Berkeley Hit and Run Caught on Bike Video

[DOS]

@GuyContinental 22838 wrote:

http://blog.sfgate.com/stew/2012/04/27/berkeley-bicyclist-hit-run-video/#.T5qxG95JZUA.facebook

but it is pretty interesting how many laws they broke in the minutes leading up to the crash- lots of blown stop signs without so much as a brake tap. .

I only saw two stop signs in the video. On the first one, you can’t see the lead rider until the second guy makes the left (he is out of frame on the left) so its possible he had stopped and been waved through by the car stopped on the sign on the intersecting road, and 2nd guy just followed (granted, I doubt it). Clearly they blow the second sign despite merging into high speed traffic. Beyond that, I didnt see any glaring misbehavior.

It does go to show that obeyiing traffic laws is a good idea if for no other reason that should something happen through no fault of cyclist, the person at fault doesnt get off because cyclist is deemed a scofflaw generally because he/she was seen violating law earlier on.

Reminds me of an incident I experienced on Rock Creek Pkwy this weekend. A group of us were riding on the pkwy early Sunday just below Mass Ave (so still open to traffic). Some of us were riding two abreast, which is, I think, illegal, in the park. So I could understand if cars heading same way we were got annoyed. But it was before 6:30 so there were no cars headed in our direction (so no traffic to impede — not an excuse, just setting scene). However, a car heading in opposite direction was irritated enough by the sight of us to cross centerline, swerv toward us to buzz the group before vering back on correct side of the double yellow. I wonder, had the car that buzzed us taken some of us out, the degree to which we would have been held accountable for violating the 2 abreast rule even though we weren’t impeding traffic and the car in question vered onto wrong side of road to send his message.

[GuyContinental]

@DOS 22864 wrote:

I only saw two stop signs in the video. On the first one, you can’t see the lead rider until the second guy makes the left (he is out of frame on the left) so its possible he had stopped and been waved through by the car stopped on the sign on the intersecting road, and 2nd guy just followed (granted, I doubt it). Clearly they blow the second sign despite merging into high speed traffic. Beyond that, I didnt see any glaring misbehavior.

Oh, don’t get me wrong, I totally agree (but would add failure to signal x 2 which is a CA law)- these guys didn’t do anything remotely egregious, even the fast right turn was into a bike lane, sort of a yield treatment of the sign. I can’t say that I wouldn’t have done both- particularly if climbing. The point is the conflation of “cyclists always break laws” with what happened to them with this car. Somehow in the commentators’ minds one seems to justify/excuse the other.

[ronwalf]

@DOS 22864 wrote:

Some of us were riding two abreast, which is, I think, illegal, in the park.

Are park rules different than Maryland law (21-1205b)?

Quote:

Riding two abreast. – Each person operating a bicycle or motor scooter on a roadway
may ride two abreast only if the flow of traffic is unimpeded.

Side note – does anyone else find this wording odd? I believe it makes riding abreast in stop-and-go traffic illegal (i.e., traffic is impeded, just not by the act of riding abreast).

[dasgeh]

I didn’t think they were doing anything egregiously stupid, but it wasn’t particularly smart to post the full video of the ride, including the not-entirely-legal parts, when it’s not relevant to the hit and run. Editing software, people.

[DOS]

@ronwalf 22871 wrote:

Are park rules different than Maryland law (21-1205b)?

Side note – does anyone else find this wording odd? I believe it makes riding abreast in stop-and-go traffic illegal (i.e., traffic is impeded, just not by the act of riding abreast).

yes, I believe national parks have their own rules and Rock Creek superintendent does not permit riding two abreast except on closed to traffic roads.

[brendan]

@dasgeh 22895 wrote:

I didn’t think they were doing anything egregiously stupid, but it wasn’t particularly smart to post the full video of the ride, including the not-entirely-legal parts, when it’s not relevant to the hit and run. Editing software, people.

I would guess it is the case that they had to submit the entire unmodified video as evidence.

Brendan

[MCL1981]

There is clearly no connection between their rolling of two stop signs 4 minutes prior to the accident, and the crack head mowing them down in the shoulder. Given this moron’s criminal history and litany of other felony charges, I doubt this will even make it to a court room for a defense attorney to to unsuccessfully bring up. He’s going to jail for the probation violations to begin with, period, even without the hit and run. And he’ll end up taking plea bargain on all these new charges, adding more jail time to what he’s already got by default. Case closed.

[Author]

Posts