Motorcyclists Last Seconds Captured On GoPro

Terrier_Jimlad said:
It doesn't matter whether he was doing 20mph, 50mph, or 100mph if the car driver cannot SEE at 50 yrds, let alone judge the time/space they had, then they shouldn't be on the road.

Even if the biker was riding at 40mph, from 50 yards away the car driver would still have pulled across and still be hit by the bike. The biker would have just reduce his chance of death somewhat.

The lack of judgement caused the crash, they have admitted it to the Police, and now hopefully they will be done for manslaughter
Click to expand...

The whole case is long over and done with. The car driver received a 12-month community order, 130 hours’ unpaid work and an 18 month driving ban. Oh, and a £60 victim sucharge and £200 costs.
 
Its a simplistic response to a situation with lots of variables. He was convicted on his own testimony anyway so is moot.
 
LOAM said:
Hes not static though at 50 yards is he? He's a narrow object heading straight on, travelling at 45m per second. I'm not saying its impossible to see him but its not as simple as viewing a static image at 50yrds and saying he's clearly visible, its not that straight forward.
Click to expand...

It would be easier to a see a moving object against the static road. Especially one with a headlight, and a car 50m behind it (which the car driver also didn't see)

And the car driver's eyesight would have given a significantly better image quality than the crappy gopro footage we've been debating.
 
cheesyboy said:
It would be easier to a see a moving object against the static road. Especially one with a headlight, and a car 50m behind it (which the car driver also didn't see)

And the car driver's eyesight would have given a significantly better image quality than the crappy gopro footage we've been debating.
Click to expand...

Im not so sure, add to that momentarily before, he was behind a vehicle moving at a much lesser speed. Its irrelevant though as what happened happened and the driver admitted negligence.
 
mattyg said:
One of those two people made a mistake. The other was completely reckless.

Did the driver not see them or did the driver not see them in the space they thought that they needed in order to complete their maneuver
Click to expand...

I though that too at first but, at the point that they appear to have started turning, the bike was close enough that it is hard to imagine he would have been irrelevant, even at an initial speed of 60 or so. If they did indeed simply look at the space they felt relevant and saw nothing, they did so too soon (albeit only by a matter of seconds perhaps, given the time of the whole video clip).

Not that this absolves the rider, of course. Based on some other comments, he may have shed as much as 20-30 mph before impact. If he had been doing 60 to begin with (ignoring whether he would have even been at the junction at the critical time) and all other factors being equal, he could have slowed to 30-40 or there abouts. Now I realise an impact at these speeds might still be fatal or crippling. But lower speed means more time to assess the hazard and react. More time to consider if going around the back of the car would have been a better choice. Presumably more control over direction of travel too, so that a sharper turn could be executed. There are a lot of uncertainties about how it would have panned out at a lower speed but we can be pretty certain he would at least have had more of a chance (or would not have been there at all).
 
Interesting read, apologies for the daily mail link

Check out the first picture down for those who are saying you wouldn't see the bike, driver hasn't started to pull across yet. The bloke is riding an FJR, a touring bike and they are huge, probably not much smaller than an Aygo that the driver also can't see. Headlamp would also be on as you can't turn them off on modern bikes. That stretch of road is straight and you can see other vehicles from a very long distance.

They've both paid the price for their mistakes, one with his life the other is going to be reliving his for a good few years.

Someone earlier in the thread commented he should have claimed to have misjudged the speed? Really? You've made a mistake that's killed someone and your first thought is how to get yourself off the hook. Fortunately the driver had a spine and was man enough to tell the truth.
 
I think this is very unfair for all the hate on the car driver. Its looks like it was at a cross roads (well similar), from the bike overtaking the toyota, the black car had 4-5 seconds to look from right &/left. if the biker had stayed behind the toyota, and the black car had spotted the toyota (news said he didn't although not sure that's true) the driver would have had more like 7-8 seconds to complete the turn. it would have been close but in my view speed was the killer in this not the driver.

i still cant understand why they spend soo much time on think bike ads about looking.yet never make any telling bikers to keep to the speed limits as the two seem too always end up together :confused:
 
Last edited:
LOAM said:
I dont mind really, 20 odd years ago my driving instructor told me the best piece of advice he could give me was to think everyone on the road was a complete idiot and to expect them to do utterly stupid things, turns out he was pretty much bang on.
Click to expand...
Interacting with drivers is one of the few times when it is justified to assume the worst about people. Trusting them not to screw up could kill you.
 
As our daily lives are getting more hectic, I swear the driving standards by all vehicle users on our roads are getting worse.

Why are motor vehicle license holders not being required to take a test every 5-10 years?

Why are cyclists still allowed to go on the busy roads without a cycling proficiency test (or some other sort of test)?

Why are all road users not getting some "simulation time" on a pc, recreating the few seconds leading up to common accident scenarios?
 
Just look at the distances covered by the respective vehicles in these images.

EMKToqR.jpg


LMpBVAN.jpg.png


ycBXXWI.jpg.png


The driver of the car had little chance of avoiding a collision in my opinion.
 
OldCoals said:
Just look at the distances covered by the respective vehicles in these images

The driver of the car had little chance of avoiding a collision in my opinion.
Click to expand...

Even though the bike was a swimming pool length away in the first pic, an the car was stil a cfew yards from the Give Way line? Y'know: the point at which the driver should be checking for oncoming traffic before crossing the carriageway

The bike had no chance of stopping, the car had every chance AND a responsibility to do so
 
Last edited:
cheesyboy said:
Even though the bike was a swimming pool length away in the first pic, an the car was stil a cfew yards from the Give Way line? Y'know: the point at which the driver should be checking for oncoming traffic before crossing the carriageway

The bike had no chance of stopping, the car had every chance AND a responsibility to do so
Click to expand...

The driver made an accidental misjudgement, the rider deliberately chose to go at high speeds.
 
SpeedFreak said:
The driver made an accidental misjudgement, the rider deliberately chose to go at high speeds.
Click to expand...

If you choose not to look for oncoming traffic before crossing a busy carriageway, then there's a pretty reasonable expectation of causing death or injury. Speed contributed to the biker's death, probably ; the car driver's lack of care/ abysmal driving caused the accident, biker's speed was irrelevant to that
 
cheesyboy said:
If you choose not to look for oncoming traffic before crossing a busy carriageway, then there's a pretty reasonable expectation of causing death or injury. Speed contributed to the biker's death, probably ; the car driver's lack of care/ abysmal driving caused the accident, biker's speed was irrelevant to that
Click to expand...

I highly doubt the driver didn't look. I believe he said he didn't see or notice the bike, which is pretty obvious given the nature of the accident. My view is that if the driver had fought the charge he probably would have successfully defended his case. I'm not saying that is right but I would expect that a jury would take one look at the rider's speed and make their mind up pretty quickly.
 
I have a lot of sympathy for the car driver.

The guy in the video had just finished a track day, took that speed on to the road and was riding pretty irresponsibly from start to "finish".

He is also a text book motorcycle accident:

Excessive speed for the conditions (in this case approaching a junction)
Right of way violation.
He wasn't particularly visible ie- grey motor bike, grey day, no high visibility clothing on a grey road.
Lack of anticipation by the rider.


55% of all motorcycle accidents happen at junctions and it's not just a case of drivers failing to look but rather failing to see the motorcyclist as in this case.

Grey bike, grey day, grey road, approaching at excessive speed from behind a grey car.

It's 6 seconds between over taking the corsa and hitting the car at the junction.

That's not a lot of time for the driver to see him, from coming behind the car, the driver probably clocked the corsa, (didn't see the bike as he was currently behind the corsa at a distance away) started to move off at a reasonable speed, was looking into the junction as he was driving into it and bang, some idiot on a bike tools into the front of him.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom