According to Doug, this would have been the lorry driver's fault

Terra Nova wrote:
Mrcheerful wrote:

in those glamour shots she is quite good looking, what a waste.


Pretty people are more highly valued the world over, there is
nothing wrong with that.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -


Mr Cheeful you are Unbelievable. Absolutely unbelievable. You really
have no idea how bad you sound do you? You have no idea how sexist
you are to women and how backward and loathsome you are in your
attitudes to fellow humans who ride bicycles do you?

Apart from all the debate about cyclists wearing headphones I haven't
heard a single scrap of sympathy extended to the girl who lost her
life, and her family. I for one give them all the sympathy I have.
They must be devastated, but even more devastated when their
daughter's death is so dismissively debated on here.

No-one knows the full facts of the case and the press make mistakes.
Just because the girl's family say they begged her not to wear her
headphones does not necessarily mean she was listening to music at the
time and that as a consequence also wore a blindfold. She is dead and
cannot tell us what she did.

Anyone wearing a headphone whilst cycling would be inhibiting one of
their senses and would so not be fully armed to stay alive on the road
- because lets face it you need more than the 5 senses our parents
gave us to stay alive in that game. They pay with their lives. A car
driver doing the same thing, eating, drinking, smoking, listening to
loud music, changing CD's and asnwering and speaking on the phone
usually kill someone else when it goes wrong and that is deemed as
careless.

It is interesting to hear yet again a driver of a HGV or long vehicle
say once more "I knew nothing", this along with "I saw nothing" and "I
heard nothing" are standard protective answers and usually mean they
are covering something up. If this man is innocent of any driving
offence fair enough, but you are not telling me a woman can cycle
straight into your vehicle with enough force and speed to kill herself
and the driver not know anything about it.

I understand the driver is devastated. He has a conscience and is
obviously sympoathetis. That will be a comfort to the family at
least.

"I saw nothing" by the way should be dismissed as a defence in any
RTC. What should be used instead is "I didn't look properly" or "I
didn't look at all" because that is usually what really happened...

I have every sympathy, both with the girls' family and especially with the
lorry driver.
She was a pretty looking girl and there is absolutely nothing wrong with
saying that it is a terrible waste that she is dead.
it would be very easy for a human on a bicycle to die by running into the
side of a lorry and the collision would not be felt by the driver. The
collision might not have been more than a few miles per hour. Particularly
when it is an articulated lorry there is very little connection to the back
end to transmit the impact to the driver.

However, it seems very likely that she was using enclosed headphones at the
time of impact (as she customarily did) and it also seems likely that she
rode straight off the pavement into the side of the truck. Exactly why we
will never know, but it seems very likely that the collision was her fault.

Terra Nova wrote:
Mrcheerful wrote:

in those glamour shots she is quite good looking, what a waste.


Pretty people are more highly valued the world over, there is
nothing wrong with that.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -


Mr Cheeful you are Unbelievable. Absolutely unbelievable. You really
have no idea how bad you sound do you? You have no idea how sexist
you are to women and how backward and loathsome you are in your
attitudes to fellow humans who ride bicycles do you?

Cyclists aren't human.

Apart from all the debate about cyclists wearing headphones I haven't
heard a single scrap of sympathy extended to the girl who lost her
life, and her family. I for one give them all the sympathy I have.
They must be devastated, but even more devastated when their
daughter's death is so dismissively debated on here.

And what about the innocent driver?

No-one knows the full facts of the case and the press make mistakes.
Just because the girl's family say they begged her not to wear her
headphones does not necessarily mean she was listening to music at the
time and that as a consequence also wore a blindfold. She is dead and
cannot tell us what she did.

Anyone wearing a headphone whilst cycling would be inhibiting one of
their senses and would so not be fully armed to stay alive on the road
- because lets face it you need more than the 5 senses our parents
gave us to stay alive in that game.

We have at least 11 senses.

They pay with their lives. A car
driver doing the same thing, eating, drinking, smoking, listening to
loud music, changing CD's and asnwering and speaking on the phone
usually kill someone else when it goes wrong and that is deemed as
careless.

Because drivers are vigourously examined & tested before being allowed on
the roads, and highly regulated whilst on the roads, the have an incredible
safety record.


It is interesting to hear yet again a driver of a HGV or long vehicle
say once more "I knew nothing", this along with "I saw nothing" and "I
heard nothing" are standard protective answers and usually mean they
are covering something up. If this man is innocent of any driving
offence fair enough, but you are not telling me a woman can cycle
straight into your vehicle with enough force and speed to kill herself
and the driver not know anything about it.

Clearly never driven an HGV have you?

I understand the driver is devastated. He has a conscience and is
obviously sympoathetis. That will be a comfort to the family at
least.

"I saw nothing" by the way should be dismissed as a defence in any
RTC. What should be used instead is "I didn't look properly" or "I
didn't look at all" because that is usually what really happened...

Again, never driven an HGV have you?

I only drive a Kangoo van. It has obvious blinds spots because it has no
side or rear windows.


--
Dave - intelligent enough to realise that a push bike, like a skateboard, is
a kid's toy, not a viable form of transport.

On 5 Sep, 23:58, "The Medway Handyman" davidl...@no-spam-
blueyonder.co.uk wrote:


Cyclists aren't human.



We have at least 11 senses.

At Least 11 hay? Name them



Because drivers are vigourously examined & tested before being allowed on
the roads, and highly regulated whilst on the roads, the have an incredible
safety record.

Unbelievable.... Drivers are truly amazing. I am one, and I never
knew how amazing I was. I am also a cyclist. So I am both thick and
must lack the intellectual capacity to be a driver.... but I am a
driver! How did I manage that?

Rigorous testing? I had 3 lessons with an instructor and passed my
driving test first time and I haven't been tested since and that was
18 years ago. Don't make me laugh. It may be the most intellectual
test you have passed but it is anything but.


I only drive a Kangoo van. *It has obvious blinds spots because it has no
side or rear windows.


Again, not intelligent enough to realise or accept that a blind spot
on a vehicle means nothing in that it remains the driver's
responsibility to see everything on the road around him, behind him
and in front of him. But again, demonstrates for us, as drivers of
motorised vehincles do time and time again that drivers truly believe
this is a perfectly valid disclaimer in the case of all collisions,
deaths, serious injuries and other injuuries to persons.

--
Dave - intelligent enough to realise that a push bike, like a skateboard, is
a kid's toy, not a viable form of transport.- Hide quoted text -

But not intelligent enough not to know that the humans have 5 senses.


The facts are, the facts in this case are unknown and you draw
affirmatives from the parts of the case you have heard to suit your
twisted views of people who ride bikes.