Originally Posted by
Moe Zhoost
News reporting is not always reliable, mate. How many media pundits have rushed their scoop before validating? Not saying that they wrong (actually, I did, didn't I) but there is this statement from Bird:
Then again, corporate statements are not always reliable truthful either.
In any case, I hope we get to hear the whole story about this event. Having encountered passively obstructive individuals many times on bike paths, I don't doubt that the scooter guys were somewhat responsible, though probably not to the extent that the cyclist would like folks to believe.
And yes, he did leave before the police showed up. I imagine that there could be reasons for that other than to avoid responsibility for the incident.
Obviously, I didn't know about that statement. That's apparently from Bird's PR department, and it smells rather fishy. The only way that the guy could know about the subpoena in order to file a motion to quash is if Bird tipped him off--there's no other way he could have been notified since no one else knows his identity. Since the whole point of the subpoena is to discover the guy's identity, he would have had to file this motion to quash anonymously. Don't know if the Georgia courts allow a "John Doe" filing like that, but this seems extraordinarily unlikely to me.
Bird may have technically rigged this to look like they're not behind the motion, but they're definitely in on it one way or the other. The article quotes the Atlanta police for Bird having filed it, and the statement you have is from Bird's PR people. I would not bet on either being the favorite to get it right.