- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
Broken bike (CC licensed image by garryknight, www.flickr.com)Cyclist who died of head injury was either hit by car door or swerved to avoid it
A 76-year-old man who died of a head injury after falling from his bike was either hit by a car door or swerving to avoid it an inquest has heard. The woman involved, who has already been fined and banned from driving for the offence, does not believe she could have done anything differently.
The Liverpool Echo reports how retired lecturer, Robert Hamilton from Birkdale, was cycling along Linaker Street in Southport on January 23 last year when he came off his bike and hit his head. He was taken to hospital but later died from his injuries.
The inquest heard that Linaker Street resident, Joanne Jackson, had caused the incident. Last year she was charged with opening a car door so as to injure or endanger a person for which she was banned from driving for six months and given a £305 fine.
Speaking at the time, Hamilton’s widow, May, expressed her displeasure that the Crown Prosecution Service had not pursued a charge of manslaughter. “It’s been absolutely devastating. I am so disgusted with the way these sorts of deaths are trivialised with very minor charges.”
The inquest heard that after pulling up outside her home at around 11.55am, Jackson opened her door in Hamilton’s path, pulling it closed again as she saw him. She said that she didn’t think he had hit the door and added: “I consider myself to be a careful and competent driver. I feel very sorry that the cyclist died but don’t think there’s anything I could have done different to avoid this accident.”
Paul Clark, the Hamilton family’s barrister, asked her whether she had seen a white car drive past her just before Hamilton arrived. He also asked whether she checked her mirrors and how widely she opened the door. “If you looked then why didn’t you see the cyclist?” he asked. Jackson said that it was because the incident happened “so quickly”.
Witness statements conflicted with regards to whether the door actually hit Hamilton or not. Jackson’s husband Gary, who was nearby, said it looked like the cyclist had swerved to avoid the car door and lost his balance. John Gore, an authorised vehicle examiner who had seen the car door agreed with this, but also said that Hamilton’s 1970s bike was not well maintained.
The bike’s tyre tread was said to have been so worn that you could see the inner fabric, while Constable Simon Richards from the Merseyside Police Collision Investigation Unit added that he did not believe the bike’s brakes were working well enough for safe use on the road.
The inquest has been adjourned until September 29 to hear further evidence.
Alex has written for more cricket publications than the rest of the road.cc team combined. Despite the apparent evidence of this picture, he doesn't especially like cake.
Latest Comments
- OldRidgeback 3 min 17 sec ago
It's 30 years since I rang the police to say the (then rare and costly) suspension forks had been stolen from my MTB. I said I knew where they were...
- OldRidgeback 6 min 50 sec ago
That's a terrible outcome. RIP for the victim. The length of driving ban plus the need for a retest at least is something.
- OldRidgeback 8 min 4 sec ago
You beat me to it - I've just read the article and was going to post the link to it.
- chrisonabike 23 min 30 sec ago
*thinking of overinflated shark-fin fairing and a pin and following cartoon-style consequences* Could be good for a short speed burst?
- Bungle_52 1 hour 1 min ago
I was wondering why the prosecutor used the word ordinary rather than competent. The two seem completely different to me.
- Jaijai 2 hours 17 sec ago
I'm surprised ,the ones I've seen 8n and built have all needed paint overspray pretty much all areas ,including headtube ,brake mount areas wheel...
- the little onion 4 hours 33 min ago
The bus should have been bigger and brighter coloured. How are drivers expected to spot a bright yellow double decker bus on our roads?...
- HoarseMann 5 hours 25 min ago
BBC news article on this implies anyone cycling on the road, rather than using the cycle area, is riding incorrectly! ...
Add new comment
34 comments
what's troubling me is that they dug up an expert witness for the condition of the car door, yet took the word of a completely unqualified policeman on the serviceability of the bicycle...
I wouldn't say one should always throw the book at a driver or passenger who opens a door without properly looking, one can accept that "mistakes happen"...but..._if_ you accept that, you then have to also accept that cyclists should never, ever, ride in door zones.
And you have to make it crystal clear to both cyclists and motorists that they should never be expected to do so, even if it means "holding drivers up" (in the race to the next red light).
The trouble is the authorities try to have it both ways at once. They need to pick one or the other - either come down like a ton of bricks on those who open doors without looking, or do what's necessary to remove all pressure for cyclists to be in door zones. I don't mind which, just pick one.
In particular, painting door-zone cycle lanes should be regarded as a criminal act on the part of councils (there has to be an offence that covers trying to lure people into inevitable danger, surely?).
But.... The Highway Code specifically makes allowance for "filtering" and that will almost always put the cyclist in the door zone.
Though, surely, if you are filtering through cars stationary in the general flow of traffic, those cars are not parked?
Fair point though, I've a couple of times nearly been hit by passengers opening their doors while in a traffic jam and not actually parked. But I'd say a much stronger burden of care applies to the door-opener if the vehicle isn't even parked at the kerb. Not sure it should be legal at all, unless your car is on fire or you are escaping from a hostage situation!
I've been doored once. Traffic 'almost' stationary and I was going up between the main stream of traffic and the footpath, aiming for a marked cycle lane I could see ahead of me. Suddenly I was on the floor with my bike next to me. Still don't actually remember it happening (too fast). Got up, looked back at the blank gaze of the woman who'd opened the passenger side door without looking. The car just carried on into traffic, and she grudgingly waited while I checked if my bike was broken (it wasn't, luckily). No apology, or even a hint of understanding of what she might have done wrong.
And that traffic, again, wasn't stationery, just very slow moving.
She could also cause this sort of carnage as a passenger, I don't think taking away her licence solves the problem?
seems ironic that by the time this inquest is being held her driving ban has been served and she is presumably back on the road.
I have profound sympathy for Mr Hamilton and his family and my comments about maintaining a bike in no way lessens Ms Jackson's responsibility for causing the accident.
To use the HGV scenario what if the car driver saw the HGV driving recklessly but was unable to stop or swerve because of mechanical faults? Would it be the HGV driver's fault? YES
Would the car driver still be dead? YES
We have no way of knowing when Mr Hamilton saw the door opening or if he could have stopped instead of swerving if his brakes worked. We have no way of knowing if his tyres contributed to his falling off. The state of his bike may well have had nothing to do with what happened. Let me make it perfectly clear Mr Hamilton was not to blame and I never implied that he was.
It is absolutely the driver's responsibility to look before opening a door but who's fault it is does nothing to change the consequences. I merely suggest that cyclists should do what they can to protect themselves from other's mistakes including making sure their bike is road worthy. To be honest I can't see how anyone can object to that.
In the Netherlands you are taught to open car doors (on the inside) with your opposite hand . Try it - by opening the door with the hand furthest away it forces you to twist around and look back down the length of the car.
Needs to be part of driving test in UK.
Paul
I think we should start with knowing how to drive being part of the driving test.
That's genius! Will definitely be doing that in future.
Quite right.
It does however lead to punishment passes/arguments every now and then. A year or so ago, a BMW driver overtook me in a dangerous place/way, when he ran out of patience. He was in enough of a hurry to pass me where it wasn't safe, but not so much of a hurry that he couldn't then stop his car in order to argue with me. 'I gave you plenty of time to pull over.' But I won't be cycling right next to parked cars.
Last post by Levermonkey is spot on, if opening a door onto a road then all the responsibility is on the driver not a cyclist or another road user. That is why cars have rear view and wing mirrors fitted ...
As everyone else has commented it is quite possible to avoid this type of accident, LOOK before you open a door. The situation is tragic and was definitely caused by the driver.
Having said that I don't believe it is victim blaming to state that a bike needs to be in a road worthy condition to ride it on a public road. Not having seen the bike I can't make that determination but what would the response be on here if a cyclist made an error and a motorist hit them and the police found that the car tyres were bald and the brakes didn't work properly?
A more accurate comparison would be a HGV driver pulling out of a junction without bothering to look, crashing into the car and killing the driver and then saying "Well, his tyres were bald".
It's fairly ridiculous to compare the potential weight, speed and power of a car with a 76 year old man.
If he was riding a bike with super sharp disc brakes would the door have somehow remained shut? Or if he had brand new, super knobbly fat tyres would that have resulted in the driver bothering her arse to check her mirrors and look properly?
I honestly don't believe it would.
You're joking, right?
Opening a car door and causing someone to swerve, versus blatantly not giving way while operating a HGV isn't in the same frame at all. One is slight negligence (as is riding on work-out bike tyres) and one is a reasonably foreseeable and preventable cause of a fatal collision.
Not at all comparable. If you were going for hyperbole, you managed, and then some.
I'm not joking at all.
And I think they are comparable.
A HGV driver hitting a car is going to be a similar impact to a car door hitting a cyclist in terms of scale.
In both situations the impact would have been preventable if the person in the wrong had taken the time the actually look properly for the more vulnerable road user.
I'm unsure as to what you disagree with about that.
Presumably she would have passed Mr Hamilton shortly before she parked therefore, she should have been aware that he would be in the vicinity when she opened the door.
Complete failure to exercise any level of 'duty of care' that could and should be expected. I wonder if she would have been so cavalier if there had been a lorry in the vicinity.
Miss Jackson has proved that she is an unfit person to hold a Driving Licence for her actions at the time, lack of remorse and inability to take responsibility for her actions.
I find the victim blaming by the Police disgraceful and partisan towards the car driver.
Needless to say, all my sympathies to Mr Hamilton's family.
In all honesty she should have looked in her mirrors and over her shoulder as due to the angle of wing mirrors you do get a blind spot hence the need to always look over the shoulder as well.
Also when you do open your door keep an eye out in your mirror as the view widens as the door opens. Simple things that could and can save serious injury or death.
Officers who are trained as vehicle examiners (of which i'm one) come under Sect 67(1) Road Traffic Act 1988, if people are interested have a look through and it will explain the processes that are carried out.
Sometimes the victim is to blame.
Presumably it is useful to have brakes that work.
If you are cycling past a car that has just parked it is foolish to cycle close by, as it is likely the driver will be about to get out.
I wonder if he was wearing a helmet.
He fell off his bike and hit his head as neither he nor his bike were prepared to deal with any sudden unexpected event.
I'll stand well back now.
@ birrzles
I don't think that any of the questions that you've asked are unreasonable ones. I have a real problem with the term 'victim blaming' when applied to accidents that don't contain malicious intent on the part of any involved parties.
The driver was negligent to not check properly before opening her car door - but I bet she'd done it a million times with no consequence whatsoever. In the same way, it's negligent to ride with badly worn tyres and poorly maintained brakes, though I'm sure that Mr Hamilton had ridden many miles on his bike like that and not suffered any consequences. The sad part is that these small and usually consequence-free oversights have combined to result in the loss of a man's life.
Vehicle drivers should absolutely have a greater duty of care to other road users because of their increased ability to cause serious injury or death, but this doesn't excuse those other road users from their own duty of care which I believe includes making sure that whatever you're riding is well-maintained and safe. This includes not riding on worn tyres, having effective brakes fitted and, in my opinion only, wearing helmets.
While these three things might have saved Mr Hamilton's life, equally, they may not have. It's impossible to say based on the limited facts reported. All we can say for sure is that this man's death is desperately tragic. My heart goes out to his wife and family.
Very sad story. Got car doored a few weeks ago. Got away with it that time. Passenger stepped out of the car that was waiting at a traffic light into the cycling lane which had a double yellow line AND a railing alongside it. He had no-where to go, nor did I.
As for brakes, I did not have time to reach for them so their status was irrelevant.
from above "The inquest heard that after pulling up outside her home at around 11.55am, Jackson opened her door in Hamilton’s path, pulling it closed again as she saw him."
from The Liverpool Echo at the time of the driver's trial:
"The court heard the 44-year-old had pulled up outside her home at around 11.55am ..........clipping a wheelie bin with her left wing mirror as she parked, causing her to move slightly forward."
"careful and competent driver"?
the article contains a photo of the cyclist that was killed - with a well maintained recumbent presumably not his choice of bike for a ride to the local shops, very sad.
http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/merseyside-woman-who-...
I refer to the 3 foot space next to a parked car as the 'deathzone'. I will not ride in it and would rather take a primary position than endanger myself trying to keep as far left as possible. I broke this rule last week and nearly got doored for it - Sod's Law. Lesson learnt...
And yet how many bike lanes do we see painted on roads that occupy exactly that space? Ride in the lane and risk a dooring, or ride outside the lane and risk a punishment pass for not being in the bike lane? It's your choice cyclists!
As for the driver's comment that there wasn't anything she could have done differently to avoid the incident, I'd suggest she has her licence removed indefinitely, at least until such time as she works that little conundrum out. If she can't she's not fit to be driving a car.
It's a sad situation, but I kept thinking when I ride and drive by parked vehicles I always ride 3 ft out.
If on a pushbike I take a prominent position solely for unlikely event of someone opening a door. Is it remnant of a bygone era where cyclists were told to keep far left to avoid holding up traffic?
"Jackson opened her door in Hamilton’s path, pulling it closed again as she saw him. She said that she didn’t think he had hit the door and added: “I consider myself to be a careful and competent driver. I feel very sorry that the cyclist died but don’t think there’s anything I could have done different to avoid this accident.”
Stupid b1tch.
".. but don’t think there’s anything I could have done different to avoid this accident.”
How about .. looking before opening your door?
The usual BS assumptions being trotted out.
A 73 year old could well be going at a good lick if he were fit enough and cycled enough. Perhaps the poor state of his bike was due to the fact that he hadn't used it for years...or that he had been using it for years!
Where does it say that the PC is either "youngish" or "fit"? I suppose that he's only a constable means this?
"Victim blaming"? How about addresses all causes of an incident? And, yes, if the bike was not well maintained that could well be a contributing factor. Get over it.
And if the victim was cycling close enough to parked traffic at a lick, then he didn't have much common sense. While drivers should be careful, check mirrors etc., we don't know the specifics of visibility at the time.
Defensive cycling is your friend. And no, you don't have to wear a helmet if you think it invades your rights.
There's nothing to say that this was anything other than a tragic accident. From what it says above, I think the lady's been overly punished.
What "yardstick" did Constable Simon Richards use/apply when testing the brakes. What passes for safe would ultimately depend on the speed, whilst a youngish fit PC would need good brakes because he may well cycle at a good clip a 73 year old may not go quite so fast and therefore would not need to reach such a lofty goal.
Pages