these probabilities could surround anything up to a manslaughter charge and we could probably go on a tangent of what constitutes an effective justice system yada yada.cp123 wrote:I don't think $400 is right - but what would be? Sticking this guy in jail?
this driver may be remorsely sorry and might have never driven a car again for all we know. he may be deeply affected and in all honesly might' not've "seen him". what is adequate??? I don't know. Is it now up to the injured party to sue him civilly or something for compensation?
I think the main point is, given the current standard of justice proceedings (IOW what an individual is liable to face on account of grievously causing harm as a consequence of their fault) , a mere traffic infringement (not even a criminal charge) doesn't cut the mustard.
-
- Posts: 1494
- Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2010 8:10 pm
- Contact:
Re: Driver doesn't give way and almost kills cyclist - $400
Postby high_tea » Mon Jan 14, 2013 3:00 pm
Small correction - the driver was charged with a criminal offence, just a really minor one. Also, it's not that he couldn't have been charged with something more serious, but that he wasn't.Cheesewheel wrote:all these probabilities could surround anything up to a manslaughter charge and we could probably go on a tangent of what constitutes an effective justice system yada yada.cp123 wrote:I don't think $400 is right - but what would be? Sticking this guy in jail?
this driver may be remorsely sorry and might have never driven a car again for all we know. he may be deeply affected and in all honesly might' not've "seen him". what is adequate??? I don't know. Is it now up to the injured party to sue him civilly or something for compensation?
I think the main point is, given the current standard of justice proceedings (IOW what an individual is liable to face on account of grievously causing harm as a consequence of their fault) , a mere traffic infringement (not even a criminal charge) doesn't cut the mustard.
PS my suggestion for law reform is to make causing bodily harm a circumstance of aggravation to breaches of the Road Rules.
- Cheesewheel
- Posts: 1209
- Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2011 9:22 pm
Re: Driver doesn't give way and almost kills cyclist - $400
Postby Cheesewheel » Mon Jan 14, 2013 3:44 pm
As far as I am aware, failing to give way is a traffic offence, not a criminal one.high_tea wrote:Small correction - the driver was charged with a criminal offence, just a really minor one. Also, it's not that he couldn't have been charged with something more serious, but that he wasn't.Cheesewheel wrote:all these probabilities could surround anything up to a manslaughter charge and we could probably go on a tangent of what constitutes an effective justice system yada yada.cp123 wrote:I don't think $400 is right - but what would be? Sticking this guy in jail?
this driver may be remorsely sorry and might have never driven a car again for all we know. he may be deeply affected and in all honesly might' not've "seen him". what is adequate??? I don't know. Is it now up to the injured party to sue him civilly or something for compensation?
I think the main point is, given the current standard of justice proceedings (IOW what an individual is liable to face on account of grievously causing harm as a consequence of their fault) , a mere traffic infringement (not even a criminal charge) doesn't cut the mustard.
PS my suggestion for law reform is to make causing bodily harm a circumstance of aggravation to breaches of the Road Rules.
Crminal offenses usually accrue when the ante is upped in terms of personal damage/injury etc
- biker jk
- Posts: 7012
- Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2009 6:18 pm
- Location: Sydney
Re: Driver doesn't give way and almost kills cyclist - $400
Postby biker jk » Mon Jan 14, 2013 5:58 pm
In any case the driver was clearly negligent the result of which was almost killing the cyclist. As such, an appropriate punishment in my opinion would be a gaol term of several years. The "I didn't see him" excuse is the loophole in the legal system which allows drivers to not take care and responsibility for their actions.cp123 wrote:I don't think $400 is right - but what would be? Sticking this guy in jail?
this driver may be remorsely sorry and might have never driven a car again for all we know. he may be deeply affected and in all honesly might' not've "seen him". what is adequate??? I don't know. Is it now up to the injured party to sue him civilly or something for compensation?
- il padrone
- Posts: 22931
- Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 11:57 pm
- Location: Heading for home.
Re: Driver doesn't give way and almost kills cyclist - $400
Postby il padrone » Mon Jan 14, 2013 6:12 pm
+1biker jk wrote:The "I didn't see him" excuse is the loophole in the legal system which allows drivers to not take care and responsibility for their actions.
SMIDSY should be disallowed as an excuse in any incident where a motorist causes injuries to a cyclist (or pedestrian). It is the driver's responsibility to make sure they DO LOOK.... and SEE... in all circumstances. How can driving about effectively with closed eyes be seen as a reasonable thing to do ??
Such a legal outcome would certainly slow down a lot of our impatient and distracted drivers. It is the sort of thing that has been achieved in many European nations.
"An unjustified and unethical imposition on a healthy activity."
-
- Posts: 1494
- Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2010 8:10 pm
- Contact:
Re: Driver doesn't give way and almost kills cyclist - $400
Postby high_tea » Mon Jan 14, 2013 6:58 pm
When has SMIDSY been a legal excuse, ever?il padrone wrote:+1biker jk wrote:The "I didn't see him" excuse is the loophole in the legal system which allows drivers to not take care and responsibility for their actions.
SMIDSY should be disallowed as an excuse in any incident where a motorist causes injuries to a cyclist (or pedestrian). It is the driver's responsibility to make sure they DO LOOK.... and SEE... in all circumstances. How can driving about effectively with closed eyes be seen as a reasonable thing to do ??
Such a legal outcome would certainly slow down a lot of our impatient and distracted drivers. It is the sort of thing that has been achieved in many European nations.
-
- Posts: 1494
- Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2010 8:10 pm
- Contact:
Re: Driver doesn't give way and almost kills cyclist - $400
Postby high_tea » Mon Jan 14, 2013 7:04 pm
What statute creates this distinction? And what does it mean anyway? I infer from the quoted article that you can be tried and convicted of a beach of the Road Rules. Gaol isn't an option, but that's true of quite a few criminal offences.Cheesewheel wrote:As far as I am aware, failing to give way is a traffic offence, not a criminal one.high_tea wrote:
Small correction - the driver was charged with a criminal offence, just a really minor one. Also, it's not that he couldn't have been charged with something more serious, but that he wasn't.
PS my suggestion for law reform is to make causing bodily harm a circumstance of aggravation to breaches of the Road Rules.
Crminal offenses usually accrue when the ante is upped in terms of personal damage/injury etc
- il padrone
- Posts: 22931
- Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 11:57 pm
- Location: Heading for home.
Re: Driver doesn't give way and almost kills cyclist - $400
Postby il padrone » Mon Jan 14, 2013 8:13 pm
Police seem to accept it often enough. Eg. the woman who 'doored' James Cross on Glenferrie Rd a year or so back.high_tea wrote:When has SMIDSY been a legal excuse, ever?
"An unjustified and unethical imposition on a healthy activity."
- Cheesewheel
- Posts: 1209
- Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2011 9:22 pm
Re: Driver doesn't give way and almost kills cyclist - $400
Postby Cheesewheel » Mon Jan 14, 2013 9:14 pm
I'm no legal eagle but traffic offenses are summary (?)high_tea wrote:What statute creates this distinction? And what does it mean anyway? I infer from the quoted article that you can be tried and convicted of a beach of the Road Rules. Gaol isn't an option, but that's true of quite a few criminal offences.Cheesewheel wrote:As far as I am aware, failing to give way is a traffic offence, not a criminal one.high_tea wrote:
Small correction - the driver was charged with a criminal offence, just a really minor one. Also, it's not that he couldn't have been charged with something more serious, but that he wasn't.
PS my suggestion for law reform is to make causing bodily harm a circumstance of aggravation to breaches of the Road Rules.
Crminal offenses usually accrue when the ante is upped in terms of personal damage/injury etc
IOW all a guilty verdict requires is the proof that you performed the action (and its usually given a standard penalty - like for instance failing to stop at a stop sign = $x fine). There is no capacity for such offenses to bleed through into moral correctiveness (such as in the case of damage to property or individuals ... or even prolonged incidences of traffic offenses for that matter - eg history of speeding, unpaid fines etc).
On account of this distinction, criminal offenses tend to stick while traffic offfenses don't
Thats why many employers generally ask their potential employees about any criminal history they have and also why certain professional fields straight out prohibit persons with a specific criminal history from practicing in certain fields
- Cheesewheel
- Posts: 1209
- Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2011 9:22 pm
Re: Driver doesn't give way and almost kills cyclist - $400
Postby Cheesewheel » Mon Jan 14, 2013 9:20 pm
I think having a savvy lawyer is more the issue - from what I recall, the culprit in James Cross's death gave her (lawyer assisted) statement to police 3 months after the incidentil padrone wrote:Police seem to accept it often enough. Eg. the woman who 'doored' James Cross on Glenferrie Rd a year or so back.high_tea wrote:When has SMIDSY been a legal excuse, ever?
Return to “Cycling Safety and Advocacy”
- General Australian Cycling Topics
- Info / announcements
- Buying a bike / parts
- General Cycling Discussion
- The Bike Shed
- Cycling Health
- Cycling Safety and Advocacy
- Women's Cycling
- Bike & Gear Reviews
- Cycling Trade
- Stolen Bikes
- Bicycle FAQs
- The Market Place
- Member to Member Bike and Gear Sales
- Want to Buy, Group Buy, Swap
- My Bikes or Gear Elsewhere
- Serious Biking
- Audax / Randonneuring
- Retro biking
- Commuting
- MTB
- Recumbents
- Fixed Gear/ Single Speed
- Track
- Electric Bicycles
- Cyclocross and Gravel Grinding
- Dragsters / Lowriders / Cruisers
- Children's Bikes
- Cargo Bikes and Utility Cycling
- Road Racing
- Road Biking
- Training
- Time Trial
- Triathlon
- International and National Tours and Events
- Cycle Touring
- Touring Australia
- Touring Overseas
- Touring Bikes and Equipment
- Australia
- Western Australia
- New South Wales
- Queensland
- South Australia
- Victoria
- ACT
- Tasmania
- Northern Territory
- Country & Regional
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users
- All times are UTC+10:00
- Top
- Delete cookies
About the Australian Cycling Forums
The Australian Cycling Forums is a welcoming community where you can ask questions and talk about the type of bikes and cycling topics you like.
Bicycles Network Australia
Forum Information
Connect with BNA
This website uses affiliate links to retail platforms including ebay, amazon, proviz and ribble.