I-Like-To-Bike

Heck, don't try so hard to be politically correct, fess up what is really on your mind about this fellow, knowing all that you do about him and after viewing a snapshot.

dougmc

The justice system in general. If you want to get picky about what needs to happen and in what order and who gets to demand what, fine, but that wasn't my point.

If the DA wants these GPS details, he'll ask for them, possibly politely at first. Maybe the police asked for such things at the scene? If a warrant or subpoena is required, they'll get it -- certainly, a court won't reject such a request if the purpose is to get data that is directly related to a crime they're investigating -- and how fast the cyclist was going will certainly be relevant here in deciding if this is to be treated as a crime or just an ordinary collision.

If the data was intentionally destroyed to keep the prosecutor from getting it, that's called things like tampering with evidence or obstruction of justice and yes, it's generally illegal.

Now, if it's prosecuted would probably depend on the situation and how easily it could be shown that the evidence was destroyed -- if the guy can claim that the evidence never existed in the first place, that might be hard to disprove. But certainly, destroying evidence that you know the police want in connection with a crime is generally illegal, even if the evidence would incriminate you. (That said, you don't have to volunteer that the evidence exists ... you do have the right to remain silent, but that doesn't give you the right to destroy evidence.)

In any event, I'm no lawyer, but if you find yourself in a situation like that of the cyclist here (I imagine it'll never happen, but just hypothetically ...), I'd suggest consulting a lawyer before destroying any evidence you may have about the collision, especially if the police have good reason to believe that it exists and you have it. (And in this case, the cyclist's extensive Strava use strongly suggests that it exists or at least existed.)

I-Like-To-Bike

But those items happen to be My point. That and the wacky legal theory that individuals are forbidden to modify their own recordings and other electronic data because "they" might want to go on a fishing trip through the data to see what "they" can find. Note that the legal beagles of BF previously did not restrict the definition of "they" to only representatives of the DA with search warrants in hand, and "they" could include anybody from nosy news reporters to lawyers foraging for data to use in a civil suit.

FYI you might take a look at High court: Police need warrant to search cell phones - CNN.com

dougmc

If the DA is looking for this cyclist's GPS tracks that covered the collision ... that's far from a "fishing trip". If the data exists, it will be extremely relevant to determining if the cyclist was riding recklessly -- his speed would be a key component to that determination.

I don't recall anything about reporters demanding the data here, but maybe I missed it.

As for a civil suit, if one happens, I would expect any competent attorney to request all such information, and I see no reason for the judge to deny such a request, as it would be directly relevant to the case. There is a penalty for failing to comply with a subpoena too, but I was specifically referring to the potential criminal case.

I saw it when it came out, but why do you think it's relevant now? If "they" (my "they", the police/DA/criminal courts) need a warrant, they'll get a warrant. Certainly, I would not expect a judge to refuse to give a warrant for his recent GPS data under these circumstances.

I imagine that had the police thought to do so (we looked him up on Strava, they may not have thought to do that), and had they been treating their investigation seriously ... they would have taken his GPS (or phone, if it's what he uses) as evidence -- they don't need a warrant to do that. If they need a warrant to read it, they'll get one. (Unless they're incompetent, which is certainly possible. And they might not need a warrant to read it -- he could have consented.)

Coal Buster

Actually, no one has said that but you keep repeating it over and over.

Fissile

That picture was taken the day after the accident while he was exiting his lawyer's office.

UnfilteredDregs

Stereotype much? Twit.

The day after the incident was quite a bit cooler, and being that he's a professional saxophonist, if you knew anything about wtf you're talking about, you'd realize they tend to protect their throats from the weather.

Fissile

Cooler? Yeah, it went down to a bone chilling 72. He needs to protect his throat from the chill? Really? Is he a horn player or an opera diva?

UnfilteredDregs

The high on the 19th was 66, the low was in the 50s.

Now who's full of hot air...twit.

Fissile

Yeah, I got in my car on the 19th and the exterior tempt gauge said 72, but I'm way down South in Hudson Co, which is practically next to Miami. I think it's you who needs to STFU.

I-Like-To-Bike

There is no requirement or obligation for an individual to preserve electronic data just in case subpoenas may be requested and issued at some future date, especially when no one has been accused of a crime or indicated that a crime has occurred.

Why exactly do the police need the cyclist's GPS information to establish the cyclist's location at the time of the accident? Is that somehow in doubt? What legal basis do the police/DA have to snoop in his phone for information for his previous track record in Central Park? Is it the same BF legal beagle principle used to snoop in every motorists' personal cell phone records to find out if they ever were speeding at any time in the past or present. IOW just hot air legal jive talk.

BTW how admissible (or accurate) is Strava data on a cell phone as legal evidence of a specific speed at any specific point in time?

dynodonn 

In before the lock down.

I-Like-To-Bike

Really? What then are these other posters posting?

FBinNY 

+1, now that the thread has moved to stereotyping and a two person argument about what is or isn't evidence o evidence tampering, it belongs in P&R. Move or shutdown coming soon.

Coal Buster

Never mind, I'm a half-hour away from leaving for vacation. May I-like-to-bike have the last word.

Grey.

GamblerGORD53

+1 This cyclist is a total TWIT and I gather so are hundreds of others in CP.
So this guy is making a sport of zooming thru the park like it is " Death Race 3000" ??? WTF ... Go play your sax at Sing Sing.

dynodonn 

It seems that whenever a cyclist starts to attain higher speeds, that still do not emulate ones that many motorists do regularly on residential streets and would be considered slow by their POV, the words like "speeding", and "reckless", seem to pop up in certain conversations.

I-Like-To-Bike

What exactly did the thread move from? An OP of a news snippet that was loaded with misinformation and man on the street ranting about cyclists followed by numerous posts of ignorant/misinformed/rumor mongering, victim blaming, and finger pointing nonsense??

IOW, you aren't interested any more now that it has drifted into other areas, so shut it down, eh?

Essex

I was looking at the continuing news reports...there is a lot of innuendos on the part of the press. When you ride CP on Thursday the bike lane is the worst lane you can ride. That section is usually wide-open to cyclists, runners and the odd carriage/park vehicle. Unless you are granny-riding you don't use the bike lane.

When I ride this section I typically do anywhere between 20-25 mph safely. Usually, most peds. are cognizant enough to stay clear (not jaywalk) in this downhill and flat section as cyclists / carriages / vehicles can be clearly seen hundreds of feet away. There is however, a intersection near 59th St. which is a complete nightmare and total cluster.

As per withholding, or destroying evidence....not ever a good thing. And I same sure both parties are keeping quiet during this period. When it goes legal a lot of stuff will come out during discovery. Additionally, I have discovered that a common tactic used in court is "I don't remember." And in my particular legal proceedings (not involving bodily injury) it works.

CbadRider

*ding ding*

That's the kitchen timer; this thread is done.