Clayton Rivet death and Questions Swirl around SIU investigation.

[casacrow]

Forum Sponsor

Re: Claton Rivert death and Questions Swirl around SIU investigation.

Skid marks could suggest quite a few things. Over riding lights is one.

Are you suggesting that leaving skid marks is not an indicator of an attempt to slow down?

 

[Rob MacLennan]

Re: Claton Rivert death and Questions Swirl around SIU investigation.

Thanks for the correction in thread title, but it's still wrong.

Oh and Camp D: those who believe for whatever reason the officer blocked the road, they acted unreasonably.

I took it from a news article. Please spell it in your response to this and I will fix it.

 

[casacrow]

Re: Claton Rivert death and Questions Swirl around SIU investigation.

I took it from a news article. Please spell it in your response to this and I will fix it.

And what news article was this? Do you have proof that you actually read said news article? Or are you simply trying to create the illusion that you have read the news article and are using this to cover up your obvious lack of knowledge in regards to proper spelling?

I have in the past been a great speller. I once received an A+ on a book report. I have written thousands of words in my life. For us to believe that you can spell without seeing any credentials including your past book reports is rediculous.

How about this, go down to the physical location of the media outlet you "say" you took the name from. Ask to speak to the editor and tell them how wrong they are to spell the name incorrectly. You will surely be laughed right out the door.

The media has gone to great lengths and thorough investigation using information they have been provided by reputable sources. For you to believe that a quick "Internet CSI" type of search to find the proper spelling is laughable at best. GMAFB.

I wouldn't hire you to address the envelopes on my Christmas cards.

P.S. thank you kindly for the correction. Muchly appreciated.

 

[Rob MacLennan]

Re: Claton Rivert death and Questions Swirl around SIU investigation.

And what news article was this? Do you have proof that you actually read said news article? Or are you simply trying to create the illusion that you have read the news article and are using this to cover up your obvious lack of knowledge in regards to proper spelling?

I have in the past been a great speller. I once received an A+ on a book report. I have written thousands of words in my life. For us to believe that you can spell without seeing any credentials including your past book reports is rediculous.

How about this, go down to the physical location of the media outlet you "say" you took the name from. Ask to speak to the editor and tell them how wrong they are to spell the name incorrectly. You will surely be laughed right out the door.

The media has gone to great lengths and thorough investigation using information they have been provided by reputable sources. For you to believe that a quick "Internet CSI" type of search to find the proper spelling is laughable at best. GMAFB.

I wouldn't hire you to address the envelopes on my Christmas cards.

P.S. thank you kindly for the correction. Muchly appreciated.

I had missed that BOTH parts of his name had been misspelt.

 

[jc100]

Re: Claton Rivert death and Questions Swirl around SIU investigation.

Are you suggesting that leaving skid marks is not an indicator of an attempt to slow down?

Most definitely, it's also an indication often of careless driving wouldn't you say?

 

[Brian P]

Re: Claton Rivert death and Questions Swirl around SIU investigation.

Most definitely, it's also an indication often of careless driving wouldn't you say?

What relevance is that??

Slamming on your brakes in an attempt to avoid a collision - ON ITS OWN, we're not talking about the factors leading up to the need to do so - is NOT indicative of careless driving.

 

[casacrow]

Re: Claton Rivert death and Questions Swirl around SIU investigation.

Most definitely, it's also an indication often of careless driving wouldn't you say?

No. I wouldn't say. Any time I have chirped on the road, was in an attempt to avoid collision with a vehicle that acted unreasonably and caught me by suprise. Now any sideways rear end sliding I have done on the track or in parking lots was done purely because it put a smile on my face.

 

[Shane.Nicholson]

Re: Claton Rivert death and Questions Swirl around SIU investigation.

From SIU news template:

Director Loparco concluded, “The forensic reconstruction of the events around the collision put the motorcycle’s speed at about 148 to 154 km/h just before it left a skid mark in a failed effort to avoid striking the cruiser. Its speed at impact was calculated to be about 142 km/h. Given the motorcycle’s speed, I rather suspect the motorcycle would not have been visible to the officer if indeed he checked the roadway in that direction before initiating his turn. A civilian witness’ evidence gives us some sense of this possibility when she recounts that the motorcycle could not be seen in her rear view mirror when she checked it 30 seconds before it passed her at high speed without any warning.


“In the end, it seems that one or more of the man’s speed, low lighting conditions and possible visual obstructions caused by construction work in the area, contributed to the collision that occurred.

Sounds a lot like rider error to me.

RIP rider.

 

[casacrow]

Re: Claton Rivert death and Questions Swirl around SIU investigation.

From SIU news template:

Director Loparco concluded, “The forensic reconstruction of the events around the collision put the motorcycle’s speed at about 148 to 154 km/h just before it left a skid mark in a failed effort to avoid striking the cruiser. Its speed at impact was calculated to be about 142 km/h. Given the motorcycle’s speed, I rather suspect the motorcycle would not have been visible to the officer if indeed he checked the roadway in that direction before initiating his turn. A civilian witness’ evidence gives us some sense of this possibility when she recounts that the motorcycle could not be seen in her rear view mirror when she checked it 30 seconds before it passed her at high speed without any warning.


“In the end, it seems that one or more of the man’s speed, low lighting conditions and possible visual obstructions caused by construction work in the area, contributed to the collision that occurred.

Sounds a lot like rider error to me.

RIP rider.

Yup. You bet. Rider was speeding, no doubt about it.

More than one person's actions can contribute to a collision......

 

[inreb]

Re: Claton Rivert death and Questions Swirl around SIU investigation.

From SIU news template:

Director Loparco concluded,...... A civilian witness’ evidence gives us some sense of this possibility when she recounts that the motorcycle could not be seen in her rear view mirror when she checked it 30 seconds before it passed her at high speed without any warning.

RIP rider.

God have mercy on us.

 

[jc100]

Re: Claton Rivert death and Questions Swirl around SIU investigation.

No. I wouldn't say. Any time I have chirped on the road, was in an attempt to avoid collision with a vehicle that acted unreasonably and caught me by suprise. Now any sideways rear end sliding I have done on the track or in parking lots was done purely because it put a smile on my face.

Ahh ok, so fine then. All the skid marks I see on the roads must all belong to vehicles who were surprised by other things. None of them could ever belong to vehicles who were going too fast to react in time to changing road conditions or to something they couldn't see while overdriving their lights. Glad we sorted that out.

 

[jc100]

Re: Claton Rivert death and Questions Swirl around SIU investigation.

What relevance is that??

Slamming on your brakes in an attempt to avoid a collision - ON ITS OWN, we're not talking about the factors leading up to the need to do so - is NOT indicative of careless driving.

I never said it definitely was, merely that it can be.

 

[hedo2002]

Re: Claton Rivert death and Questions Swirl around SIU investigation.

So now collision investigators should not consider events leading up to a collision? You can't isolate one portion and remove it from the event. The rider would not have slammed on his brakes. Common sense and logic, tells us that skid marks are made only when faced with a panic situation that requires immediate intervention. Again if everytime a motorist or rider left a skid mark, (while merely "SLOWING DOWN" as casacrow is trying to convince is the norm). to me "slowing down" means trying go say from 65 km down to 50. Is it now the assertion that Clayton was merely trying to slow from 154 to 142 as that would make the outcome better? OR was he trying to go from his speed of 154 to 0, within a VERY VERY short period of distance and time? I would suggest the latter is the more likely scenario.

So let's examine your scenario. a vehicle in front of you suddenly brake checks you and you hit it. Would want the investigator to not consider this as it was "leading up" the actual collision and that you "slammed on your brakes" on it's own? That would result in a very poor investigation and the result of who would be charged would be substantially altered.

Casacrow when you locked up your brakes in your scenario was it your desire to merely hit the other vehicle at a lower speed, or was it to STOP so you didn't hit the vehicle?

What relevance is that??

Slamming on your brakes in an attempt to avoid a collision - ON ITS OWN, we're not talking about the factors leading up to the need to do so - is NOT indicative of careless driving.

 

[robmack]

Re: Claton Rivert death and Questions Swirl around SIU investigation.

As established, the car was mid U-turn, blocking most of the road, when the motorcycle hit midway. Some posters state that the rider should have seen the headlights. Neither headlights and taillights would not have been visible to the rider; they would have been shining 90 degrees to the motorcycle's approach. Only the reflective police markings and the side markers would be the visual clues available at the time of impact. The cruiser would have been minimally visible for some time to any traffic approaching from either direction, as the maneuver completes. That could account for the short skid marks and high speed impact.

 

[Brian P]

Re: Claton Rivert death and Questions Swirl around SIU investigation.

hedo2002, your response to my statement is absurd.

In 2007, in Tennessee, I was travelling westbound on TN165 going into Tellico Plains at approximately 60 km/h entering town, speed limit is 35 mph so that is pretty much right at the speed limit ... LEGAL. Without signalling or giving any other warning, a car turned left across my path. I knew I was going to hit it the moment the car turned. I left a skid mark from the locked front wheel leading up to the point of impact.

You're suggesting the presence of that skid mark, on its own, suggests "careless driving" on my part? I tried to stop. I couldn't. Given the timing of the situation, there's no way I could have. And for that matter, I couldn't swerve, either. Parked cars on the right (and the car in question was aiming for a parking spot between them). Couldn't swerve to the left because that would have been head-on into oncoming traffic. I was legal. Speed was legal. I did everything I could. Still hit the car.

Back to the incident under discussion. 25 km/h is about 7 metres per second, more than one car length. If the car was going 25 km/h at the time, it could have been as little as one second-ish, maybe a second and a half, between the time that the car was on the side of the road, parallel to the traffic lane but off to the side, and when it was across the road blocking the lanes. If the police officer had pulled that U-turn without looking (which is my contention), then even if Clayton had been at the speed limit he would not have been able to stop in that time.

I've been there. Not going 150 km/h, mind you. But if a car turns across your path, there is no time to react.

 

[Rob MacLennan]

Re: Claton Rivert death and Questions Swirl around SIU investigation.

The concept of 'having no time to react' is relative to the speeds and distances involved. I've been in that situation when a car turned across my path, roughly 10 metres ahead of me, when I was travelling at 50 Kmh. I just managed to get the front end to dive under braking, when I impacted the car's front bumper.

 

[hedo2002]

Re: Claton Rivert death and Questions Swirl around SIU investigation.

Re read my post Brian I was assetrting that the skid mark must be taken into context of the entire incident and can't simply be considered on it's own as you had "suggested" that it should be. I am lso asserting that the presences of as skid mark, shows, (logically) that Clayton was trying to make a panic stop and not merely "slow down" as Casacrow has termed it.

So I will ask you the same question as I asked casacrow in your scenario was the skid mark a result of trying to stop in a "panic stop" to avoid the collision, or where you merely "trying to slow down" so you could hit the vehicle at a lesser rate of speed.

I also never said the cruiser would not have been across "most" of both lanes, (He would not have been completely blocking the westbound lane as he was turning around there would have been "some" space to compete the turn without hitting the barricade. So I do have an issue with the use of the term "blocking the road" as this indicates he pulled his cruiser there became stationary in an attempt to have the rider stop. This simply is not supported by the FACTS, (GPS and black box data). I have stated the cruiser would have been "across the road" I know it may seem trivial but for those trying to convince others this was ALL the fault of the officer it is a HUGE difference.

I agree when going 150 km/h ANYWHERE leaves you little or no options of avoidance. This is why we don't have speed limits of 150. But again using logic and the laws of movement, time and space, had Clayton not been doing 154 Km/h he NEVER would have been in the place at that time, ergo NO COLLISION. This is what makes his speed a MAJOR contributing factor. So if he HAD been doing the speed limit he would have never been in a collision.

hedo2002, your response to my statement is absurd.

In 2007, in Tennessee, I was travelling westbound on TN165 going into Tellico Plains at approximately 60 km/h entering town, speed limit is 35 mph so that is pretty much right at the speed limit ... LEGAL. Without signalling or giving any other warning, a car turned left across my path. I knew I was going to hit it the moment the car turned. I left a skid mark from the locked front wheel leading up to the point of impact.

You're suggesting the presence of that skid mark, on its own, suggests "careless driving" on my part? I tried to stop. I couldn't. Given the timing of the situation, there's no way I could have. And for that matter, I couldn't swerve, either. Parked cars on the right (and the car in question was aiming for a parking spot between them). Couldn't swerve to the left because that would have been head-on into oncoming traffic. I was legal. Speed was legal. I did everything I could. Still hit the car.

Back to the incident under discussion. 25 km/h is about 7 metres per second, more than one car length. If the car was going 25 km/h at the time, it could have been as little as one second-ish, maybe a second and a half, between the time that the car was on the side of the road, parallel to the traffic lane but off to the side, and when it was across the road blocking the lanes. If the police officer had pulled that U-turn without looking (which is my contention), then even if Clayton had been at the speed limit he would not have been able to stop in that time.

I've been there. Not going 150 km/h, mind you. But if a car turns across your path, there is no time to react.

 

[hedo2002]

Re: Claton Rivert death and Questions Swirl around SIU investigation.

I believe you may have misinterpreted the context of what we were saying.

Many hear have stated The officer SHOULD have seen Clayton's bikes single headlight regardless of the distance Clayton was away, in his rear view mirror. My point is IF the officer is expected to do this then I asked why Clayton didn't see the tail lights and head light illumination, (remember this is a dark country road with no street lighting). The officer would have had to apply his brakes, (presumably in a NORMAL slowing technique prior to making the turn), so if he did this, (we can logically assume the officer was traveling at 80 km/h before deciding to make this u turn. therefore the question becomes why didn't Clayton see the brake lights/tail lights and illumination for the head lights, all while presumably looking ahead tro where he was heading at 154 km/h?

If your going to go that speed at night in a construction zone would you not be hype vigilant to look ahead?

As established, the car was mid U-turn, blocking most of the road, when the motorcycle hit midway. Some posters state that the rider should have seen the headlights. Neither headlights and taillights would not have been visible to the rider; they would have been shining 90 degrees to the motorcycle's approach. Only the reflective police markings and the side markers would be the visual clues available at the time of impact. The cruiser would have been minimally visible for some time to any traffic approaching from either direction, as the maneuver completes. That could account for the short skid marks and high speed impact.

 

[inreb]

Re: Claton Rivert death and Questions Swirl around SIU investigation.

I believe you may have misinterpreted the context of what we were saying.

Many hear have stated The officer SHOULD have seen Clayton's bikes single headlight regardless of the distance Clayton was away, in his rear view mirror. My point is IF the officer is expected to do this then I asked why Clayton didn't see the tail lights and head light illumination, (remember this is a dark country road with no street lighting). The officer would have had to apply his brakes, (presumably in a NORMAL slowing technique prior to making the turn), so if he did this, (we can logically assume the officer was traveling at 80 km/h before deciding to make this u turn. therefore the question becomes why didn't Clayton see the brake lights/tail lights and illumination for the head lights, all while presumably looking ahead tro where he was heading at 154 km/h?

If your going to go that speed at night in a construction zone would you not be hype vigilant to look ahead?

This happens all the time. You see them so you assume they see you. The social contract (and laws) dictate don't get in each others path/space. Not clever doing 154km/h in those circumstances but pact remains.

 

[casacrow]

Re: Claton Rivert death and Questions Swirl around SIU investigation.

So now collision investigators should not consider events leading up to a collision? You can't isolate one portion and remove it from the event. The rider would not have slammed on his brakes. Common sense and logic, tells us that skid marks are made only when faced with a panic situation that requires immediate intervention. Again if everytime a motorist or rider left a skid mark, (while merely "SLOWING DOWN" as casacrow is trying to convince is the norm). to me "slowing down" means trying go say from 65 km down to 50. Is it now the assertion that Clayton was merely trying to slow from 154 to 142 as that would make the outcome better? OR was he trying to go from his speed of 154 to 0, within a VERY VERY short period of distance and time? I would suggest the latter is the more likely scenario.

So let's examine your scenario. a vehicle in front of you suddenly brake checks you and you hit it. Would want the investigator to not consider this as it was "leading up" the actual collision and that you "slammed on your brakes" on it's own? That would result in a very poor investigation and the result of who would be charged would be substantially altered.

Casacrow when you locked up your brakes in your scenario was it your desire to merely hit the other vehicle at a lower speed, or was it to STOP so you didn't hit the vehicle?

Umm, you can spin things all you want, but someome had asked if the rider should have slowed down when seeing the officer. Yes, the rider absolutely did. And yes he was trying to slow down very quickly, sure call it a panic stop------>A CAR JUST PULLED RIGHT IN FRONT OF HIM.

Slowing down is slowing down. It's a process that turns kinetic energy into heat energy. If you are confused about this I will gladly google some references for you, but I do believe despite your long winded post that makes you appear confused, that you really do understand the intent of things being said here.

When I locked my brakes(was only one axle,not that it matters) I was attempting to slow down, stopping would have been a poor decision, I was on 410 in traffic. I was not brake checked, if I was that would have been me 100% driving without care. What happened was a car passed me on the right in the merge lane(nothing wrong with that), then quickly turned left in front of me and hit the brakes. I'd say she went from 100km/hr to25km/hr. Not too sure what her intent was, but she was holding a phone to her ear with her right hand.

Some people may believe brakes are only for stopping, but they do a pretty good job at reducing speed as well. I know I can drive a truck almost all day and maybe never use the brakes to stop once, I also can run an entire race on my motorcycle and brake extrememly hard over and over again- and not come to a stop at all.

Forum Sponsor