On 22/06/2019 12:49, TMS320 wrote:
On 22/06/2019 12:21, Bod wrote:
On 22/06/2019 12:13, JNugent wrote:

The court decided that the cyclist and the victim were each a nominal
50% to blame for the collion. She for stepping out without looking,
he for proceeding to collide with her without even trying to stop.
Â*
Â* He did apparently try to avoid her. Are you saying that he
deliberately rode into her?

Note that Nugent is doing his usual slippery routine by using the word
word 'stop'. As though stop and avoid are the same thing.

The court decided that avoidance (ie, changing direction, without
braking and without stopping) was indeed not an acceptable thing for the
cyclist to do. He should have braked, very hard, to a halt if necessary.
The court decided that so there's no point to your wriggle.

Braking (hard) is what I do in my car in similar circumstances. Isn't it
what *you* would do?