Tommy Wells at the Memorial

"Alice's death reminds us just how dangerous it is for bicyclists," said D.C. Council member Tommy Wells (D-Ward 6), who attended last night's vigil and commutes by bicycle from his Capitol Hill home to the John A. Wilson Building downtown. "It reminds us how much work we have to do to make our city safe and that our streets belong to all of us."

And here is Dr Gridlock on it.


DSC_1339
Originally uploaded by Washington Area Bicyclist Association

Comments

[SteveH]

Does anyone know the specific reason why the driver has not been charged by the police? Every article I read on this says makes it sound like the driver was at fault.
Why are we not all picketing the Metropolitan Police Dept over this? I can't accept that they would simply do nothing and allow this truck driver to continue driving recklessly.

[Tom]

I wasn't there and I haven't heard any eye witness account but, maybe the driver hasn't been charged because he wasn't at fault.

The bike may have been trying to pass on the right when the truck started his turn.

This incident is a shame. I can't imagine the driver feels like a winner either. Let's wait for the facts to come out before we dust off the guillotine.

[washcycle]

Tom,

let me preface with I don't know all the details yet. But passing on the right is legal.

Two possibilities. 1) The driver stopped in the auto lane, cyclist in the bike lane. Signal or not, the driver is at fault.

2) As the driver stopped, he merged into the bike lane - as required for a right turn - and put on his signal. The cyclist ignored this and passed on the right anyway. In which case the cyclist is at fault. This seems unlikely to me.

A third possibility that the cyclist was in the bike lane and then the driver merged over doesn't make sense for obvious reasons.

[SteveH]

I agree that we shouldn't dust off the guillotine quite yet, but the police do owe an explanation. Not a single article or blog mentions these details.

[think a little]

The police need to interview witnesess, complete the crash profile, etc. That usually takes a week (remember this is DC) then it gets handed to the DA who decideds to press charges. If no charges have been filed in a week, then you can get angry...for now the wheels of justice turn very very slowly.

[Tom]

wash,

Thank you for clearing that up.

[think a little]

Washcycle-
As both a truck driver and a bicyclist, I can tell you there is an option 3 that you left out.
Truck is in the R st travel lane, bike in the bike lane but 10-12 feet back from the light (right in the trucks blind spot) light goes green truck begins right turn driver watching pedestrians at the 2 corners of R st as well as the upbound traffic on 20th running the red, begins his turn in the intersection (trucks turn wide when going right) and the bike having just accelerated gets caught under the front wheel. Legal fault then lies in a complex game of was the turn signal on, how far back were the 2 actors from the intersection at the time of the green, etc. Does that rise to the level of legal charges, possibly, but without a showing of negligence of active attempt to harm regretably no.

Ive been in the same bind (both as a truck diver and bike rider) myself and been lucky. To everyone out there Trucks are big, they react slowly and there are many many places that a driver cant neccessarily see you....please do not cut behind, around or otherwise play dodgeball with a truck.

[washcycle]

Yeah, I think this takes time. Let's give the MPD time to do a full investigation. If he is innocent, I'd hate to ruin his life.

[MB]

I agree that it's not time to ruin the guy's life (if he's a decent person, it probably already is), but I don't buy the Option 3, here. That requires a level of inattentiveness on the part of the cyclist that I just can't fathom. Not impossible, but just really really really unlikely.

[think a little]

Oh I agree, but Option 3 while less likely is a possibility.....would you wait right next to a stinky garbage truck or would you hang back a few feet? What Im confused about is that from the photos Ive seen her bike was under the middle of the truck which would imply to me that she went under the front wheels. Meaning she was in front of the truck when he turned as opposed to being broadsided and pulled under the back wheels. Again that would imply a higher rate of relative speed for her than the truck if they were both stopped at the light, which seems a bit odd unless she had a rolling head start, but could be achieved if she started a few feet back and he turned without noticing her....

Im going to read the incident report with interest

[Tom]

Wash,

It's interesting that you don't think that a 22-year old could be inattentive.

I'm an old man and have pedaled tens of thousands of miles. I have broken a collar bone, and mangled ligaments in my thumb in crashes that were due to my not paying attention. As a matter of fact, even though both accidents were on the road, no cars were in sight.

I didn't know the rider so I can't assess her experience. But, I have found myself in some sticky situations due to a miscalculation of my abilities and the intentions of others around me.

So, I wouldn't take option 3 off the table. From my personal experience it really is as likely as any of the others.

[washcycle]

A 22 year old could be inattentive. I'm saying she'd have to have a death wish.

Here's what the driver should have done by law. As he approached the intersection put on his turn signal. Make sure the bike lane is clear. Merge over into the bike lane once the solid line becomes a dashed line. Stop at the light. Keep the turn signal. When the light changed, turn right looking for pedestrians in the crosswalk.

If Alice were already in the bike lane ahead of the truck, he would've been behind her. If she were next to the truck as he merged he would've waited for her to move ahead of him.

For her to be responsible, here's what would've happened. She would come across a garbage truck in the bike lane with his right turn signal on. She would have had to decide to squeeze around the truck on the right and then go through the light when it changed ignoring the truck entirely. Does that seem reasonable to you?

I don't think he ever merged. And so, he's at fault.

[washcycle]

think a little, as I mentioned in the previous comment. You start option 3 with:

"Truck is in the R st travel lane"

Then he was in the wrong place. I move to dismiss.