Cyclist killed by Olympic bus: witness accounts and Wiggins's input

About time someone with some 'prescence' stood up and said something regarding wearing helmets.

I'm not saying the helmet laws will change in this country because of this, but I wouldn't be surprised. I would welcome it btw, as I would regarding headphones whilst riding ..

Andybwhite - you are definitely wrong an arrest does not trigger the issue of contempt of court. We do have a free press and they know the rules on this.

A coroner will no doubt perform an inquest and come to a decision as to the cause of death. Evidence in that inquest can be reported on, and depending on the coroner's finding criminal charges may result. If that happens then we can no longer comment on the evidence in the case. From what I can see unless there's evidence that this witness testimony is wrong criminal charges are unlikely.

Let's not be too hard on Waggley Bridins though I presume he was not in possession of the facts. Head injuries are the main cause of cycling fatalities. So although he was wrong in this case, I do think he has a valid point.

I would never stay in that position by any vehicle, in fact I usually overrun the white line ASL or no ASL just so I am seen and can clear the junction faster.

"If you dont wear a helmet you risk serious head injury."

Thing is, the only serious cycling injury I've ever had wouldn't have been prevented by a bike helmet. It would have been prevented by a full-face motorcycle helmet, though. By this logic, then, motorbike helmets should therefore be compulsory for pedal cyclists.

Maybe Wiggo was talking in the broader sense?

You guys can be as bad as daily fail etc for seeing a tree in the woods.

Well for my money if Wiggins argues that helmets should be compulsory (not that this will happen) if it makes more people ride with one that is fine by me. If the resulting debate raises more of the real issues even better.

My life was undoubtedly saved by a cheap Aldi Cycle Helmet last year. Whilst descending at approx 50kph I turned a corner and despite taking avoiding action hit a car, was sent airborne and landed on my head. It did not stop three broken ribs but the sound of scrunching polystyrene was music to my ears. In A and E a surgeon explained what would have happened had I not been wearing it, that is enough for me.

Clearly in this case it would have made no difference, what would do is mirrors or blind side monitoring systems being mandatory on buses and lorries and better education for both riders and drivers to avoid blind side collisions.

In order for the UK to go Dutch we need to reach the levels of cycling enjoyed there accompanied by the necessary infrastructure to make cycling safe and helmets mostly unnecessary but that is a long way off if not never, there is no demonstrable political will to do it as there are no demonstrable votes in it. Sad but true.

If Bradley's comments open the debate and the conclusions are action or at least discussion of some of the things I mentioned his comments would be worthwhile.

I witnessed something very similar with a tipper truck in Borough a couple of years back, it was dark, the rider had no lights and the driver had no chance of seeing the rider. The rider was ill adivsed to ride up the inside of a truck turning left.

A helmet wouldn't have helped, but it wouldn't of hurt.

In my case lights very possibly could have helped as it was pretty dark and a flashing light may have let the driver know he was there.

Deaths like this are always tragic.

Brake's press release on the incident is interesting - no mention of helmets in its reporting of Wiggo's comments:

National charity backs Wiggins’ appeal for safer cycling, and calls for safety measures to enable active lifestyles

Olympic gold medallist Bradley Wiggins has called for safer cycling following the tragic death last night of a 28 year old cyclist, who was run over and killed by a coach close to the Olympic Velodrome. Wiggins commented that cycling in the capital can be dangerous, and there needs to be more ‘give-and-take’ between drivers and cyclists. He advised cyclists to do everything they can to keep themselves safe and argued cycle helmets should be mandatory.
Brake, the road safety charity, is campaigning for key measures to protect cyclists and pedestrians, to prevent devastating casualties and make it safer for people to enjoy active, sustainable lifestyles, including:
• Widespread 20mph limits in towns and cities and lower limits on rural roads, to give drivers more time to react and more chance of avoiding collisions
• More traffic-free and segregated cycle paths, especially on key commuter routes and connecting homes and community facilities
• Safe pavements, footpaths and crossings in communities

Julie Townsend, Brake deputy chief executive, says: “We echo Wiggins’ calls for cyclists to do everything they can to protect themselves, but it’s also critical that far more is done to make roads safer for cycling and walking. We are appealing to government and local authorities to give greater priority and investment to enabling people to walk and cycle in their own communities without their lives being endangered. We need more widespread 20mph limits, and safe routes for people choosing these healthy and sustainable forms of transport.
“If we are to encourage more active and sustainable lifestyles, and enable more children and adults to take up sports like cycling and running, we need our streets to be more cyclist and pedestrian friendly.”

I think a more useful comment from Wiggins would be to warn cyclists not to ride up the inside of large vehicles.

Terribly sad news.
I support Wiggins comments. Its all common sense...

If you block out the sounds of the road by wearing headphones or listening to music you give yourself little chance of hearing danger.
If you dont wear a helmet you risk serious head injury.
If you dont wear hi-viz clothing or use dont use lights in the dark you wont be seen easily.
If you jump red lights you could collide with a vehicle / somebody.

Cycling up the inside of a large vehicle even while it is at rest is a risky manoeuvre. As the witness statement says, it is safer to keep behind and wait. I feel sympathy for the family of the victim - but if the incident occurred as described then the blame will be shared - to what degree that is so will be decided in court.

A lot of the fatalities involving cyclists and large vehicles occur when the large vehicle makes an unexpected manoeuvre such as cutting across a lane without indicating or when indicating very late. Neither a helmet nor the bodyarmour I wear for BMX racing would give adequate protection in an incident with a large vehicle as decribed in this article. For the moment the witness account may not be considered predjudicial to any court case, but it would probably be advisable to take it down shortly as it is quite possible it will be copied by those less aware of the laws.

I note the coach involved was for transporting members of the media. I wonder if this will have an effect on the reporting, given that there were may have been more witnesses?

I cyclec into the centre of London last night with my wife and neither of us bothered with helmets. I note Wiggo's son was not wearing a helmet when he rode down the street in Paris alongside his father while celebrating the Tour win. Paris is a busy city and has a higher rate of fatal road accidents than London, so perhaps Wiggo should consider that fact - throw, shouldn't, glass house, stones - and all that.

If the witness statement is correct, the cyclist was at fault. The bus driver would have had no knowledge of his presence and the rider had put himself into the hazardous situation. It is very sad, but we must not get into the mind-set which says 'cyclists are NEVER to blame'.

On the subject of helmets, this rider would not have been saved by a helmet and there is no mention of his wearing or not wearing one. If you read the specifications for cycle helmets, they are designed to protect in single vehicle accidents at speed below 10mph. In other words, if you fall off at low speed. In most cases they will not protect you at higher speeds and may well exacerbate the injuries received.

Wow talk about hero to zero Mr. Wiggins comments are his own thoughts/opinions and he is entitled to them however to say what he said (and more importantly When) was at best ill conceived but before I go completely ballistic, one question, how much information was he given before he said all that tosh.

Agree with above I to doubt Wiggo had been told of the details of the accident.

Wiggo speaking his mind and is nothing I for one support his statement.

As adults we have a choice but c'mon under 16s should have to wear a helmet. That way you grow up and don't know any different.

My little man who is 3 now rides on two wheels and has had a helmet since I bought him a balance bike at 18 months (pushy dad eh?

Now when he rides a bike it is natural instinct to wear the helmet.

What ever the argument helmets prevent injury and I know from personal experience.

I'm continuing to hope for a sea change in public attitudes towards cycling safety. I just sent this to Brian Cookson. If anyone can get it to influential people within the Sky organisation, feel free to forward the link:

http://fiftyyearsandcounting.wordpress.com/2012/08/02/wiggins-speaks-out...

Colin

Wiggins is basing his opinion on helmet wearing on his own experiences. He probably sees the benefit of one because he rides at great speed and in groups where coming off is constant danger and has seen that a high speed crash can lead to head injuries
I doubt he rides in rush hour urban traffic at slow speeds on a commute.
This poor fella who died was ran over by a bus and no helmet in the world was going to save him.
Wiggins helmet comments, which he has made before, are unhelpful to those of us who choose to not wear one and only add to my growing feeling that legislation is on the horizon.

In fairness to Wiggins he probably didn't have all the facts, didn't have time to prepare an answer and didn't really know what was being asked. Assuming the questions was just a 'someone was killed cycling in London tonight, is London safe to cycle in' then you can justify his answer of effectively 'No' with caveats of being as safe as possible by wearing helmets etc.

I'm guessing Brad didn't have much info on the incident, and was therefore commenting rather generally about cycling in London rather than this incident, so "wear a helmet" is a valid opinion, although it wouldn't appear to make the difference in this situation. So so sad.

Agree though that the account is "utterly terrifying". Wonder if the bus was indicating?

A helmet wouldn't have saved him. Not cycling alongside the bus might have (if the witness is correct).

Every day in London I see red light jumpers and cyclists undertaking lorries or trying to push past at the lights when they are only going to be overtaken seconds later and they would be safer to stay behind.

I'm really unsure of how we improve things. As cyclists we have the same rights on the road as other vehicles and yet we are not, as a group, as disciplined as other drivers and many take ridiculous risks when they are at most risk of injury/death.

The problems are evident, solutions not so much.

How exactly is a helmet supposed to help if you're dragged under a bus?

Being crushed by commercial and construction vehicles kills a disproportionately high number of cyclists, certainly in London. It's massive internal organ damage that kills them, as horrific as that sounds.

Next time a pedestrian is killed by a car can the BBC get hold of Paula Radcliffe and ask her about the need for people out walking to wear Hi-Viz and body armour?