Incident – N. Barton at 10th St N, 8/25/2017 8am

[dasgeh]

@tenbiker 164650 wrote:

I had an incident on my normal commute on N. Barton, heading from N. 9th straight across N. 10th on a green light. A car was across from me in the going straight/right-turn lane, and I was going down the hill at 8am on a sunny day, wearing a reflective fluorescent yellow vest and a helmet, riding in the middle of the lane, no cars ahead of me. The car across from me put on the left-turn signal and started to turn. I hit my brakes so hard that I flew off the bike and landed ahead of it on the pavement. I don’t remember anything but witnesses say that the car also hit the brakes – we did not collide. Once the car cleared me, he drove off towards Rt. 50.
A passerby helped me off the street and flagged down an ACPD patrol car. That officer called the ACFD ambulance and took me to the VHC ER.
My helmet saved my head but the crash broke my clavicle and it needs surgery.
I have reached out to Bike Arlington about working with ACPD to come up with a new kind of report for when there is no actual collision with a vehicle and will follow up with the BAC.

Stay safe out there!

So the car caused you to crash, then left the scene, and ACPD knew this and did not attempt to track the car? Did you get the license plate or other identifying information? Is ACPD treating this as a hit-and-run?

[TwoWheelsDC]

@dasgeh 164651 wrote:

So the car caused you to crash, then left the scene, and ACPD knew this and did not attempt to track the car? Did you get the license plate or other identifying information? Is ACPD treating this as a hit-and-run?

I suspect they’re taking the standard “no collision, no care” approach.

[tenbiker]

To ACPD, it was a medical emergency. No one from ACPD witnessed the incident (I don’t know what ACPD heard from anyone who witnessed the incident) and the car that failed to yield was gone by the time ACPD got there. I understand this is the standard operating procedure – my proposal is that we work with ACPD to change the SOP.

@dasgeh 164651 wrote:

So the car caused you to crash, then left the scene, and ACPD knew this and did not attempt to track the car? Did you get the license plate or other identifying information? Is ACPD treating this as a hit-and-run?

[Guus]

I’m very sorry about your crash, that sucks.

Wish you all the best with the surgery and recovery.

[dasgeh]

@tenbiker 164653 wrote:

To ACPD, it was a medical emergency. No one from ACPD witnessed the incident (I don’t know what ACPD heard from anyone who witnessed the incident) and the car that failed to yield was gone by the time ACPD got there. I understand this is the standard operating procedure – my proposal is that we work with ACPD to change the SOP.

I guess that makes sense in the moment (they see someone on the ground, 1st priority is to treat the person), but you’ve reported now what happened, right? Are they investigating the failure to stop? (The law doesn’t require a collision, despite that everyone calls it “hit and run”)

Thanks for reporting it. Will definitely put this on the list for the next ACPD visit to the BAC.

Oh, and what Guus said — glad you’re ok.

[scoot]

@dasgeh 164677 wrote:

(The law doesn’t require a collision, despite that everyone calls it “hit and run”)

Has anyone ever been charged for violating 46.2-894 without a collision?

I agree that drivers should be held liable for causing injuries in scenarios like that of the OP, but I don’t see it actually happening. I’m skeptical that the phrase “involved in an accident” would be interpreted to implicate the driver in such a case. Especially given that subsequent text in the law (“the vehicle collided with”, “the person struck”) assumes a collision.

[Author]

Posts