It's Not a Bike Accident When a Car Hits a Rider

[MagnificentUnicorn]

All you have heard is 1 side of it, from 1 witness, who embellishes his story for dramatic effect and may or may not withstand cross examination.
Kid might have spun out on a cow pie for all you know.

You’re a disgusting human.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[jono]

Contra Costa County might be the top road biking county in America. It's liberal, wealthy, and where the entire Bay area goes to road bike. It's full of biking infrastructure.

Including the bike lane the victim was using.

[highangle]

You’re a disgusting human.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Thank you. I'll take the trouble to remind you the whole "Rolling coal" allegation is from 1 source. Cops at the scene didn't issue citation. Maybe they heard another story, Nancy Drew?

[Dantheman]

Including the bike lane the victim was using.

It was for looking not touching, apparently.

[altasnob]

Confusing article on the Knapp case. Says vehicle hit Knapp from behind. Also says Knapp was riding his bike in a bike lane at intersection of Dougherty Road and Bollinger Canyon Road. When you look this up on google it shows sharrows on the vehicle road. So I assume Knapp was using the sharrows and that is what they refer to as a "bike lane." I noticed the intersection includes one of those awful situations where a vehicle making a right turn has to cross over the sharrow, and a biker using the sharrow going straight has to go across the right turn lane (see below). Bottom line, this isn't Texas and I don't see a political motivation for the DA to error on the side of the driver. The county really is one of more pro-bike places in the US.

[mcphee]

[jono]

I don't see a political motivation for the DA to error on the side of the driver. The county really is one of more pro-bike places in the US.

America: Where murder is legal if you use your car.

Checks out.

[Dantheman]

Bottom line, this isn't Texas and I don't see a political motivation for the DA to error on the side of the driver. The county really is one of more pro-bike places in the US.

Criteria for vehicular manslaughter under California law:

1. Commits an unlawful act (not amounting to a felony);
2. With negligence, or gross negligence; and
3. Someone is killed as a proximate cause of the unlawful act.

The Knapp case involves unlawful acts (failure to yield, failure to maintain lane, failure to exercise reasonable care for the safety of others on the road), negligence (most traffic infractions, including failure to yield, are commonly cited as examples of negligent driving), and death as a proximate cause of the unlawful act.

[altasnob]

Not saying the DA made the right call. Just saying her constituents include lots of road bikers, and I assume she knows that (DA is born and raised in Oakland, was judge for 22 years). Have to see the full reports to pass judgment. I wish the media would make public record requests for the full police reports rather than just give us scraps of info from press releases.

[dunfree]

Maybe that information shouldn’t cost so much $. That’s if the police & courts care about people understanding them.

[altasnob]

Public records requests are typically free. At least in Washington. Once the prosecutor has their hands on the case, the police reports have to be released to anyone who requests them. This is typically via email. Try it dunfree. Make a public records request to the Contra Costa DAs office, and San Ramon Police Department, for the full police report and post up here what you get in return.

https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/2345/Public-Records

https://www.sanramon.ca.gov/our_city..._units/records

[dunfree]

Public records requests are typically free. At least in Washington. Once the prosecutor has their hands on the case, the police reports have to be released to anyone who requests them. This is typically via email. Try it dunfree. Make a public records request to the Contra Costa DAs office, and San Ramon Police Department, for the full police report and post up here what you get in return.

Contra costa county website (court/public records) told me it was $0.50 a page in person or emailed. I looked before I posted.

edit: since you edited even $.10 page adds up to a nontrivial bill for a news agency

[altasnob]

Try it and report back to us. You don't pay until you get to see the final price quote. I see $3 for cd. Washington also allows charging per page, but that's only if the record only exists in paper format, which would only be really, really, old records. Washington also allows like $3 to burn the reports on a cd and mail them to you. But nothing if they can fit on an email. And I find that even if an agency can charge for records, they typically don't bother. And for high publicity cases like this they normally provide them free, and very quickly (since they are normally overwhelmed by requests). Washington is a much more fair, logical, and open state than CA, but CA can't be that bad.

[dunfree]

It’s your point, it’s your request, it’s your fucking problem. Me? I think even in “liberal” “friendly” jurisdictions the police/prosecutors can be cozy and unaccountable.

[altasnob]

Made the request. I would agree that both the county and the police department do a piss poor job of making it easy to request reports (they do a much better job up here in the Seattle/Tacoma area). I always knew California was an ass backwards state like Texas.

[teledad]

Confusing article on the Knapp case. Says vehicle hit Knapp from behind. Also says Knapp was riding his bike in a bike lane at intersection of Dougherty Road and Bollinger Canyon Road. When you look this up on google it shows sharrows on the vehicle road. So I assume Knapp was using the sharrows and that is what they refer to as a "bike lane." I noticed the intersection includes one of those awful situations where a vehicle making a right turn has to cross over the sharrow, and a biker using the sharrow going straight has to go across the right turn lane (see below). Bottom line, this isn't Texas and I don't see a political motivation for the DA to error on the side of the driver. The county really is one of more pro-bike places in the US.

That's not a sharrow, that's a legally protected bike lane. Cars are required to yield if moving into the lane (just like any other lane) and can only do so when about to turn right or pull over to the shoulder. Sharrows in California look like this:



Agreed that the right turn across the bike lane is problematic (but still the driver's responsibility to yield when crossing).

[old goat]

When I ride to the American River bike trail in Sacramento I ride in an unprotected bike lane on a 4 lane divided road. At one point a freeway off ramp comes in from the right after making a tight spiral. Cars coming off the ramp have to cross the bike lane while the bikes have to cross the off ramp to get to the curb. Because of the tight spiral you can't see cars coming off the ramp until late. There used to be a ghost bike near there--up by the closest stop light. Because of the AR bike trail and because it passes the main entrance to Cal State U Sacramento there is a lot of bike traffic. Surprised there's only been the one ghost bike.

[PB]

Ghost bike means all that's left of a rider and their bike?!? Or a prop to get cars to slow down?

[::: :::]

A ghost bike is a memorial to a dead cyclist, usually painted white and permanently located (locked to something typically) near the site of the incident.

[smartyiak]

No charges in Greg Knapp case
https://www.bicycling.com/news/a3708...t-by-a-driver/

[I]The Contra Costa County District Attorney blamed the collision on the driver’s inattention…

Not even a traffic citation.

Don’t they have the charge of “Inattentive Driving?” Sure, it’s the most minor of traffic offenses…but “inattention” is LITERALLY the word the DA used. 🤷🏻♂️


Sent from my iPad using TGR Forums

[PB]

Inattentive = reckless??

[::: :::]

Sort of weird logic where the facts of a collision aren’t enough evidence to charge a motorist with the most minimal charge available


And yet, the “following too close” standard is held as a instant ticket for the following driver with a huge burden on the following driver to prove otherwise, if even possible (ie video evidence of the front driver making purposeful dangerous choices resulting in a collision)

[Dantheman]

Don’t they have the charge of “Inattentive Driving?” Sure, it’s the most minor of traffic offenses…but “inattention” is LITERALLY the word the DA used. ����♂️

It's mind blowing that they couldn't be bothered to ticket the guy for failure to maintain lane and/or failure to yield. At least make him pay a few hundo in fines and suffer through traffic school, FFS. Even that shitstain DA in South Dakota had to pay $1,000 in fines and plead to some minor misdemeanors.

Inattentive = reckless??

Inattention is usually considered to be negligence, while reckless driving requires a higher degree of wanton disregard for traffic laws. However, as noted, a vehicular manslaughter charge in CA only requires basic negligence, not gross negligence or reckless driving.

[PB]

Toss the bikes out of the equation, any dillweed rolling coal deserves a lobotomy.

[smartyiak]

It's mind blowing that they couldn't be bothered to ticket the guy for failure to maintain lane and/or failure to yield. At least make him pay a few hundo in fines and suffer through traffic school, FFS. Even that shitstain DA in South Dakota had to pay $1,000 in fines and plead to some minor misdemeanors.



Inattention is usually considered to be negligence, while reckless driving requires a higher degree of wanton disregard for traffic laws. However, as noted, a vehicular manslaughter charge in CA only requires basic negligence, not gross negligence or reckless driving.

Re: inattentive: it is also handy bc I’ve seen plenty of times civil cases resolve when the Plaintiff’s attorney walks in and says: your guy admitted guilt in criminal court….id like the police limits please.

Sure it was only a $25 fine and 2pts in traffic court …but who wants to argue to a civil jury that they’re guy wasn’t at fault when he already admitted to being inattentive?

Re: reckless: as Dan said: here in DE, Reckless requires a higher mens rea; Inattentive Driving is the lowest driving charge aside from Speeding+5.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums