Who's fault ?

[Sbk12rs]

Watch video and decide if you dare !!! http://media.putfile.com/CRAZY-MOTERCYCLE-CRASH

[ZX-12R]

I'm not a good speed guestimator and I don't have the time to calculate how fast the bike was going but the car clearly pulled in front of him so until I know how fast he was going, car is 100% at fault in my book.

The bike didn't appear to slow down or even try to evade. He probably wasn't paying attention. He had at least 2 full seconds from the time the car crossed the line until impact which is more than enough time to at least begin to turn out of the way.

[OreoGaborio]

Yeah, there was a thread about this video over on ODFU... someone took a video editing program and determined they were doin about 45-50mph at the point of impact.... chances are, he was speeding, but it doesnt matter... Car was still 100% at fault IMO.

[neuthunder]

at fault or not i'm pissed about the people that were behind the car that didnt even pull over to see if everyone was alright, just kept driving

[LowSider]

I don't think the car signaled and it definatly did not stop before turning.

It looked like the bike was speeding but some times bike just look that way.
Especially if the bike was speeding, the car should have seen it and let it pass.



I can't believe it took that long for the people to run over to him.

[RandyO]

I am appalled at all the assumptions I have read in different forums, why is the cage automaticly at fault ? why do peeps think nobody stopped to help out?


I will make my own assumptions from the 30second video clip that shows the traffic in 75 feet of public highway

It is a busy area speed limit is likely 30mph

a group of cars was behind the car thet was in the accident,
likey a street light that just turned green a few feet out of the picture


just cause people didn't stop in front of the camera (why would they) doesn't mean they didn't stop to help out

The cage had his turn signal on

I believe the bike was behind a cage that turned into the gas station from the other entrance,

the rider did not pay attention to the cage that had already innitiated the turn and accelerated to 60mph± (based on time in the video to travel an estimated 4 car lengths) didn't want to miss that green light that was ahead.

the Biker is an idiot, and is 100% at fault

[SVRACER01]

Originally posted by RandyO
.

the Biker is an idiot, and is 100% at fault

tell me you dont beleive your own idiotic BULLSHIT!!!!
even if it wasnt a bike that was involved in that accident the person turning left would be at fault for the obvious reason that you are supposed to yeild to oncoming traffic when making a left hand turn. it doesnt appear that the biker was attempting to slow or avoid so maybe he wasnt paying attention and YES maybe even speeding. HELL, he coulda been doing a wheelie off camera and set it down just in time to enter the frame. that doesnt excuse the fact that the car was IN HIS LANE!! making an EXTREMELY SLOW left hand turn i might add.
you know Randy, sometimes with all you wisdom and age and experience and all the miles under your belt........................ you can be a real fuckin moron

[ZX-12R]

Originally posted by SVRACER01
you can be a real fuckin moron

Where's my popcorn? This could become interesting!

[RandyO]

Originally posted by SVRACER01
tell me you dont beleive your own idiotic BULLSHIT!!!!
even if it wasnt a bike that was involved in that accident the person turning left would be at fault for the obvious reason that you are supposed to yeild to oncoming traffic when making a left hand turn. it doesnt appear that the biker was attempting to slow or avoid so maybe he wasnt paying attention and YES maybe even speeding. HELL, he coulda been doing a wheelie off camera and set it down just in time to enter the frame. that doesnt excuse the fact that the car was IN HIS LANE!! making an EXTREMELY SLOW left hand turn i might add.
you know Randy, sometimes with all you wisdom and age and experience and all the miles under your belt........................ you can be a real fuckin moron

if the bike came out of nowhere from behind a car, the cage is not at fault,

if the biker was doing something negligent, he is automaticly at fault

and I have the experience of turning left in front of a motorcycle, he was found at fault. his insurance paid for the damage to repair my truck, almost identical damage as the video, except it was a harley and he lowsided into the side of my truck

[Suf Daddy]

Maybe they both are at fault. But I have to say the car is over the yellow line and in the path of on coming traffic regardless of the speed of the motorcycle.

If you watch the car wheel it jabs the brakes a fraction of a second before the bike impact. Its like the cager never saw the cyclist, which could be from ANY number of factors including sunlight glare.

Plus the field of vision of the gas station camera is so focused on that one entrance that its hard to say no one helped the guy as he's out of the frame.

The women call for help and the nearest to the road goes towards him.......

Just about the best situation you could hope for given what happened. Hopefully the ambulance got there quick and saved the cyclist.

-Suf Daddy

[Suf Daddy]

At fault or accident reconstruction notes, someone told me they look for where the impact is.

Front
Middle
Rear
of a turning car.

Front drivers fault crossing into other lane
Middle and rear are more subjective to time and other factors...............

Rear usually is considered that the turning vehicle displayed enough warning and nearly completed the crossing of the lane that the oncoming traffic should have had time to react or avoid the car.

However, we now cars stop short and people F you when you're trying the get across a lane of traffic.

So this guy had three choices;
Dump and lowside: POW.
Hit and superman...........the best I think given the "no win" situation...........
Veer LEft into the back or oncoming traffic..................

-Suf Daddy

[Sbk12rs]

I've watched this vid a couple of times ,,,, my ass just pukers eveytime I see it !

[sanfelice]

ok, I did not watch this video, because I hate seeing crashes, especially if I can not learn much from them (and from the sound of posts, I cannot learn much from this except to keep speed down in traffic).

But, formerly being part of a bicycle forum, I can tell you that there are lawyers for bicyclists that swear up and down, every way to Sunday, that the person occupying the lane has the right of way, even when that cyclist is hidden behind another car (remeber that bicyclists are less visible than riders and often ride to the right of traffic making them very susceptible to left turners). So, cycle-friendly lawyers have popped up to defend them and they - supposedly - win many of these cases brought against cages turning left or swerving into a lane, etc.

[benVFR]

I'm 100% in agreement with Randy here.

That guy was flying based on how fast he went through the frame & how far he flew, and the car looked like it had nearly stopped and was not turning left hard or fast. It looks like the bike was going far enough over the speed limit that the cager was not able to judge it's distance.

I don't think it's at all fair to compare this to a bicyclist getting turned left on. It's so different. Bicyclists are often at fault & get nailed for it. A lot of the left turning cars that hit cyclists inolve cyclists at night without lights, people who are riding a bike cause they are on a DUI license suspension, etc.. it is pretty rare to have an enthusiast cylist get in an accident like this one in broad daylight. That car was not moving, and the ground is level. The bicycle would be unlikely to be in the center of the road, very unlikely to be travelling over 25mph solo, etc..

Regardless of who is at fault here... we all need to get it through our thick skulls that no amount of blame on the cager & no amount of money won through litigation is going to ever heal your injuries 100%. We all have to take personal responsibility for our riding & our own safety. If that guy was a good marathon runner or hockey player or something and he brakes his leg in that crash nothing the insurance or lawsuit gives him is ever going to get those athletic abilities back. That is something I fear far more then losing my motorcycle or some $$$.

[legalspeed]

a.) what's the speed limit on that road?

b.) video has been altered.

Car is at fault.

[benVFR]

Good point no one is moving in the 1 second of video when the biker is moving.. you could easily speed that up in an editing program with minimal trouble.

I doubt it though....

[Awesome]

Chuck Noris is at fault.


OBVIOUSLY!

[legalspeed]

Originally posted by benVFR
Good point no one is moving in the 1 second of video when the biker is moving.. you could easily speed that up in an editing program with minimal trouble.

I doubt it though....

look at the time read-out; it skips.

I'm not saying why, or how, just sayin'.

I see RandyO's point with the replies; seems people just took a glance and replied at face value.

I believe the lady approaching the camera wanted a store clerk to call an ambulance, then saw it was already being done. She just turns away too qucikly. I also believe the car driver is trying to assist the rider, the door is prolly jammed by the front fender sheet metal.

Accidents suck no matter what, I hope everyone is alright.

[slaps76]

I blame it on the rain.

Because the rain don't mind....and the rain don't care.

[neuthunder]

obviously chuck norris is at fault, he round house kicked that guy off the bike

[rjh200]

Either way the police will write it up to make it look like the motorcyclists fault.

[sanfelice]

Originally posted by benVFR
I don't think it's at all fair to compare this to a bicyclist getting turned left on. It's so different. Bicyclists are often at fault & get nailed for it. A lot of the left turning cars that hit cyclists inolve cyclists at night without lights, people who are riding a bike cause they are on a DUI license suspension, etc.. it is pretty rare to have an enthusiast cylist get in an accident like this one in broad daylight.

Where do you get these "statistics?" I think you should check some of the bicycle forums before responding. In essence, they are a lot like these forums in that most people assume innocence and therefore must be taken for what they are, but you are quite wrong (no, very wrong) about the "reasons" that bicyclists get into accidents and whether or not they are considered (by the law) to be at fault.

[bump909]

was the biker speeding with his eyes closed? could that car have taking that left any slower? i don't care who's at fault, that accident could have been avoided either way.

[benVFR]

Originally posted by sanfelice
Where do you get these "statistics?" I think you should check some of the bicycle forums before responding. In essence, they are a lot like these forums in that most people assume innocence and therefore must be taken for what they are, but you are quite wrong (no, very wrong) about the "reasons" that bicyclists get into accidents and whether or not they are considered (by the law) to be at fault.

Sorry that is just my ignorant opinion after averaging about 5000 miles per year on my bicycle for the last 6 years and doing about 30 races. I guess maybe it was stupid to get an opinion of cyclists by riding like crazy as opposed to reading internet forums.

We bicyclists are just as bad as everyone else... everyone thinks they are perfect and it's always the cars fault.

Sorry but cyclists are insanely dangerous and often stupid. You get people who are racing who don't even know to use the front brake, half the peloton has no idea what countersteering is, and nearly everyone runs red lights and stop signs with barely a thought at all. And as soon as you get 5 or more bicyclists together all of a sudden we think we own the road, the groupthink is insane.

The holier-than-thou attitude among cyclists is 1000x worse then motorcyclists... save it for someone who cares.

[chr|s sedition]

Originally posted by Suf Daddy
Maybe they both are at fault.

god, I should be able to answer, this I have a final in Torts in like a week on this exact kinda shit.

the idea is contributory negligence.

car: has duty to turn into oncoming traffic in a safe way. it is foreseeable that someone on may coming from that directiong, and thus requires a reeasonble standard of care in making the turn. legally, if you are changing lanes your are normally held at fault. if the car breached that duty to turn safley, they can be held at fault in proportion to the...

biker: has a duty to drive at a safe speed. failure to meet that duty would be considered negligent. in my view, he was clearly speeding.

based on just what you see, there prolly ins't enough info to determin what degree each was fault, but there seems to be a shared responsibility.

-sedition