http://www.itv.com/news/2013-01-27/hanham-hit-and-run-cyclists-bristol/
CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Cycling News
"Two cyclists killed in Bristol hit and run"
(24 posts)-
Posted 12 years ago #
-
One of the news reports suggested they had been on a tandem.
Posted 12 years ago # -
There was a veritable Twitterstorm when the initial BBC report came out saying "in an accident", despite it being clear at the time it was a hit and run. Article was updated afterwards.
Posted 12 years ago # -
38-year-old man arrested after handing himself in at a police station in connection with hit and run.
Posted 12 years ago # -
@kaputnik: Yes, I saw that. "Accident". It took two separate revisions of the article to remove all occurences of the word. Normalising the actions of a person who killed two fellow humans and then drove away. The culture of victim-blaming is appalling.
What is also appalling is the road design in what is a residential area with a primary school close by. There is a 30mph speed limit and a lack of traffic calming - big sweeping curves that mean people don't have to slow down when turning into side streets, and no speed bumps. This in a place that dares to call itself a "cycling city".
The already blood-soaked King Car highways department must take partial responsibility. Two more people who will not go home again. Tragic.
Posted 12 years ago # -
The front page of the BBC news website is saying "A 38-year-old man is arrested following the death of two cyclists in Bristol who were in a collision with a car." - That phrase is disturbingly worded to sound as though they hit him.
Posted 12 years ago # -
sadly 'cyclist collides with ...' (and sometimes even 'pedestrian collides with' seems to be the preferred formulation in these reports. Why they think we go around cycling into the sides of buses, HGVs or cars is beyond me.
Posted 12 years ago # -
Terrible story and often takes complaints to get the default setting of journalists to be accurate. The assumption is the opposite of strict liability. When they don't know what happened they should say a collision between a vehicle and a cyclist. This is rarely done. Appalling in this instance as the driver left his vehicle at the scene and ran away, before handing himself in. Not conclusive proof but somewhat suggestive...
Posted 12 years ago # -
I agree that use of 'accident' is, in many circumstances, abhorrent (and certainly in this case, as gembo says, there's a strong suggestion this was more than an 'accident'). In many cases, where all of the circumstances are not known, I'm less likely to get exercised about it.
And I can't actually say I'm too perturbed about 'cyclists collided with' - semantics detract a little from the real issue, that being that some people have been killed by another person, and how do we go about stopping that from happening again. That's just a personal view, I can understand why others think it's something that needs to be changed.
The Twitter storm last night kicked off further when someone replied to the BBC tweet of the incident, stating that this was a 'result' for all road tax paying motorists. The guy was a troll, who from later tweets clearly thought that he was on a comedy par with Frankie Boyle, rather than just being straightforward offensive. Sadly, by retweeting and scowling, the guy (only had 300 followers or so) got a lot more publicity for his views than he warranted.
And of course, if his remark was about black people, or gay people, or people of a specific religion then he could well be facing some hate crime charge. Cyclists = fair game.
Anyway, after all that, RIP for the two cyclists, and I hope the driver (if at fault, which the circumstances suggest he may well be) gets the book thrown at him.
Posted 12 years ago # -
"Tandem crash car 'being pursued' by police"
Posted 12 years ago # -
that headline lacks the word "was". On reading the article, the Police had lost touch with it at the time it hit the cyclists;
Avon and Somerset Police said an officer was alerted to a Citroen Picasso travelling along Lower Hanham Road at speed, shortly before 16:00 GMT on Sunday.
A spokesman said the officer indicated to the car to stop but it made off.
The officer began to follow the car but lost sight of it.
Police said that shortly afterwards the car stuck another vehicle and then collided with the cyclists.
Assuming the Police report is accurate here (and they rarely release anything in circumstances such as these unless they are pretty clear on the facts), it leaves very little doubt about this neither being an "accident" or "cyclists in collision with a car". It's not even really a "hit and run". It should really be called a "kill and flee".
Posted 12 years ago # -
And why is it always "A cyclist collided with a vehicle"?
a vehicle = an object.
a cyclist = a person.So an object (which can't be blamed) collided with a person (who can be blamed)!
Surely it should be a "vehicle collided with a bicycle" or "a motorist collided with a cyclist"?
Posted 12 years ago # -
Is it them being on a tandem that has made this news? Not that it shouldn't be news, of course - but I was surprised that this was still in the national news headlines at lunchtime today. When I remarked on it, my OH was surprised that cyclists' deaths didn't always make the news, I had to disabuse the poor man.
Posted 12 years ago # -
I assumed it made the news because it was two cyclists, rather than the normal one.
Posted 12 years ago # -
Would the fact that the car had had some contact with the police before the accident also have kept it in the news? (Just speculating.)
Posted 12 years ago # -
I think it's a combination of married couple; tandem; car having recently been 'seen' by the police; hit and run; driver handing himself in quickly.
But really, is it important why it's still in the news?
Posted 12 years ago # -
Their personal life seems to have taken precedence in the reporting now. Remind me to disallow any friends or family to speak to the press in the event of my death...
Posted 12 years ago # -
A man has been charged with two counts of causing death by dangerous driving after a husband and wife were knocked off their tandem bike in Hanham, near Bristol, on Sunday.
Nicky Lovell will appear before North Avon Magistrates' Court on Wednesday.
The 38-year-old, of Oldland Common, south Gloucestershire, has also been charged with driving while disqualified, driving without third party insurance and driving a vehicle and failing to stop after a road accident.
Allie Longhorn, senior crown prosecutor for the Crown Prosecution Service, said: "I have today authorised Avon and Somerset Police to charge Nicky Lovell with two counts of causing death by dangerous driving.
"I have also authorised charges of driving while disqualified; driving without third party insurance and driving a vehicle and failing to stop after a road accident.
Posted 12 years ago # -
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/driver-court-over-tandem-deaths-030856264.html#8mvGaTv
Mr Simons, 34, and his 30-year-old wife - described by friends as "two peas in a pod" - died when their bicycle was in collision with a Citroen Picasso car.
The couple on their tandem did not collide with the car. It collided or rather crashed into them.
Stating the obvious not having insurance, nobody that is disqualified can get insurance, third party or otherwise! Good to see that it is an additional charge and one that incurs a custodial most frequently.
Posted 12 years ago # -
I guess as this story unfolded I was picturing a young boy racer type culprit.
The guy turns out to be 38!
How did he get to that age and still think it was ok to drive around disqualified/uninsured?
He doesnt have the excuse of young and foolish. Just the foolish (or worse.Posted 12 years ago # -
I believe criminal is the word you are looking for. not foolish.
Posted 12 years ago # -
How did he get to that age and still think it was ok to drive around disqualified/uninsured?
I think it all ties into the prevalent way of thinking in the UK that sees driving as some kind of right, rather than a privilege.
Assuming the facts as reported so far all stand up in court, this unpleasant character will expect a few years custodial sentence, plus a driving ban when he gets out. Having driven in this reckless, selfish and dangerous fashion while already banned from driving, one would think that a life ban would be pretty much a given. Does anyone here think he will actually get a lifetime ban?
Posted 12 years ago # -
"
Bristol tandem bike deaths driver pleads guilty"
Posted 12 years ago # -
Posted 12 years ago #
Reply
You must log in to post.
posts
