Paul Barnard

This is the write-up that covered the original crash: https://www.wdsu.com/article/belle-c...rrero/43517216

This tells of the arrest: https://www.nola.com/news/jefferson_...8315d30d5.html

The cyclist was in a 15 MPH blind bend marked as a no passing zone. The road is a low traffic volume 35 MPH road in an industrial area adjacent to the MS River. There is a dedicated bike path that runs right beside the road. There was some talk that the path was blocked nearby at the time of the accident, but I don't know that to be true. I am shocked that the driver was charged, even though he was obviously negligent. I have seen drivers get away with far worse.

JoeyBike

No consolation for the dead guy.

I've biked that exact spot dozens of times. The classic "Two Ferry" ride from the East Bank and back to the East Bank (loop) uses River Road for a bit. Not surprised someone got hozed right there.

GamblerGORD53

This is a very sharp turn. The trailer end would swivel out. I see no reason for the truck to try to squeeze by, bloody stupid. The question is exactly where he first saw the bike.
Looks like most of the streets there are suicidal.

JW Fas

At least the charge matches the crime.

indyfabz

As I read LA law, maximum sentence is 5 years, with or without hard labor, and a $5,000 fine.

Bald Paul

Being arrested doesn't mean he's convicted. His lawyer will most likely work out some deal to plead guilty to a lesser charge with no jail time. He'll still be sued in civil court, I'm sure.

LV2TNDM

I've said it before, and I'll say it again, PLEASE stop using the term "accident" when it comes to motor vehicle collisions!

It MAY be a TRUE accident that could not have been avoided. Using the "a" word might then be appropriate; but that would be AFTER all the facts are known. So why bias the discussion with a word that connotates innocence or lack of culpability on the responsible party? You shouldn't.

So use "collision, wreck or crash" instead. Or "incident" works too.

Observing drivers today tells me that collisions are RARELY "accidental." Car wrecks are almost always the result of impatience, distraction, selfishness, entitlement, malice, aggression, impairment, rage or a combination thereof. In other words, the collision is usually the result of several BAD CHOICES drivers make. If you were to get drunk, pull out a gun and then threaten someone and later ended up killing that person with it, would you call it an accident? No one would. So why use this term when another deadly weapon is involved?

The San Francisco Police Department has stopped using this terrible word for traffic incidents. All police departments and public agencies should. The media should as well.

And cyclists? Without a doubt should stop using this terrible word!

Car culture pervades American society. This term only leads to light punishment or no punishment at all for drivers who kill. We see this all the time.

Let's not contribute to this injustice that perpetuates injury and killing of cyclists and all other vulnerable user groups. It's the LEAST we can do.

JoeyBike

Obviously you feel strongly about this. I'm not convinced it's a car culture thing.

If I'm a hit man, or someone otherwise purposely trying to kill someone with a car, then it is definitely not an "accident". But since we are all "innocent until PROVEN guilty" in the USofA, then pretty much every crash is assumed to be by accident at first glance.

So other than the "hit man" scenario and a long list of negligence on the part of the operator (driving intoxicated, distracted, etc.) humans and mechanical contraptions are far from perfect. Most motorists do not want to ruin their expensive vehicles, waste their time at the scene, and maybe in court, or hurt anyone. People's minds wander. We didn't evolve to operate our brains at "mile-per-minute" speeds. Regardless of fault (an insurance company / ambulance chaser perspective) assuming the motorist is not KNOWINGLY impaired, most crashes are "accidents". Honest mistakes made by imperfect beings mostly incapable of "mile-a-minute" perfect judgement.

Like it or not, if it wasn't on purpose, it's an accident to almost everybody. Sorry the semantics causes you so much grief.

JW Fas

All accidents are collisions, but not all collisions are accidents. The NHTSA's meta analysis found that 94% of collisions are due to human error, so only 6% were due to the vehicles themselves, the environment, or unknown reasons.

We can determine if a collision was an accident independent of a criminal conviction, because it's not relevant to what an accident is. An accident is a collision that was both unintentional and couldn't reasonably have been avoided. If you crash because you were speeding, intoxicated, or texting, that's not an accident. There were easy steps you could've taken to prevent the collision (don't speed, don't drive drunk, don't text).

Analogy: If you eat nothing but simple carbs and never exercise, you'll probably gain weight. If your excuse is, "Well I didn't intentionally gain weight, so it's an accident." no one with half a brain would buy that. You consciously engaged in behaviors that you knew had a substantial probability of an unfavorable outcome, so to call it an accident is asinine. It's the same approach with motor vehicle driving (or any vehicle for that matter). There are certain behaviors that you know will increase your chances of wrecking, so it doesn't matter if you didn't mean to crash.The only relevance your intent has is to a criminal prosecutor who decides if you should be charged with manslaughter or second-degree murder, but it's not relevant to whether or not the collision itself was an accident.

JoeyBike

I am not disagreeing with your premise.

Let's say you buy all your tissue at the Dollar Store. It's Brand X Dollar Store stuff. Your friend has a runny nose and asks you to pass him a "Kleenex". Then you say "NO DUDE....it's Dollar Store tissue, NOT Kleenex".

You can't change the world. You certainly can't change many people right here on A&S. Just hand the dude the "Kleenex" and move on with life and be happy. Is the outcome (or lack thereof) personally worth the battle for you?

"So why are you late to dinner?" "Oh, I got stuck behind an ACCIDENT." <-- This cannot be fixed.

Roughstuff

I would replace "is assumed" to "should be assumed" in your comment, but the rest is spot on.

That is because today SEMANTICS is everything, and silly old notions like "innocent until proven guilty" are tossed into the trash. You see the same thing with "hate crimes" (in contrast to crimes where you love the person, apparently.)

The driver of a long truck/vehicle should be aware that a sharp turn means the rear of the vehicle will swing wide, so I hope this is pointed out in the investigation and in court.
Similarly a bicycle rider outside of a clearly available shoulder should be aware of the greater risk in the lane of traffic, and I hope this is made clear also.

But these decisions sometimes have to be made in the heat of riding/driving, which complicates the "intent" issue. That is why I prefer the word accident until proven otherwise.

Roughstuff

Correct, but the FACT that you were speeding, intoxicated, or texting, has to be verified and proven in a COURT OF LAW, not by the simple statement of police, or observers, or members of the "Society of Opinionated BastURDS," as I call us. And until then, it is an accident. Given the rampant bias and illiteracy among the news media these days, one cannot be prudent enough about "what actually happened."

JW Fas

Not necessarily. A guilty verdict for a crime must be rendered in a court of law, but the criminal case does not determine whether a collision was an accident. An officer's radar gun can verify the fact of speeding. A breathalyzer or blood draw can verify the fact that you were intoxicated. If my helmet camera captures someone texting, that's a fact regardless of whether they're convicted of a crime in court.

Polaris OBark

Collisions are either accidental or intentional. If the driver did not intent to collide with the cyclist, then it is described as an accident.

Absent proof of intent, the legal interpretation is "accident."

If the unintended collision (the accident) resulting in the death of the cyclist can be attributed to negligent behavior of the driver, then it is an example of a negligent homicide. The prosecution needs to prove criminal negligence; they do not need to prove criminal intent.

Hence the terminology.

LV2TNDM

I'm not going to wait around for extensive study and research to decide CONCLUSIVELY that this is 100% true.

And even if it's 100% false, you should STILL USE THE WORDS I SUGGEST! They're far more objective. They do not make erroneous assumptions. They are far better.

BTW, a driver doored a father riding with his 5-year old daughter around Lake Merritt a month ago. She died as a result of her injuries. Driver fails to obey CVC 22517 at a cit park with a bike lane, yet I'm sure many will call it a "honest mistake, an accident, or a horrible unavoidable tragedy." This is what usage of this word creates. It excuses law-breaking by drivers. I'm sure the media, after using the "a" word, will immediately ask, "Was the cyclist wearing a helmet?"

This is ALMOST ALWAYS THE CASE, as if there's always this subconscious need to deflect blame and responsibility FROM the driver and ONTO the victim. I call ********.

BTW, I just learned that TWO friends were sent to the ICU in the last year by irresponsible drivers. Two riders with EXTENSIVE training, racing and touring experience (50 years for both) almost killed by irresponsible behavior behind the wheel.

Where the dad & girl were hit? I WAS HIT 1/4 MILE AWAY IN THE SAME BIKE LANE two years ago! This is Lake Merritt where bikes, people, joggers, skaters, scooter riders and every other form of recreation are happening. Yet drivers cannot possibly drive with even more care here. Nope, it's "Me, me, me, ME! I HAVE TO GET WHERE I'M GOING.... AND NOW!"

This is homicidal behavior and needs to be treated and punished as such.

Yeah, I have VERY strong feelings on the subject. Sorry I get irate when drivers murder vulnerable road users. I guess I'm kinda touchy that way.

PS Oh and I just remembered: This VERY SAME stretch of road? Drivers on two occasions I know of personally, have gone into the oncoming lane to floor it and pass multiple cars and bicyclists. It's ******g mayhem out there and I'm ******G SICK OF IT!

LV2TNDM

If a criminal "accidentally" pulls the trigger while robbing a bank, is it considered an "accident" and is charged with manslaughter?

N.O.P.E. Not at all.

Why? Because WE WRITE THE LAWS and decide how terminology is used and actions are punished. We can easily legislate changes to the vehicle code and criminal law to stop excusing egregious behavior behind the wheel. When a driver CHOOSES to get hammered and then CHOOSES to get behind the wheel and kills someone, YOU may say it's an accident. But the law doesn't. And most rational people don't either. Thanks to MADD, we've totally removed the tolerance for drunk driving. We can do the same with the irresponsible driving we see rampant on our roads.

You need to revise the way you think about things. You need to hold drivers to a higher standard. You need to stop using vernacular designed to exonerate drivers before ANY facts are in.

If you don't, you become complicit in the carnage.

Polaris OBark

Because it is a criminal conducting an armed robbery, and the motive/intent to kill is clear.

What is the motive for the driver to kill the cyclist?

LV2TNDM

Buncha ******g entitled driver apologists here! In the "Bicycle Advocacy & Safety" section, no less! No wonder we struggle to hold drivers accountable. If YOU are this willing to use sloppy and lame language that excuses egregious driver behavior, how can we ask Average Joe to do any better? We can't. We are part of the problem.

But perhaps it takes more extreme advocating and attitudes like mine that will help swing the pendulum.

As I've posted here & elsewhere, I spent two weeks in France in '22 and was simply blown away by the patience exhibited by drivers on narrow two-lane country roads who needed to pass us on our tandem. Two weeks and with only ONE exception,* the hundreds of drivers who passed us, waited patiently behind us for an open and clear section of road, they signaled left, overtook us, signaled right and moved back over. I simply could not believe how gracious and safe they were. And I've toured in Europe before and spent a summer working in Germany, so I'm not even new to the experience. Yet I was still taken aback at how much respect the drivers showed us.

I guess that's the result of "commie socialist" France for you! Where workers get paid time off and school children are fed high-quality lunches at school (among about a million other benefits of strong social democracy). Damn commies!

But somehow, in America, we've been habituated to homicidal behavior behind the wheel. Car culture does indeed promote this. We are third-class citizens on the road and the law supports this assertion.

*And that exception was almost without a doubt, some ******* tourist in a rental car. Figures!

JoeyBike

The vast majority of legislators are motorists and do not ride bicycles. The vast majority of citizens are motorists and do not venture off of their neighborhood streets on bicycles. The vast majority of legislators and citizens HATE cyclists getting in their way. So the vast majority of Americans do not care, perhaps even relish those moments when a cyclist gets hozed playing in traffic. Majority rules in the good ol' USofA.

To ride or not to ride, this is the question. The vast majority of dead cyclists do not care what the incident that killed them is called either. It's super easy to not be an "accident" victim on a bicycle. Foolproof, actually.

Polaris OBark

It is quite the opposite. I would actually favor something approaching a complete ban on private automobile traffic.

But this sort of psychotic ranting and raving doesn't help anything. You are just alienating people and confirming their prejudices, which sets us all back. Think about this, please.

Steve B.

I find it remarkable that the police and prosecutors actually charged the driver with anything. That rarely, if ever happens.

tomato coupe

Maybe you should have looked up the definition of the word 'accident' before you started your crusade to remove it from common use. From Merriam Webster Dictionary:

Paul Barnard

What is a connotation Alex?

Paul Barnard

Yet France has a higher per capita bicycle fatality rate than Texas.

I-Like-To-Bike