Motorcyclists Last Seconds Captured On GoPro
- Thread starter RavenXXX2
- Start date
I thought that, he's barely eased or had not eased at all. Also, just how small the car was in the distance. Viewed from the drivers perspective the rider would have been a fraction of that size. What is not obvious is that the bike is also coming down hill on a road shrouded by trees, that would have made it even harder to pick him out. Without doubt the driver is guilty of not looking properly. He held his hand up to not seeing the bike and pleaded guilty. The rider was just going way too quickly, the overtake is only around 200-300 yards prior to the junction anyway. At 100mph he made it significantly harder for the driver to spot him and gave himself zero chance of being able to avoid a collision, It's just irresponsible riding. It's a great shame the lad lost his life, I would have preferred they'd both still been around to collect a fine and some points for their behaviour. Sadly that's not the case.
Last edited:
Except by not giving his mum a kiss, he wasn't breaking the law was he? I know what you're getting at with the 'it could have been any variable and his life may have been saved' but in this case the variable was break the law or not break the law? He broke the law and died.
I'm definitely not of the opinion that the car driver is blameless but dismissing his speed as just another variable in his day is silly.
Yes I stated this a long time ago. People can keep quoting IF statements but they all mean nothing otherwise lets go the opposite route to what you all are in that the rider could have started his ride 10mins earlier and been doing 55mph at the time of the accident however the drivers poor judgement still resulted in them pulling across in front of the bike leaving no time for the rider to react and the rider smacking his head into the side of the car breaking his neck.......
Discount the speed, discount the bike being there, purely look at the drivers actions. They were a chancer, impatient, lacking in observational skills, have poor judgement of speed and if you watch the video in slow motion really didn't seem to have any intention of stopping at the 'give way' part of the junction to properly assess the situation. I like Dimple do think the driver saw the bike but thought it would be in their best interest to say that they didn't, that or through shock they stated this. This is someone with poor driving standards.
Now add in the fact the numpty bike rider thought it a good idea to carry such high speeds into a hazard and the combination has resulted in a fatality.
I don't feel sorry for the driver or the rider, both took a silly gamble/risk at that moment in time and one of them paid the ultimate price.
Rpm would be high. Engine gives a lot of braking, you wouldn't pull the clutch in.
And didn't some one say that's about 70 on that bike, which means in about 1second he's scrubbed of 30mph which is a substantial amount for the time available.
And didn't some one say that's about 70 on that bike, which means in about 1second he's scrubbed of 30mph which is a substantial amount for the time available.
Police have it as 97 mph, which is probably worked out from where the needles were stuck after impact and video footage. (not some random forum best guesses) The lad was irresponsible, I'd still rather have seen him fined and banned for speeding rather than dyeing.
Wasn't that at the overtake, no one is saying he wasn't stupid. Just that he isn't 100% to blame like some suggest.
Just because someone else breaks the law, doesn't jean you can do what ever you want and not get charged for also breaking the law.
Edit - actually he doesn't change speed, he has a fraction of a second to respond and he tries swerving.
Last edited:
Associate
- Joined
- 7 Mar 2013
- Posts
- 1,639
- Location
- North East
Always a sad thing to see.... I do around 40,000 miles a year and I see good and bad driving all over the place from all types of vehicles.
It would be entirely possible for the driver not to see that biker. An object 75cm wide, 1 meter high, traveling at nearly 45 meters per second. Legal driving standard of vision is what - 20/40? 6/16? At 3.5 seconds and 150-200 meters away such bike would be a blurry dark dot about the size of half of your pinky thumbnail if you look with your arm stretched as far as you can. Eyes move towards direction of your turn, one mississippi, clutch down, first gear, two mississippi, move away, 3 miles per hour, three mississippi, clutch down, hand moves towards gear stick, shadow, whoa, front of the car missing...
If the driver had stopped for a few pints on his way back he would have been a lot further down the road as well...
Alternatively if he had left a few minutes earlier and travelled back at 60 he may have been at that exact spot. The end result being similar, except we wouldn't be moaning about the speed of the motorcyclist and the driver would/should have been put away for a lot longer...
Stupid argument is stupid.
Neither of them are without blame. I wouldn't like to put a figure on it 50/50, 60/40, 40/60 whatever. Driver should have looked properly, should have seen him, should have stopped. It's equally understandable that he would not have been expecting anything coming so quickly, or how he may have missed or half seen him too late. At that speed the rider never gave himself a chance. It's heart-breaking, but a single second can mean the difference between being another statistic or simply shouting down the other driver/rider.
Last edited:
A lot of the support for the car driver in here. By the letter of the law, the car driver was at fault and was punished as such. I do think the bike ride was a moron though for trying to blast through a junction at close to 100mph.
It should also be illegal for cars not to drive with lights on during the day.
Its already a legal requirement in several countries and makes a massive difference in many places for all road users.
![[TW]Fox](/data/man-of-honor/2009.png){kind=avatar}
You must be watching a different video. At the point at which the car moves into the lane the bike is so close that a collision would have happened almost irrespective of the speed in question.
Both drivers drove in a dangerous fashion, as the court then found.
The argument that if he wasn't speeding he would have been miles further back is just ridiculously irrelevant.
[TW]Fox;26862078 said:
Utter rubbish. If the guy on the bike had been doing the speed limit in all probability the car driver would have easily seen him!
Remember, the guy on the bike came very very fast from behind a slow car of which the guy turning saw. He probably didnt see the biker come up behind that slower car and over take him as the guy was going so fast!
Speed had a lot to do with it!!
[TW]Fox;26862078 said:
Indeed.
To add, most people appear to have crystal balls and can see what could've happened under different circumstances. Nobody knows, we just know what DID happen.
Both idiots, driver admitted fault, motorcyclist took a stupid risk and paid the ultimate price. There's not much of anything to argue/debate about.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 17 Nov 2003
- Posts
- 36,747
- Location
- Southampton, UK
Speed clearly was a factor but it comes down to two things for me: 1) That if a driver was paying proper attention to the road, they should have seen the bike, even travelling at speed. I understand that most people including myself sometime drive on "auto pilot" but that's no excuse for proper observation. 2) The car's actions because of this lack of observation mean that the biker would have had to take action to prevent a collision, be that breaking, swerving or otherwise.
None of that excuses the clearly excessive speed, but if the driver was paying the attention they should have then the accident wouldn't have happened. If the biker was travelling at a slower speed it may have still been a fatal accident, even at 60mph.
That's not to say the driver's actions were proven to be well below that of a careful and competent driver to reach a conviction, just that I would place more blame on the driver.
None of that excuses the clearly excessive speed, but if the driver was paying the attention they should have then the accident wouldn't have happened. If the biker was travelling at a slower speed it may have still been a fatal accident, even at 60mph.
That's not to say the driver's actions were proven to be well below that of a careful and competent driver to reach a conviction, just that I would place more blame on the driver.
no, the bike was pretty close to the car when the car driver pulled across his path, its been to court, the car driver was proved to be at fault.
your now a forensic RTA investigater are you?