On Friday, February 22, 2019 at 3:58:25 PM UTC-8, Radey Shouman wrote:
Frank Krygowski writes:

On 2/22/2019 12:10 PM, wrote:
On Thursday, February 21, 2019 at 7:55:16 PM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
As long as we're on the subject: It's interesting how much helmet
promotion was due to the mania of just a few people. Randy Swart (who
essentially _is_ the "Bicycle Helmet Safety Institute") was responsible
for a disproportionate amount of the fear mongering. For example,
“Without one, you are always in danger..."

See http://www.bikeboom.info/helmets/

--
- Frank Krygowski

There has been a steady downward trend in the ratio of both
pedestrians and bicyclists injuries because drivers know the outcome
of court cases involving these - it invariably goes against
motorists.

If only that were so...

https://www.bostonmagazine.com/news/...-crash-boston/

Here is another Massachusetts case:

https://theswellesleyreport.com/2013...ling-accident/

Wellesley police very thoroughly investigate a crash involving a truck
and a cyclist, decide to seek an indictment for Motor Vehicle Homicide
but the grand jury does not return a true bill on any charges.

I don't know what the criminal code in Massachusetts says, but in many states, if the grand jury returns a no bill, the prosecutor can re-present the case to a different grand jury or file a criminal complaint. Presenting to a grand jury is like kicking a penalty shot through an open goal. It's usually not that tough to get a true bill -- unless the prosecutor doesn't want one, or the criminal case really does suck, or the grand jury is totally out to lunch. With all the evidence and witness in that Massachusetts case, it didn't look like the prosecutor was laying down. That leaves two options, and we don't which one it was.

-- Jay Beattie.