|
|
|
The Bad Drivers of Ontario Thread
- Thread starter Boots
- Start date
Mad Mike
Well-known member
After thinking about this, I’m wondering if the cyclist failed to yield ROW? The designated bike lane ended before Dufferin, the collision happened after than in a chevroned lane. As I understand it, the designated lane ROW does not exist outside the designated lane, so cyclists must yield ROW when approaching from behind.Truck driver pretty much tries to kill a cyclist. Passes the bike and turns right over him. I've had lots of vehicles do that but they were normally taxis. Thankfully I didn't have a truck do it.
Police gave a "disobey sign" ticket to the truck driver. Holy f. That's $110. How this was anything less than careless is appalling. There is a solid argument for dangerous as it was no right turn and he almost killed somebody.
'Lucky he was not killed:' Video shows cyclist slamming into turning truck on Bloor Street
New video footage has been released showing a cyclist slamming into the side of a flat-bed truck after its driver appears to cut him off while making a right-hand turn in Toronto’s west end last month.www.cp24.com
I scoured the web looking for further clarification on this rule -- nothing found -- anybody have a reference for this situation?
It looks like 2 crimes at one scene.
Where no bike lane is present a bicycle falls under the standard definition for "vehicle." That means overtaking on the right of a vehicle making a legally signalled right turn is forbidden, and failure to yield right-of-way. "Legal turn" would be the operative expression here.
Mad Mike
Well-known member
Does an illegal turn cancel an illegal overtaking?
We know the turn was illegal. We have insufficient evidence on the overtaking. With the speed of the cyclist, it looks unlikely but we don't have enough video to know for sure.
The overtaking wasn't illegal, if the turn was prohibited.
I wonder how many of us took evasive action and avoided a crash because, although we did own that part of the road, we didn't take on a losing encounter.
Most, if not all of us. In this case, however, we have no real evidence for or against the truck having actually signalled this turn. The cyclist probably couldn't see what, if anything was in front of the truck until he was alongside it, so wouldn't necessarily have known why it was slowing down. Bicycles don't brake on a dime, so he probably didn't have a chance.
EDIT - Despite the results of his actions, I fully expect that the final result will be something like a finding of guilt for "prohibited turn", "turn not in safety", or "disobey sign."
Mad Mike
Well-known member
I wonder if the cyclist would have done differently at 6pm when the truck would be ok turning right?
Something that we'll never know, just as we don't really know if the truck signalled.
TK4
Well-known member
Scary - how does MTO let stuff like this stay on the road ?
And the lights being messed up and different sized tires and . . .
That's a "dangerous operation causing death" charge, right there. No excuse not to charge at that level, when you have video evidence.
Likely a drug runner. Lots of them use e-bikes as they can cover more ground than bicycles and you don’t need a license or all the responsibility associated with that :/
Last edited:
|
|
|
|
|