Cyclist Dies in Brighton

It's bad enough when a cyclist is killed on the road, but is there any
need for this kind of reporting?

http://www.theargus.co.uk/the_argus/news/NEWS2.html

"Officers also want to know why the woman was cycling on the road on
the eastbound carriageway and not the cycle path on the south side
pavement in Kings Road."

Sounds like victim blaming to me.

In article , ar106
@connectfreeREMOVE.co.uk says...
It's bad enough when a cyclist is killed on the road, but is there any
need for this kind of reporting?

http://www.theargus.co.uk/the_argus/news/NEWS2.html

"Officers also want to know why the woman was cycling on the road on
the eastbound carriageway and not the cycle path on the south side
pavement in Kings Road."

Sounds like victim blaming to me.


?
Sounds like they want to know what happened. Maybe they want to prevent
the same thing happening again.

--
Mike

"Andrew Richardson" wrote in message
...
It's bad enough when a cyclist is killed on the road, but is there any
need for this kind of reporting?

http://www.theargus.co.uk/the_argus/news/NEWS2.html

"Officers also want to know why the woman was cycling on the road on
the eastbound carriageway and not the cycle path on the south side
pavement in Kings Road."

Sounds like victim blaming to me.

Yes it does look like victim-blaming and it happens all too often in the UK
when it comes to cycling injuries and deaths. The police in question should
be ashamed of themselves.

helen s

On Sun, 13 Nov 2005 10:45:20 +0000, Andrew Richardson
wrote:

It's bad enough when a cyclist is killed on the road, but is there any
need for this kind of reporting?

http://www.theargus.co.uk/the_argus/news/NEWS2.html

"Officers also want to know why the woman was cycling on the road on
the eastbound carriageway and not the cycle path on the south side
pavement in Kings Road."

Sounds like victim blaming to me.

*A police investigation was focusing on whether the bicycle had lights
and reflectors and whether the woman was wearing any reflective or
light-coloured clothing.*

I know that recent reports suggest that the police are not as bright
as one may hope, but surely it doesn't take much to establish the
above.

*He [Sgt Geer] said, "We want to remind all cyclists to ensure they
wear the correct protective clothing including a helmet and reflective
bands."*

Perhaps the police investigation should first focus on whether the
cyclist was wearing a helmet, and if she was conclude that it did her
no good, and if she wasn't refocus the investigation to discover if
helmet would have saved her life.

Andrew Richardson wrote:

It's bad enough when a cyclist is killed on the road, but is there any
need for this kind of reporting?

http://www.theargus.co.uk/the_argus/news/NEWS2.html

"Officers also want to know why the woman was cycling on the road on
the eastbound carriageway and not the cycle path on the south side
pavement in Kings Road."

Sounds like victim blaming to me.


"A police investigation was focusing on whether the bicycle had lights
and reflectors and whether the woman was wearing any reflective or
light-coloured clothing."

That will be a challenge for them.

--
Eiron

I have no spirit to play with you; your dearth of judgment renders you
tedious - Ben Jonson.

"Bertie Wiggins" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 13 Nov 2005 10:45:20 +0000, Andrew Richardson
wrote:

It's bad enough when a cyclist is killed on the road, but is there any
need for this kind of reporting?

http://www.theargus.co.uk/the_argus/news/NEWS2.html

"Officers also want to know why the woman was cycling on the road on
the eastbound carriageway and not the cycle path on the south side
pavement in Kings Road."

Sounds like victim blaming to me.

*A police investigation was focusing on whether the bicycle had lights
and reflectors and whether the woman was wearing any reflective or
light-coloured clothing.*

I know that recent reports suggest that the police are not as bright
as one may hope, but surely it doesn't take much to establish the
above.

*He [Sgt Geer] said, "We want to remind all cyclists to ensure they
wear the correct protective clothing including a helmet and reflective
bands."*

Perhaps the police investigation should first focus on whether the
cyclist was wearing a helmet, and if she was conclude that it did her
no good, and if she wasn't refocus the investigation to discover if
helmet would have saved her life.

It sounds to me as though she wasn't carrying lights. They are more
protective than helmets.

Geoff Pearson wrote:

It sounds to me as though she wasn't carrying lights. They are more
protective than helmets.


Its not so clear. Either there are lights on the bike in which case its
a question of whether they were switched on, or there are not in which
case they already know the answer and wouldn't need to ask. In either
case it does not excuse the driver because there is plenty of street
lighting there by which to see what is on the roads if you bother to look.



--
Tony

"The best way I know of to win an argument is to start by being in the
right."
- Lord Hailsham

Andrew Richardson wrote:
It's bad enough when a cyclist is killed on the road, but is there any
need for this kind of reporting?

http://www.theargus.co.uk/the_argus/news/NEWS2.html

"Officers also want to know why the woman was cycling on the road on
the eastbound carriageway and not the cycle path on the south side
pavement in Kings Road."

I don't see a problem with the reporting. There's obviously a very real
problem with the reported attitude of the police, but if the police are
going to get into victim blaming then I'd rather know about it than not.

Sounds like victim blaming to me.

Yes, but not on the part of the journalist.

--
Danny Colyer (my reply address is valid but checked infrequently)
URL:http://www.colyer.plus.com/danny/
Subscribe to PlusNet URL:http://www.colyer.plus.com/referral/
"He who dares not offend cannot be honest." - Thomas Paine

"Andrew Richardson" wrote in message
...
It's bad enough when a cyclist is killed on the road, but is there any
need for this kind of reporting?

http://www.theargus.co.uk/the_argus/news/NEWS2.html

"Officers also want to know why the woman was cycling on the road on
the eastbound carriageway and not the cycle path on the south side
pavement in Kings Road."

Sounds like victim blaming to me.

Sound like you're shooting from the hip to me.

There are lots of unanswered questions in the article. Quite a few
inferences can be drawn from the sorry tale but unless one was intimately
involved with the incident the inferences remain, at best, guesses.

Here's some things to consider:

The woman was German, was she crossing the carriage way and looked in the
wrong direction before crossing forgetting she was in the UK and not
Germany?

In an accident involving serious injuries, don't the priorities lie with
getting the victim to hospital and not loggin what s(he) was wearing at the
time of the accident?

Having had lights detach themselves from my bike after hitting potholes, a
thorough search of the accident area may have to be made to establish of
lights were fitted to the bike which may well be mangled if a heavy
impact/collision was made.

The accident was pre-dawn. The establishment of whether lights were on the
bike is a legitimate exercise when trying to establish the cause(s) of the
accident.

Establishing that the cyclist was wearing reflective clothing and that the
bike had reflectors and lights could strengthen the case for a prosecution
of the driver and not imply that the woman was feckless.

The article mentions serious head injuries, a helmet may logically be held
to be a possible life saving piece of equipment to those unfamiliar with the
current 'debate' including police, medics and journalists.

All pure conjecture of course and none of it contributing to the general
case that cycling is a beneficial activity whose low risks are outweighed by
an extended lifespan for most participants.

vernon wrote:

Sound like you're shooting from the hip to me.

There are lots of unanswered questions in the article. Quite a few
inferences can be drawn from the sorry tale but unless one was intimately
involved with the incident the inferences remain, at best, guesses.

Here's some things to consider:


You've missed out the questions they didn't ask:

Was the motorist going too fast?
Was he talking on his phone?
Were his windows clear of mist and condensation?
Was he tuning his car radio or fiddling around with something else in
the car?

Since we know his car was yellow we at least don't need to ask whether
it was visible although that would seem to be irrelevant as they were
travelling in the same direction implying he hit her from behind.

And if they are going to ask why she wasn't using the alternative but
less convenient pavement option it would be valid to ask why he wasn't
using the alternative but less convenient public transport option.

--
Tony

"The best way I know of to win an argument is to start by being in the
right."
- Lord Hailsham