It’s a common refrain among local cyclists: Want to kill someone and get away with it? Run them over while they’re on a bicycle.
Within Boston’s growing cycling community, a perceived lack of criminal prosecution of motorists involved in fatal bike crashes has been a regular source of outrage in recent years. That ire came to a fever pitch last week, when a grand jury investigation of a Wellesley bike crash with seemingly copious evidence — video footage, witnesses defending the deceased bicyclist, a truck driver who had fled the scene and had an extensive history of driving infractions — came back with no charges.
Comments
There are irresonsible, reckless, agressive, and just plain stupid miscreants on both sides of this. The problem is that the cars and trucks have a clear advantage. They will most likely always win in the crash catergory. The law says we must share the roads. We should all be able to live up to this simple law. Just because you are in a hurry doesn't give one to the break the law on either side. Biker or Auto/Truck driver. We have to learn to truly share the road and work together on this. After all, many, many of us who drive gas powered vehicles also ride bicycles. Be more careful. And more respectful.
Something smells.... even with video evidence a grand jury couldn't decide the case had enough merit to proceed ?
I have to agree with your speculation. I would also be suspicious that the case was brought to the GJ to cover the bases politically but that the prosecutor backed off on his or her presentation. It doesn't make sense and it's not the only bike death case that has failed to be prosected. I find it very disturbing. I too viewed the tape and clearly, there was nothing hiding the cyclist from the truckers view.
Good points. What can be done after a Grand Jury makes a decision in Massachusetts?
I don't mean to make light of this tragedy, because I really feel sympathy for anyone involved in an accident lie this. But, I immediately thought about how our system is out of balance when U.S. Attorney Carmen Ortiz will chase down a Internet hacker while this truck driver escapes any serious charges. What a sad deal this case is for everyone involved. Bike riders have no protection!
Apples and oranges. The prosecutor did pursue this case, but the grand jury (the people) decided there wasn't enough of a case to proceed to trial.
Ortiz followed the law. The hacker was wrong. Killed himself and now people want to pretend it was someone elses fault. All choices he made.
"The problem, bike advocates say, is that most people, and most jurors, just don’t like bikes" Not true. I like bikes.Just don't like most bicyclists. Why? When two passed me on the right going over 60 mph coming down the hill next to Wachusett mtn this fall. Really? yup. Those types deserve what ever they get.
Any bicyclist going 60mph knows they're risking their life, car or no car involved. A bump in the road, a pothole, a tree branch sticking out, and they're done. Nothing to do with laws of the land, only the laws of physics.
60 mile per hour. . .really? Must have been Lance Armstrong.
I drive in the city alot..and there's nothing more surly that a cyclist who doesn't get their way. Traffic lanes and lights are for Thee, not for Me!
I enjoy riding a bike once in a while. . . in a community where streets ar e designed for neither cars, bikes, nor pedestrians. Those roads are just too narrow for any two such vehicles or walkers to be passing one another at any singular time. But, that is about my town. Now let's talk about the city of Boston and its Mumbling Mayor's decision to paint bicycle lanes all over the city, with many of those lanes bordering automobile travel lanes on one side and auto parking lanes on the other. In other words, painted bicycle marked lanes alongside the driver's side of parked vehicles, where a driver may open a door at any time, even as a moving motor vehicle passes the cyclist on the other side. Evidently Mr. Menino found an out of work designer of machine tools or some such to come up with a scheme to mark Boston streets for bicyclists, with no thought given to the larger power and rights of automobile operators. Evidently the mayor and his traffic lane designers believe that any moving automobile is supposed to be driven into oncoming vehicle traffic if a bicyclist happens to be either be riding irresponsibly in a bike lane or if a driver of a parked car just happens to open a door even as my vehicle and a bicylist coincidentally pass by the door opener's vehicle. SQUJSH!
It never takes long before some enlightened liberal starts the insults. I simply state the fact that riding a bike in a sea of motor vehicles is inherently dangerous, and choosing to do is foolish. Drivers, however enlightened to cyclist rights and the superior ways of socialist Europe, cannot always spot and react to every contingency in a crowded street. Common sense is not so common anymore, at least on this site.
Riding a bike in a crowded city is dangerous and foolish. There are simply too many distractions and too little space for safe operation in thestreets of cities like Boston. Be wise not otherwise.
The same could be said of driving.
Physics, like arithmetic, is not an opinion. The standard "moral equivalence" argument doesn't work here. The bike rider loses every time, and asserting your "cyclist rights" in the path of a 2 ton vehicle is dangerous and foolish.
The comments here are evidence of the general ignorance in Boston and the specific reputation for being the worst drivers in America and some of the rudest, most selfish people in the world. Driving downtown last evening, I saw some of the most harrowing, selfish, and life-threatening driving maneuvers I have ever seen, and I have lived here for over 30 years. Bicyclists have just as much right to the roads as drivers. To hold up one or two examples of cyclists who break rules while not doing so with the by-far huger number of drivers is to ignore the law and excuse murderers like this truck driver.
As a follow biker - I do have an important comment - DO NOT ride side by side - you make drivers mad and then they want to hit me riding single file.
I agree with Factchex totally. And not only are cyclists treated unjustly when killed, try to get the Police to treat you fairly when you are hit and not killed. Often they do not want to fill out accident reports for accidents involving bicycles.
I have a comment that is not related to the Wellesley case....but rather, relates to the Globe's reporting on "bicyclist's rights". It's clear that some cyclists do whatever the H they want - I recently saw one almost mow down a pedestrian in a crosswalk. So why doesn't a reporter watch for bike scofflaws, then interview them? Ask them WHY they are breaking the law. Ask them questions to determine if they even KNOW the laws. And why doesn't the precious bike "community" - which seems to have been given a soapbox by the Globe - start a program to educate cyclists about what they should and should not do??? Motorists are not always in the wrong (again, I'm not talking about the Wellesley case here).
They have interviewed "bad" cyclists for other articles they've run on bike safety.
The overwhelming majority of cyclists are also licensed auto drivers, and most of them are also car owners. They know the law as well (or not, which is often the case) as car drivers.
On the one hand, it certainly sounds like an indictment would have been approproate in this case. On the other hand, "Stereotypes about careless or foolhardy bicyclists" have quite a bit of truth behind them, as anyone who walks around here knows full well.
I have sympathy for any person hurt in an accident on the road but I have seen maybe 1% of cyclistists stop for a red light or stop sign. I see cyclists make some very poor choices to avoid standing in traffic, stopping in an intersection or attempt to beat the bus or other large vehicle.
Part of the safety initiative should be ticketing cyclists who do not obey as well as the motorists.
Good job of changing the subject -- was there any indication in any investigation that this unfortunate cyclist was at any way at fault?
Your sensitivity to traffic law violations is selective; about 1% of drivers obey speed limits, and relatively few scrupulously obey the law at stop signs and before turning right on red. Speeding in residential neighborhoods is very dangerous; the risk of death in a pedestrian collision rises from about 5% at 20mph to 45% at 30mph, and 85% at 40mph. Every extra mile per hour piles on the risk. People may think it's safe, but statistics suggest otherwise, and it makes neighborhoods much less pleasant.
In addition, even when they do fail to stop, cyclists have a better ability to see if it is actually safe to do so. Their heads are positioned at standing height or better only 3 feet behind the front of the bike, there's no foggy or filty windshield or windows to obstruct their vision, and their hearing is (usually) unimpaired. Someone sitting in a noisy car (engine on, fan on) with the windows up is nearly deaf and cannot hear oncoming traffic; if the radio is on, they can only hear the loudest noises outside their car.
Unwise cycling is a self-limiting behavior; almost getting hit by a car or truck is very scary, and getting hit by a car or truck is at minimum painful, and often worse. Cyclists very rarely put other people at serious risk (about one pedestrian killed per year in the US). Poor driving is not self-limiting; it is not nearly as scary, not nearly as painful, and often puts other people at risk (over 3000 pedestrians killed per year -- per vehicle, about 15x as risky as cycling). Enforcement is a social activity, and it should be proportional to social risk; overall, we should expect to see 3000 drivers ticketed for every cyclist ticket that is issued; in places like Cambridge with a 10x higher bike share than the norm, it should be more like 300 to 1.
Or perhaps, you're just worried about the safety of the cyclists themselves, and paternalistically assume that they don't know better. That would be well-intentioned, but ignorant of actual risk. Big health studies in Europe indicate that the lack of exercise that comes with commuting in a car (not walking, not biking) is deadly, and far more dangerous than the risk from bicycle crashes. Other studies suggest that when there is a car-bicycle crash, it is more often the driver that is at fault than the cyclist, though in many cases the crash is a team effort. One study discovered that when cyclists wear helmets, the *car drivers around them* engage in riskier behavior -- suggesting that the concern for helmet-wearing is not so much about cyclist safety, but instead about driving speed.
I challenge anyone to walk or bike casually on the Minuteman bikepath a few times and see if they still feel the same way about hardcore bicyclists. Wolfpacks riding side by side at high speed terrorize both pedestrians and casual cyclists. They think they own the path, and the rest of us trying to enjoy it are nuisances getting in their way.
I am a cyclist who uses this path regularly and I agree about this generalization. I try to only use it on weekday mornings when few people are on it. However, what does this have to do with this article? To not only complain about cyclists exercising their right to ride on roads but to now complain about them on bike paths?
Factchex:
Is *is* relevant because the article discussed motorists attitudes toward bicyclists. Such attitudes are formed in places like the bikepath I spoke of. The irony is half the time they terrorize me, I'm on a bicycle myself. But not in spandex. Nooooooooooooo. Never in spandex.
When the biycling community takes on the same responsibility that drivers have then they will be recognized. Bicyclists should have to obey all the same laws as drivers--currently they dont. They should have to be licensed, trained and taxed by the state. An insurance policy should also be a requirement. The bicyclist is a free rider--paying nothing for roadways, maybe a tax would be in order for all the roadway Demands being made by their community.
Case in point about the ignorance I mentioned above. Cyclists don't pay taxes for roads? Are you for real here? Most cyclists are also drivers. And everyone who pays taxes, even if they don't drive or ride bikes, pay for the roads.
This comment has been removed.
Would the driver of the car have stopped if the victim had been a pedestrian? Probably not. If victim had been a pedestrian, the grand jury would have retruned an indictment quickly.
The comments reflect the frustration that many drivers and pedestrians feel when they see bicyclists ignore traffic laws. For example, two weeks ago I was in a cross walk trying to cross a street and bicyclist blew a whistle at me because they did not feel like stopping.
It would be nice to see an article about police ticketing bicyclists who flaunt laws instead of another article about a bicyclist baing killed. No one deserves to die because someone did not obey a traffic law.
This comment has been removed.
It would be nice if I saw police enforcing crosswalk laws around pedestrians (I almost never see that) instead of writing citations to bicyclists for coasting through traffic lights when there are no cars or pedestrians in sight (I do see that).
The next time a bicyclist stops for me when I'm in a crosswalk will be the first time.
This comment has been removed.
See you out there, then. I do it all the time.
This comment has been removed.
Trying to transform Boston, which is a difficult city even for drivers, into a Euro type biking city overnight is bound to produce accidents and fatalities. Riders have to realize they're rolling the dice with their safety ands should be aware they could be "dead" right.
This comment has been removed.
Euro cities were designed before Boston. It's a cultural bias, not a logistical thing.
It is hard to get convictions for drivers anywhere who kill motorcyclists. I am not surprised there was not indictment in this case. Two-wheeled vehicles are neither respected nor seen by drivers, and I think that's just a subtle prejudice. JMHO
Unforutnately, many people on the streets of Boston have a prison mentality. They ignore transgressions by themselves and others like them while aggressively attacking the transgressions of others.
Bicyclists ignore traffic laws, pedestrians jaywalk, motorcyclists have obnoxiously loud exhaust systems, and drivers in Boston are well, drivers in Boston. The streets of Boston would be much safer and more pleasant if the police would enforce all of the laws for everyone. As a member of the pedestrian, motorcyclist, and driving groups, I would have no problem with that.
This comment has been removed.
In my experience driving to and from downtown Boston, cyclists weave in and out and pay no attention to drivers. One actually darted across me at my green light. They are totally foolhardy. I almost had a heart attack for fear of hitting him. These people are mostly behaving like accidents waiting to happen. This is not a good city for cycling and these new rules for cyclists should never have been implemented. Thank all the good old lobbyists.
As usual, the grumpy suburban contingent in the Globe comments section is being totally reasonable: "Many bikers annoy me, so any biker, regardless of whether he is the one who annoyed me, deserves to die." Thank God I never have to set foot in the suburbs, and these knuckleheads are too racist to come anywhere near my neighborhood. The only contact I have to have with them is virtual, just the way I like it.
Please do tell. . . exactly what does a knucklehead's being - as you allege - a racist have to do with bicyclists?
We can debate all day that some cyclists may not obey traffic laws, just as some drivers may not. It has no bearing on this case. Legally each case should be judged independently of other people's actions.
There is video clearly showing that the cyclist was obeying traffic law while the driver of the truck was not. Whether it is a bias of the jury or for some other reason, Justice was not served.
Just looked at the video. Not surewhere the driver broke the law but maybe I amlooking at the wrong video.
Simple answer is to not allow large trucksand bikes on narrow roads that cannot accommodate them. Perhaps this was just an accident with nobody at fault.
That said, manyvibe riders need to get their heads on right. If you arebeing overtaken by a large object, regardless of your right to be there, slow down and move to the side until the large object passes you. It might save your life. Pedestriansknow this and do it all the time. Yes you have a right to the road and you can exercise that right as you fly through the air, propelled by the laws of physics. And please, remember you are required to yield to pedestrians and their children. Get smart
..... A life lng bike enthusiast and safe rider
no way you ride and post what you did. The motorist is responsible for passing at a safe opportunity. Cyclists have just as much right to the road as drivers, and as mentioned above, the vast majority of bikers are drivers also. This cyclist was riding correctly at the side of the road and he is supposed to what?... hear the truck bearing down on him, get off his bike and jump onto the nearest lawn? You're absurd.
The video stops before the critical time where the road narrows and the biker is hit. The other complication about this particular stretch of road is that there are granite curbs that are 4-6 inches high. So even if the biker had sensed the truck bearing down on him, there would be no way for him to move off the road. It's a good example of trying to increase safety for pedestrians (building high curbs) and making it more dangerous for bikers.
NEW MASSACHUSETTS CYCLIST MIRANDA WARNING
-----------------------------------------------------------------
YOU HAVE THE RIGHT . . . to share the road with ten-ton vehicles that will kill you.
IF YOU CHOOSE TO EXERCISE THIS RIGHT . . . the laws of physics can and will prevail and you will die.
YOU HAVE THE RIGHT . . . to a coroner who will determine that you died because you felt you had the right to wrecklessy ride your two wheeled bicycle in the same space that ten-ton vehciles were also driving.
This comment has been removed.
Uhm, OK. So as a truck driver you have a right to smear cyclists across the road, not stop, and get off scot-free?
Bicyclists around here certainly aren't always angels. That being said, I do believe that this whole problem begins and should end with real enforcement of basic traffic laws, primarily for motorists. I honestly don't know if it is ingrained corruption or what, but there has never in my thirty-something years of driving in the area been any significant enforcement of traffic laws, none. As a motorist, you are really free to drive in any reckless or arrogant manner that you wish, and there will never be any serious consequences. Ever read a driver's manual? All those laws and rules that when you were 16 you were scared to break because you might lose your license? Well, that's basically all just a big joke in the here and now. You cannot drive two miles around the city without witnessing some kind of incident that makes you want to tear your hair out, and it doesn't matter at all what the driving conditions are, or if the streets are clogged or empty. Start posting cops at intersections and really enforce the laws big-time. I'm suppose I'm being naive here, but it seems to me that, if enforcement is done consistently and correctly, that drivers will adapt and improve over time, and so would the bicyclists eventually, once traffic flows in a somewhat civilized manner and fewer people feel that they're at war with each other. Meanwhile, if anyone can enlighten me as to why there is no enforcement, please tell me because I really would like to know (I suppose it *is* corruption, a backed-up legal system, no funds etc., the same stuff we've been hearing for years). How about a Politician running on the premise, or promise, of jailing traffic miscreants? Accidents are just as horrible as any other kind of physical violence. You may say I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one (or am I)? Anyway, put the gd drivers in jail and take it from there. And I'm a motorist, not a bicyclist.
Walk around downtown Boston. Unless I jaywalk - I am dodging bikes all the time and no cars (cars only run a red at the end of yellow - not 30 seconds into the red that cyclists do. When I have a Walk signal I have to look in both directions (on a one-way street no less) to make sure a cyclist won't hit me. So if I were on a jury - my prejudice would creep in - although I would never want anyone to die. Oh and cars love bikes that they have to wait to pass only to have the bike pass the cars at the next signal becuase the cars obey the signal and the biker does not.
This comment has been removed.