Australian Cycling Forums - Bicycles Network Australia

Scott_C wrote:

queequeg wrote: What road shoulder?

That's where the car stopped. If we assume she was going 100kph the collision site would be ~100m before this point if she didn't start braking until after the collision, by my estimate that puts the collision on the other side of the curve where there might be more of a shoulder, the fact that the shoulder disappears could help an argument he was on the shoulder until it disappeared and had to move into the road.

A quick check on Google Street View, taken in May 2017, shows that for the most part, Sedgwick Rd does not have a shoulder, including the section where this happened

https://www.theland.com.au/story/520827 ... r/?cs=3372

queequeg wrote:

A quick check on Google Street View, taken in May 2017, shows that for the most part, Sedgwick Rd does not have a shoulder, including the section where this happened

https://www.theland.com.au/story/520827 ... r/?cs=3372

You are correct.

antigee wrote:lets hope the Victoria Police have a strong well prepared case and the jury (if applicable?) don't choose the it could happen to any one of us verdict - the defence line described above was used in a UK teen cyclist death...apparently defence lawyers can choose to use it when the sun failed to shine at the time of the appalling driving:

http://www.kentonline.co.uk/deal/news/v ... ile-33310/

“At this point he said he was possibly 10 to 12 seconds away from the point of collision when he noticed the cyclist who he claimed rode off the pavement and onto the road without looking, “ the prosecutor said.

Mr Sullivan said it was then taken away for analysis where text messages were discovered between the driver and his partner......."

http://www.kentonline.co.uk/deal/news/v ... ing-33772/

shocking death and shocking outcome

\

What a disgrace. Texting up to 2 minutes before the ambulance was called, and lied to police about his phone. But one difference: over there, as far as I can tell from that second story, it isn't illegal to text and drive.

AdelaidePeter wrote:

antigee wrote:lets hope the Victoria Police have a strong well prepared case and the jury (if applicable?) don't choose the it could happen to any one of us verdict - the defence line described above was used in a UK teen cyclist death...apparently defence lawyers can choose to use it when the sun failed to shine at the time of the appalling driving:

http://www.kentonline.co.uk/deal/news/v ... ile-33310/

“At this point he said he was possibly 10 to 12 seconds away from the point of collision when he noticed the cyclist who he claimed rode off the pavement and onto the road without looking, “ the prosecutor said.

Mr Sullivan said it was then taken away for analysis where text messages were discovered between the driver and his partner......."

http://www.kentonline.co.uk/deal/news/v ... ing-33772/

shocking death and shocking outcome

\

What a disgrace. Texting up to 2 minutes before the ambulance was called, and lied to police about his phone. But one difference: over there, as far as I can tell from that second story, it isn't illegal to text and drive.

Yes, that jury decision is an absolute disgrace. For the guy to be not just using his phone, not even just reading texts, but actually trying to type in a text at the very time that he killed that poor cyclist. And then for the courts to find him guilty of absolutely nothing - that is just plain ridiculous!

Also, when I read that driver's pathetic excuses it really makes me mad.

“I was texting just using my left hand. When I pulled out onto the road I was trying to keep my attention on the road, so I typed without looking at the phone.”

“It was all very quick but it seemed to me he had adjacened (sic) out slightly from the lane he should have been on.”

So it was the cyclists fault because he wasn't where he "should have been". Is this guy serious? Take a look at the google street view of the area where it happened and tell me where else the cyclist could possibly have been.
https://www.google.com.au/maps/@51.1663 ... 6656?hl=en

It must be hard to prove fault on the part of the driver.
Or disprove fault on the part of the cyclist.
https://www.bendigoadvertiser.com.au/st ... des-crash/

warthog1 wrote:It must be hard to prove fault on the part of the driver.
Or disprove fault on the part of the cyclist.
https://www.bendigoadvertiser.com.au/st ... des-crash/

I wonder if they plan to have a police driver follow a police cyclist while the driver taps away on facebook.

One wonders if they have Jason's GPS Data, so they'd have a pretty accurate record of what he was doing.

Driver accused of being involved in the death of Jason Lowndes is due back in court tomorrow for a further committal hearing which may suggest additional charges or the Prosecution Service following thru its earlier attempt to make the driver surrender their license as a bail condition

https://www.bendigoadvertiser.com.au/st ... s/#slide=6

Driver who killed cyclist Danica Fullerton in October 2017, sentenced to 5 1/2 years' jail. http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-09-20/d ... n/10287124

Her family wants a longer sentence but (and it's easy for me to say) this sentence looks more or less in the right ball park. It's certainly a lot better than 300 hours community service and 2 years' loss of license. (As given to Mohamed Fageer for killing Ann Formaz-Preston in 2016: https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw/moh ... zlw5k.html )

Yep, the life of a 19 year old girl is actually being recompensed with a final effective result of two years goal.

I do believe that should a person want to kill another, the method by vehicle seem to be the most advantageous to the criminal.

Year, I know he is sooooo sorry.

I don't understand why the media ever mentions the maximum sentence when very few if any are sentenced to this period. The most important information is the median sentence for the offence. A 60% discount to the maximum sentence is outrageous.

biker jk wrote:I don't understand why the media ever mentions the maximum sentence when very few if any are sentenced to this period. The most important information is the median sentence for the offence. A 60% discount to the maximum sentence is outrageous.

OK I missed that and it does seem too short. But how does that compare to a "normal" manslaughter sentence? It's still a lot better than 300 hours community service.

It wouldn't mind a 2 year sentence if it could be combined with other penalties, like revoking his license for 20 years (and random police visits to enforce it).

Probably also worth mentioning that the ACT Coroner will be having the hearing into Mike Hall's Death starting next Monday, running for 3 days.

https://cycle.org.au/index.php/articles ... ll-inquest

Driver accused of being involved in the death of Jason Lowndes case sent to jury trial next year, no plea entered, application to surrender license as bail condition refused, prosecution outline extent of drivers texting leading up to the collision.......https://www.bendigoadvertiser.com.au/st ... des-crash/

antigee wrote:Driver accused of being involved in the death of Jason Lowndes case sent to jury trial next year, no plea entered, application to surrender license as bail condition refused, prosecution outline extent of drivers texting leading up to the collision.......https://www.bendigoadvertiser.com.au/st ... des-crash/

She admitted to not looking at the road. Isn't that a guilty plea?

biker jk wrote:

antigee wrote:Driver accused of being involved in the death of Jason Lowndes case sent to jury trial next year, no plea entered, application to surrender license as bail condition refused, prosecution outline extent of drivers texting leading up to the collision.......https://www.bendigoadvertiser.com.au/st ... des-crash/

She admitted to not looking at the road. Isn't that a guilty plea?

The lawyer is trying the same tack which was successfully used in the Caleb Wills case http://www.bicycles.net.au/forums/viewt ... 53&t=99033 . Yes she was at fault and yes she killed Jason Lowndes, but it was just a minor infringement, not "dangerous driving".

Mike Hall inquest started today. Report at ABC News

Emma Kent, who killed Gareth Davies in Macedon on 10 December 2017 (page 5 of this thread), has pleaded guilty to dangerous driving causing death https://www.theage.com.au/national/vict ... 50fza.html . She says she was distracted "trying to connect her phone's Bluetooth to the car audio" for ten seconds ( ) . Description of road here https://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-12-12/ ... ul/9247178 .

At least she pleaded guilty and didn't try to argue that her driving wasn't dangerous; unlike this guy http://www.bicycles.net.au/forums/viewt ... 53&t=99033

the difference between shutting up to the police and getting a good defence lawyer I guess...from theage article linked above:

"The defence called for a community corrections order, but the prosecution argued the offending was serious and deserved jail.

Kent was remanded in custody for sentence on November 26."

AdelaidePeter wrote:Emma Kent, who killed Gareth Davies in Macedon on 10 December 2017 (page 5 of this thread), has pleaded guilty to dangerous driving causing death https://www.theage.com.au/national/vict ... 50fza.html . She says she was distracted "trying to connect her phone's Bluetooth to the car audio" for ten seconds ( ) . Description of road here https://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-12-12/ ... ul/9247178 .

At least she pleaded guilty and didn't try to argue that her driving wasn't dangerous; unlike this guy http://www.bicycles.net.au/forums/viewt ... 53&t=99033

I see this every day when driving, and it's getting worse, no better, so whatever messages the authorities are trying to send about not using your phone while driving AREN'T WORKING.

I almost got rear ended on the freeway yesterday because the lady behind me looked to be texting. I was near my off ramp or would have changed lanes to avoid her. I could see her doing the "neck tilt" constantly. I had to brake, and she had to do an emergency brake and avoided me by centimetres. When I drove off, she left a massive gap behind me, because she'd had to brake os hard her phone had slipped off her lap an she was now searching around on the floor to find it rather than driving

10 seconds is such a long time to not be paying attention.....so much can happen in the blink of an eye, let alone 10 whole seconds....

AdelaidePeter wrote:Emma Kent, who killed Gareth Davies in Macedon on 10 December 2017 (page 5 of this thread), has pleaded guilty to dangerous driving causing death https://www.theage.com.au/national/vict ... 50fza.html . She says she was distracted "trying to connect her phone's Bluetooth to the car audio" for ten seconds ( ) . Description of road here https://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-12-12/ ... ul/9247178 .

At least she pleaded guilty and didn't try to argue that her driving wasn't dangerous; unlike this guy http://www.bicycles.net.au/forums/viewt ... 53&t=99033

Sentenced to just 9 months gaol. Woefully inadequate.

https://www.theage.com.au/national/vict ... 50icl.html

biker jk wrote:

AdelaidePeter wrote:Emma Kent, who killed Gareth Davies in Macedon on 10 December 2017 (page 5 of this thread), has pleaded guilty to dangerous driving causing death https://www.theage.com.au/national/vict ... 50fza.html . She says she was distracted "trying to connect her phone's Bluetooth to the car audio" for ten seconds ( ) . Description of road here https://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-12-12/ ... ul/9247178 .

At least she pleaded guilty and didn't try to argue that her driving wasn't dangerous; unlike this guy http://www.bicycles.net.au/forums/viewt ... 53&t=99033

Sentenced to just 9 months gaol. Woefully inadequate.

https://www.theage.com.au/national/vict ... 50icl.html

Yes.
Far more severe than the slap with a wet lettuce leaf I was expecting, however.

I think the fact she pleaded guilty and didn’t try to justify or excuse her behaviour was taken into account. She also has other provisions re: community service etc. Should maybe serve that with a cycling organisation of some kind.

There are no winners in these cases.

cyclotaur wrote: There are no winners in these cases.

Agreed. However, some lose more than others.

cogs19 wrote:

cyclotaur wrote: There are no winners in these cases.

Agreed. However, some lose more than others.

Absolutely.

Mububban wrote:


I see this every day when driving, and it's getting worse, no better, so whatever messages the authorities are trying to send about not using your phone while driving AREN'T WORKING.

I almost got rear ended on the freeway yesterday because the lady behind me looked to be texting. I was near my off ramp or would have changed lanes to avoid her. I could see her doing the "neck tilt" constantly. I had to brake, and she had to do an emergency brake and avoided me by centimetres. When I drove off, she left a massive gap behind me, because she'd had to brake os hard her phone had slipped off her lap an she was now searching around on the floor to find it rather than driving

10 seconds is such a long time to not be paying attention.....so much can happen in the blink of an eye, let alone 10 whole seconds....

Agreed.
A mandatory licence suspension is needed.
It is endemic among the driving public now.
I would argue it is more dangerous than at least low level drink driving, so the precedent is there.