Re: Sydney Bicycle accident

"Doug Jewell" <ask@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
news:482820dc$0$22133$5a62ac22@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Trevor Wilson wrote:
>> "Noddy" <me@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
>> news:4827a55a$0$58058$c30e37c6@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>> "Trevor Wilson" <trevor@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
>>> news:68p9l8F2sshtoU1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>
>>>> Swerving and stopping in front of a group of cyclists, then leaving
the 
>>>> scene of the resulting accident, is not only illegal, but extremely 
>>>> poor form.
>>> It depends entirely on the cir***stances.
>>
>> **Indeed. An engine fault is not a situation which calls for
endangering 
>> the lives of 50 cyclists. It is a situation which calls for the driver
to 
>> allow the vehicle to slow, whilst looking for an op****tunity to get off

>> the road SAFELY.
> One re****t that I saw (and bear in mind it was a re****t, so there is no 
> guarantee to it's truth), said that several cyclists overtook him BEFORE

> they started ploughing into the back of the car. If he stopped in the
way 
> you are describing you would expect the front cyclists to be the ones 
> hitting him. If the front cyclists got past, and it was ones further
down 
> in the pack that hit him, it tells me that there is nothing wrong with
his 
> stopping action, but it was the cyclists were riding too close to each 
> other to be able to A) see the unexpected and B) react to the
unexpected.


Precisely. For a hypothetical, try reversing the situation...........

5 cars driving nose to tail. The front car comes upon a cyclist and at the

last minute swerves to pass the bike. The other 4 cars, driving to close
to 
the car in front, don't have time to react and run straight over the 
cyclist.
Who does Trevor think would be at fault there?

-- 
Kwyj.