[pct-l] Manslaughter Charge for Bicyclist

[Timothy Nye]

The more I ruminate about Zorglub's attempt to distinguish the recent vehicular manslaughter case as one in which the bicyclist: "was apparently racing through crowded streets and ran a red light, resulting in the death of an old man who did not see him coming"' the more irritated I get about the attempt to distinguish situations where there is no difference.  As presumably everyone but Stoll, er, Zorglub, can see it is precisely the same potential unsafe use of speed and failure to yield in an environment where there is nowhere to get out of the way for the unfortunate hiker by a group consisting without exception of law breakers in the first place.

If there were an attorney looking for a way to contribute to safety on the trail he might develop a litigation plan where hikers took packers of any vehicles around trail heads with bike racks showing the racks and their license plates and  then take pictures of any bikers the encounter on the section.  I'd assume that encountering a bicycle on the trail in such a circumstance could be extremely distressful. Especially, if a hiker felt his safety were threatened.

In that event, a complaint naming Doe defendants could be filed and a subpoena for the registration of the suspect vehicle could be issued. Then the complaint could be amended to include the name of the licensed owner and additional discovery consisting of the defendant's  deposition noticed.  Of course, the owner would be ill advised not to retain counsel which, take my word for it, will be very, very expensive, say $20,000 for a retainer,something not covered by insurance since the bicyclist is engaged in an illegal act.  Unfortunately, Mr. Stoll, employed by the Court of Appeal, will be unable to appear on their behalf.  Or they could ignore the situation and a default judgment obtained.  Especially if the hiker's lawyer didn't care about earning a fee.

Just sayin'

Gourmet
 

Sent from my iPad

On Mar 9, 2013, at 8:00 PM, Zorglub <azorglub at yahoo.com> wrote:

> Mr Bucchiere will hopefully get what he deserves.  He was apparently racing through crowded streets and ran a red light, resulting in the death of an old man who did not see him coming.
> 
> Now, I assume that Gourmet posted this to further an anti bike agenda.  One cyclist behaving like an idiot on the road does not say anything about the other 99% of cyclists who will mountain bike respectfully on the PCT when it's legal (or may ride it today).
> 
> So petty...
> 
> Can't wait for this summer!
> 
> 
> 
>> The following was published in the Wall Street Journal on Friday, March 8, 2013
> 
> Manslaughter Charge for Bicyclist
> 
> San Francisco- A bicyclist who allegedly struck and killed a pedestrian last year will be tried on vehicular manslaughter charges a judge ruled Thursday in a case that highlights growing tensions on streets around the country over bicycle ridership.
> 
> Superior Court Judge Andrew Y. S. Chang denied a request by an attorney for the bicyclist, 36-year-old Chris Bucchere, to reduce the charge in the March 29, 2012, collision to a misdemeanor. Sutchi Hui, 71, who was hit in a cross walk, died of his injuries.
> 
> Vehicular manslaughter in California carries a maximum penalty of six years in prison. Mr. Bucchiere's lawyer didn't immediately return calls for comment.
> 
> "I hope this case serves as a reminder to all that there are life altering consequences to not following the rules of the road," said San Francisco District Attorney George Gascon in a statement.
> 
> A spokesman for the district attorney said his office hasn't been able to find another case of vehicular manslaughter involving a bicycle nationally in recent years. San Francisco's increasing road congestion has aggravated tensions between bicycles, motorists and pedestrians"
> 
> As a side note, I'd like to add that when the Forest Service issued there recent letter supporting the continued ban on MTB'S on the trail I posted a comment on the  MTB Facebook site commenting that the letter, in my opinion, had been carefully researched and drafted so as to be virtually bullet proof from an appellate stand point, as well as removing any potential sense of grievance, or  "fairness" as to our two wheeled brethren. ( Ted Stoll must have agreed; he posted a despairing couple of posts bemoaning the impact on his apparent true goal of legitimizing MTBs in national parks. Later that day my Facebook account was hacked and then my e-mail. Part of my Facebook account was deleted and a spam blast sent out from my e- mail. The circumstances suggest where the blame lies.
> 
> This development in a home jurisdiction of the trail will hopefully serve to put the issue to rest legally; although, I don't expect the bike community to pay any heed. Even if a sentence is meted out under the current "catch and release" regimen there is little likelihood of any time actually being served. However, it does set up an iron clad civil suit so that this guy can be forced into virtual poverty the rest of his life by this unfortunate victim's survivors.
> 
> Gourmet
> Sent from my iPad
> 
> \
> _______________________________________________
> Pct-L mailing list
> Pct-L at backcountry.net
> To unsubcribe, or change options visit:
> http://mailman.backcountry.net/mailman/listinfo/pct-l
> 
> List Archives:
> http://mailman.backcountry.net/pipermail/pct-l/
> All content is copyrighted by the respective authors. 
> Reproduction is prohibited without express permission.