Motorcyclists Last Seconds Captured On GoPro

[cyclops12]

Id say that was 75% bike : 25% car fault in this accident.

If he was going slower then any number of things could have happened but if you insist on driving around at 100mph then expect the consequences of a 100mph accident when it comes along.

Sad though...

I don't see it like that, yes the biker was going way to fast and yes if he was going slower then any number of things could have happened.

You can also say if the diver didn't cut a large chunck off the corner and did infact turn where he should have he would have seen the bike, You can also say if he'd done just that and then stopped/looked before turning like he should have the bike would have been past the junction.


This is a NSL road not the local high street, lots of speeders both bike and car on these roads you simply must stop and look before crossing! Both to blame.

 

[MooMoo444]

I seem to remember that in car crashes what is often the cause of death is internal damage

The aorta can be torn off the heart which is a pretty quick way to go.

any one of the main organs can be detached with enough force.

Yeah, your organs are slammed into the front of your ribcage at 100mph. When you consider they are pretty fragile at the best of times, it's obviously not good.

 

[EdGey]

It's a risk you take going that quickly (especially in an area like that and on a bike??) but If I had to point the finger it would be at the car driver.

He is the one who pulled into an oncoming lane without looking properly, after all.

 

[Gixer]

the way i see it the car caused the collision , the speed killed the motorcyclist

Pretty much what I think too. I don't currently ride but rode for many years and now drive / cycle. People do struggle to judge what speed any two wheel vehicle is going. From the video though that car should have never even tried to make the turn. At the point the car started to make its turn the bike, and car behind, would have been clearly visible and it was a poor decision on the car drivers behalf to turn.

The bikers choice to carry such speed through a junction was also a poor decision. I did a little advanced riding with the police and focus was on road positioning and adjusting speed to suit the situation. When you're on a vehicle which makes you far more vulnerable and you ride with the thought that everyone on the road is out to kill you, you tend not to end up doing 100mph through junctions.

A very sad and tragic incident with bad decisions made by both parties. Those who comment that it is 100% A or B's fault, well I really don't want to be on the road with you.

 

[EdGey]

I don't see it like that, yes the biker was going way to fast and yes if he was going slower then any number of things could have happened.

I don't mean to be pedantic but If I was you I'd want to know.

It's have, not of. For example 'any number of things could have happened.'

 

[jimjamuk]

I don't see it like that, yes the biker was going way to fast and yes if he was going slower then any number of things could have happened.

You can also say if the diver didn't cut a large chunck off the corner and did infact turn where he should have he would have seen the bike, You can also say if he'd done just that and then stopped/looked before turning like he should have the bike would have been past the junction.


This is a NSL road not the local high street, lots of speeders both bike and car on these roads you simply must stop and look before crossing! Both to blame.

Thats what I said - both to blame

but the damage comes from the speed so the bike has more of the blame than the driver - sorry

if you choose to ride that speed cutting down reaction times for all parties then you have to carry more than 50% of the blame

 

[leigh_boy]

Thats what I said - both to blame

but the damage comes from the speed so the bike has more of the blame than the driver - sorry

if you choose to ride that speed cutting down reaction times for all parties then you have to carry more than 50% of the blame

disagree, i think the car was going too quick to be able to stop propery as well so decided just go for it

 

[jimjamuk]

disagree, i think the car was going too quick to be able to stop propery as well so decided just go for it

So in court he said he didnt see the bike - what makes you think he decided to "go for it" when apparently to him he was on a junction with no oncoming traffic.

Theres trying to justify someone speeding but saying the car was going to too quick when the bike was nearly at 100mph - seriously!

 

[cyclops12]

I don't mean to be pedantic but If I was you I'd want to know.

It's have, not of. For example 'any number of things could have happened.'

No problem, I did copy/ paste that bit from jimjamuks's post.

But to be honest my grammar isn't the best so I would have made the same mistake

edit: did it again.

 

[Elixir]

I think it's obvious that both of them are to blame, and that's the whole point of the video. It's to make all road users aware of what can happen in the hope that they'll make safer decisions on the roads.

If you guys want to go on all day saying "I think it was 38% the bikers fault and 62% the driver's fault" then you're massively missing the point. Both were in the wrong, both have paid a price, and it's a shame one of them paid with their life.

 

[leigh_boy]

So in court he said he didnt see the bike - what makes you think he decided to "go for it" when apparently to him he was on a junction with no oncoming traffic.

Theres trying to justify someone speeding but saying the car was going to too quick when the bike was nearly at 100mph - seriously!

i said AS WELL meaning the bike.
either way some 1 died happens all the time and its sad but its not going to change

 

[Chuk_Chuk]

So in court he said he didnt see the bike - what makes you think he decided to "go for it" when apparently to him he was on a junction with no oncoming traffic.

Theres trying to justify someone speeding but saying the car was going to too quick when the bike was nearly at 100mph - seriously!

I mentioned earlier and someone confirmed bikes need to have their lights on. bike lights are by no means dim. If the driver took his time at the junction he would have seen them imo.

 

[fastwunz]

97 mph on a ruddy bike through a junction? Seriously???!! Sad but obvious result. Selfish riding resulted in death - you simply can't do that speed and expect everyone else to deal with it a cater for your actions.

Bikes fault imo

 

[Amp34]

I agree with some people here in that I feel pretty sorry for the driver. True, they should have seen the motorcyclist, but everyone makes mistakes. They could be the safest driver in the world, but for some reason didn't see him this time. Now they're being done for causing death by dangerous driving as well as being banned from driving and probably heavily mentally scarred by the whole incident.

The motorcyclist shouldn't have been doing anywhere near that speed.

That's the risk you take when getting into a car. Driving is an inherently risky activity, a risk that is forgotten due to the frequency of and national reliance on it.

If you don't want to take the risk then don't drive.

But at 60mph, he would have still been 5-10 miles back down the road and the car would have pulled out in an empty space and never had to see the bike.

If the motorcyclist had stopped for a couple of pints before getting on the bike after the show he would have been 5-10 miles back and not hit the car... Alternatively another driver may not have looked before crossing a road and the motorcyclist hit another car.

The motorcyclist should take some blame for going at that speed but the fundimental point is the driver didn't look properly before turning into his path, a very frequent problem which causes problems for other motorists, cyclists and pedestrians.

 

[dacads]

That's terrible.. how long is sentence for driver? Surely they need to take into account speed biker was going

 

[Glaucus]

Have most people missed that she admitting tonot seeing the bike or CAR, the car was doing the speed limit and she still didn't see it. This is why she is guilty.
Both Muppets, she didn't look and his speed makes everything harder.

 

[londonbairn]

Almost everyday when I cycle to work I will see someone pull out of a junction/roundabout without even looking properly. This morning I was hurtling along at a decent speed, then a driver pulled out of a side road in front of me. I had to quickly double check there was no one to my right and swing round her. I dont get how some motorists/pedestrians/cyclists logic works when they make a stupid manoeuvre; do they think the rest of the world will just comply?

Haven't seen the video but if as some say the driver didn't even look at all then irrespective of the speed, it's the right sentence.

 

[cyclops12]

Thats what I said - both to blame

but the damage comes from the speed so the bike has more of the blame than the driver - sorry

if you choose to ride that speed cutting down reaction times for all parties then you have to carry more than 50% of the blame

Don't take me wrong I agree with what you say about the speed of the bike.

It's just I also think if the driver had stopped/looked and not cut the corner the accident wouldn't of happened.

I think what they both did was crazy.

 

[mattyg]

the way i see it the car caused the collision , the speed killed the motorcyclist

This for sure.

I hadn't realised in my previous post that it was a SMIDSY.
The driver should have seen the biker.

 

[this_is_gav]

even at 60MPH that would have killed.

I did it at 60mph and only had a slightly bruised knee.

The driver pulled out of a junction - I saw him look the other way and not once in my direction, but I still had very little time to do anything about it.

Had I been in a car I'd have had some nasty leg damage and an airbag in my face.