Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

Video: Cyclist seriously injured after ignoring traffic signal warns fellow riders to stop at red

Craig Dortkamp needed 200 stitches in head wounds... in video from City of London Police, he urges others not to make same mistake

A cyclist who was seriously injured when he was in a collision with a London taxi after riding through a red light is urging other bike riders to stop at traffic signals. Craig Dortkamp, originally from Sydney, Australia, has made the appeal in a video produced by City of London Police.

Craig, an experienced cyclist who commutes to work by bike each day, rode through the red light at London’s Holborn Circus assuming it was about to turn green; instead, it was traffic signals elsewhere on the junction that had changed.

As he tried to avoid traffic he crashed into a taxi, his head smashing the rear window, cutting his forehead to the bone. His injuries required 200 stitches. He also suffered cuts elsewhere on his face

Craig says he hopes his experience will serve as a warning to others. “Be sensible, don’t take unnecessary risks, don’t run through a red light – you don’t know what is around the corner.

“I hope I don’t see any other cyclists running through a red light. If you don’t take that risk your chances of being hit by a vehicle are much slimmer and you probably won’t end up with scars on your face for the rest of your life like me.”  \

Police add: “Craig hopes his experience will both act as a warning to cyclists while encouraging them to take a moment and wait at red lights.  Pausing for those extra few seconds while the lights change to green could be the difference between you reaching your destination safely or being involved in a collision.”

It’s an issue that divides cyclists. Stand at any busy junction during peak commuting hours, and you’ll see some tear through a red light without pausing, others set off from the light before they turn green, and others wait patiently until the signals change and give them right of way.

The theory has also been put forward that the reason such a high proportion of serious cycling casualties in London involve women struck by lorries at junctions is precisely because they are more likely than men to obey red lights, and unwittingly put themselves in danger.

However, many others see this explanation as overly simplistic and indeed plain wrong, pointing out that factors such as where women cyclists choose to position themselves on the road, the design of lorries, and junctions, and the working practices of the construction industry in particular all have a part to play in contributing to that sorry statistic.

But until roads, and junctions in particular, are made safer, some maintain that riding through a red light, or at least anticipating the signal changing, is a vital element in keeping safe on two wheels in an urban environment.

Opponents of red light jumping counter that by pointing out the effect that a minority of cyclists riding through illegally through lights that are against them also create a negative impression of bike riders in general; a motorist stopped at a traffic signal will remember the one rider who rode through the junction, rather than the half dozen waiting their turn, while near misses when using a pelican crossing, say, can be alarming for pedestrians.

Last year, we reported that 44-year-old cyclist Andrej Schipka had been fined £850 after he rode through a red light in High Holborn and struck a pedestrian who was crossing the road, leaving him with injuries including a brain haemorrhage and fractured skull from which he was not expected to fully recover.

The message from City of London Police, however, is unequivocal; cyclists, like other road users, are subject to the law, and that includes obeying traffic signals – of the 3,000 fines issued to cyclists in the Square Mile last year, nine in ten were for riding through a red light.

While no figures for that year are available for London as a whole, a Freedom of Information request from London cyclist and road.cc user Tim Lennon that we reported upon in 2011 found that in the year to end-March 2010, in the Metropolitan Police area (all London boroughs other than the City of London), 1,872 cyclists were fined for riding through red lights.

That was dwarfed, however, by the number of motorists fined during the same year for a similar offence – 79,851 drivers receiving fixed penalty notices, although it’s likely that many of those, perhaps the vast majority, will have been generated automatically via cameras installed at junctions, clearly not a possibility in the case of cyclists.

City of London Police does acknowledge that often, it is the behaviour of other road users that puts cyclists at risk, and has listed nine points for riders to be aware of to “keep your nine cycling lives.”

Those are:

1 – Black cabs swerving to the kerb to pick up/drop off passengers

2 – Pedestrians stepping out into the road without looking (and most of us do it on occasion) 


3 – Passengers hopping off or on Routemaster buses without looking 


4 – Vehicles turning left across you – even more serious if it is a bus or truck 


5 – Car doors being opened into your path

6 – Vehicle creepage at junctions

7 – Delivery vehicles parked in cycle lanes 


8 – Drivers failing to indicate properly leaving everyone guessing 


9 – Vehicles doing impromptu U-turns.

Simon joined road.cc as news editor in 2009 and is now the site’s community editor, acting as a link between the team producing the content and our readers. A law and languages graduate, published translator and former retail analyst, he has reported on issues as diverse as cycling-related court cases, anti-doping investigations, the latest developments in the bike industry and the sport’s biggest races. Now back in London full-time after 15 years living in Oxford and Cambridge, he loves cycling along the Thames but misses having his former riding buddy, Elodie the miniature schnauzer, in the basket in front of him.

Add new comment

47 comments

Avatar
matthewn5 | 11 years ago
0 likes

The best reason I know not to jump red lights - apart from the law - is that at the junctions I ride through you're likely to be hit by a car running the red light. I've seen a lot of near misses.

That said, I think there's a case to let cyclists go when the four way (barn dance) pedestrian cycle is showing. At walking speed, obviously. There's got to be some time advantage to cycling, otherwise we may as well drive.

Avatar
shay cycles | 11 years ago
0 likes

Sniffer - if you are asked to dismount by a "Cyclists Dismount" sign you don't need to worry about breaking any laws if you stay on the bike - those signs are purely advisory not mandatory and no offence is committed if you choose not to dismount.

Avatar
eurotrash | 11 years ago
0 likes

Just this evening on my way home, a bunch of us (cyclists) were stopped at a red light waiting to go, then it changes to green and we take off across the intersection... and a RLJ'r comes steaming through full speed ahead from the side. I was too annoyed to slow down which in hindsight would have been better, and shouted something to him about red lights. Luckily he somehow managed to squeeze through us without taking anyone out. Next time he'll be flying into a car and be less lucky.

Avatar
alexholt3 | 11 years ago
0 likes

I'm at a loss for words as to why a video like this should be required. Time for another biblical flood I think.

Avatar
kamoshika | 11 years ago
0 likes

Not condoning RLJing under most circumstances, but there are sets of lights where I live that are triggered by the presence of a vehicle and aren't sensitive enough to detect a bike. I've often been faced with the decision to go through the red or sit there and wait for a car to arrive to make the lights change. I'll usually go for the first option. I've reported them to the council, but little seems to have been done to improve them.

Avatar
Sniffer replied to kamoshika | 11 years ago
0 likes

I recognise your comments. My experisnce is that is on rural roads only where the traffic is light. I regularly use a narrow bridge that it traffic light controlled. I would have to sit awaiting a car to come along before the lights change.

Town / city centre I would not dream of it.

The other rule that I find hard is another canal bridge I use, where I am asked to dismount (the bridge is also light controlled). I think I am in more danger walking in cleats than nipping swiftly across.

Avatar
11speedaddict | 11 years ago
0 likes

i ride 7 days a week for 25 years
i commute 6 days - only 5 miles each way
i do club rides on sundays
i never jump red lights
If you want to be treated as an equal on the road , even though its unlikely that many drivers will ever treat a bike rider as equal, you have to follow the law.
Its never OK or safer to jump a red light.
If a motorist is sitting at lights and a cyclist comes round him (especially on inside) and ignores the lights it just pisses them off. And rightly so.
Imagine, and i mean really imagine a reverse situation.
Every time you stop at a red light, the car comes up and goes through red. What the cyclist would do is moan about it but probably then follow the car.
as i say i dont not jump red lights for safety- i can easily negotiate a junction without using traffic signals - i dont jump lights so as not to give the motorist the higher moral ground.  13

Avatar
zanf replied to 11speedaddict | 11 years ago
0 likes
11speedaddict wrote:

If you want to be treated as an equal on the road , even though its unlikely that many drivers will ever treat a bike rider as equal, you have to follow the law.

This is a terrible attitude. I dont think cyclists should be treated as equals by motor vehicles. Just as I dont think that pedestrians should be treated as equals by vehicles. For the simple reason that none of them are.

There is a pyramid of vulnerability and vehicles are at the bottom of it, with pedestrians at the top and cyclists underneath. I want everyone to treat other road users according to that hierarchy, rather than as it is now ('might is right') or with everyone as "equals", which is a blanket integrationist attitude.

Avatar
farrell | 11 years ago
0 likes

And when are the police going to bring out the video of a motorist who went through a red light and caused a wreck?

Or the video about the drink driver who caused a wreck?

Or the driver than couldn't be bothered slowing down and waiting and caused a wreck?

Or the one where they were showing off to their mates and caused a wreck?

Or the one when they were dicking about on their phone and caused a wreck?

Or the one....you get the idea. I'm not condoning red light jumping, but he's gone through, got it wrong and bust himself up but in terms of the dangers on the roads to to other users it's not the biggest threat.

Avatar
sihall34 replied to farrell | 11 years ago
0 likes
farrell wrote:

And when are the police going to bring out the video of a motorist who went through a red light and caused a wreck?

Or the video about the drink driver who caused a wreck?

Or the driver than couldn't be bothered slowing down and waiting and caused a wreck?

Or the one where they were showing off to their mates and caused a wreck?

Or the one when they were dicking about on their phone and caused a wreck?

Or the one....you get the idea. I'm not condoning red light jumping, but he's gone through, got it wrong and bust himself up but in terms of the dangers on the roads to to other users it's not the biggest threat.

I agree, there are bigger fish to fry in terms of cutting down accidents and making the road safer but you can't be annoyed that they are bringing this to people's attention. It's illegal, it's dangerous and we shouldn't do it, and it would be one more thing off the list if people realised.

Hopefully they'll then bring out all of the other videos.

Avatar
fancynancy | 11 years ago
0 likes

Cycling home the other day I had a police van next to me in the ASL... he saw the red light but just rolled on into it. If they can't lead by example then nothing will change  37

Avatar
eurotrash | 11 years ago
0 likes

This guy was a statistic, he got lucky and got a second chance. Same for all other RLJers. If you do stupid shit, you shouldn't be surprised when bad stuff happens to you. Don't RLJ, don't filter when it's unsafe to do so, beware of HGVs, watch for vehicles ahead of you signalling, always shoulder check before swerving out into the road, use common sense... it's not that difficult.

Avatar
kie7077 | 11 years ago
0 likes

it is not for you (or Sleepy to decide which to follow and which not to

It is everybodies choice what laws to follow. If a law tells me to go jump off a cliff, I'll pass on that, thanks.

Some laws are asinine, I am a free person and will choose for myself which laws to follow.

Roads and road laws were simply not made for cyclists, If breaking a law is safer then my advice is, break the law.

Would you recommend 4 year olds cycle on the roads or the pavements? Cycling on the pavements is definitely illegal.

This doesn't mean I don't follow and agree with most laws, it just means I don't think we should follow every dictate of some corrupt old farts in parliament.

Avatar
sihall34 replied to kie7077 | 11 years ago
0 likes
kie7077 wrote:

it is not for you (or Sleepy to decide which to follow and which not to

It is everybodies choice what laws to follow. If a law tells me to go jump off a cliff, I'll pass on that, thanks.

Some laws are asinine, I am a free person and will choose for myself which laws to follow.

Roads and road laws were simply not made for cyclists, If breaking a law is safer then my advice is, break the law.

Would you recommend 4 year olds cycle on the roads or the pavements? Cycling on the pavements is definitely illegal.

This doesn't mean I don't follow and agree with most laws, it just means I don't think we should follow every dictate of some corrupt old farts in parliament.

I respectfully disagree, laws are made and we should follow them, there is a whole process for making laws to ensure they don't tell people to jump off a cliff. If you pick and choose which laws to follow, you're in effect a criminal, I don't think I should have to pay for that so I'll take it, I like that person so I'll hit them etc. The law is there to take those decisions away from us for the benefit of the whole population. We may not always agree with them but I don't agree with just breaking the ones we don't.

You are a free person, but you live in a country with laws, if you do not want to be bound by them, you're free to leave. I think it very arrogant you believe you're above the law, that you know better. I think it's a very immature view.

You mention children, if they're under the age of criminal responsibility, they can't be prosecuted which is one counter to this. The other is that the Home Office have issued a statement regarding the fixed penalties for the offence of riding on the pavement that they are to be used with discretion and not to be issued to anyone under the age of 16.

I hope you're not one of the cyclists which want cars to follow the rules, overtake properly and stay out of the green boxes. If they had the same mindset as you (and why shouldn't they), overtaking on the other side of the road is not as safe (for them) as brushing past a cyclist on the left side. Why should they stop in front of the boxes, cyclists may then appear which will cause them inconvenience and may the require more unsafe overtaking. As I pointed out, your earlier post called for more legislation to act, but if you don't care about it, why should anyone else?

Avatar
kie7077 | 11 years ago
0 likes

TFL/councils are really annoying sometimes, they time pedestrian lights so slow that many times the pedestrians have long gone and the cars have to stop at some lights which are completely devoid of pedestrians.

They need to be brought to book for this, it is a gross over prioritisation of motor traffic over pedestrian traffic which back-fires, causes danger to pedestrians because they rightly don't want to wait up to 2 minutes for the lights to change and so go traffic dodging and I don't want to have to stop at a pedestrian crossing that has no f**king people at it.  14

Avatar
a.jumper replied to kie7077 | 11 years ago
0 likes
kie7077 wrote:

TFL/councils are really annoying sometimes, they time pedestrian lights so slow that many times the pedestrians have long gone and the cars have to stop at some lights which are completely devoid of pedestrians.

Amen! I know one junction, 0-2minutes on the road, 4-16minutes if you wait at every red toucan light. That's from a council that claims to prioritise walking and cycling! Everyone jumps reds on that junction because they don't want to die of old age alongside the road.

Avatar
Belaroo | 11 years ago
0 likes

just give cyclists their own space on the road, our own lights and design the roads for all users. It really is crazy when there's so much research and evidence to show how much better it could be.
When I cycled in London, I stopped at all lights. Jumping lights isn't cool or clever. The hard part is remembering it's better to be alive than right.
I don't think realistically it will change that we will spend as much as they do in Holland. Transport just doesn't have priority. Until every cyclist in the country descends on Westminster in an gigantic demonstration, it will never change.

Avatar
banzicyclist2 | 11 years ago
0 likes

9 points all true, but running red lights is just asking for it. It makes me mad everytime I see a cyclist doing it, it puts them at risk and gives all the law abiding cyclists a bad name too; not to mention putting us at risk from irate motorists.

The highway code is very clear, cyclists must obay traffic signals and stop at red lights ......... period!

That's my view, and rant on this subject over and done with.

Avatar
kie7077 | 11 years ago
0 likes

I went through a red last Thursday, quite simply I would have probably been run over by the vehicle behind me who seemed to have been completely oblivious to the fact he'd jumped a red.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uj5t-eiTfBU

Avatar
evo-playa | 11 years ago
0 likes

I happened to be caught at the red light at Oval Station this morning. There was a PCSO hiding in the shadows. I presumed he was waiting to nab RLJs. But instead he hopped into the road, and handed a leaflet to the BMW driver who had decided that he would park in the ASL.

As he cross back I said thanks, and he said "it's only a warning this time". So hopefully the Met have been told to clamp down by Boris and co in city hall.

Avatar
Karbon Kev | 11 years ago
0 likes

What a twat. If you jump red lights, you will eventually hit something or something will hit you. Pretty common sense really.

Avatar
shay cycles | 11 years ago
0 likes

I get a bit fed up of repeated claims that sometimes it is safer not to stop at a red light. I get even more fed up that it is rarely challenged by the majority of cyclists who stop at red lights because (a) it is the law and (b) it is safer.

The only time it is safer not to stop at a red light is when you've already done something wrong putting you in a more vulnerable position. Sometimes we get it wrong, as do drivers, and we need to learn to accept when we've got it wrong rather that trying to justify it with excuses.

For example "it would not be safe to stop so quickly" really means "I was going too fast and didn't think I'd be ablen to stop quickly enough" or "riding through on red gets me out of the way of the traffic" really means "I'm not really sure how to handle the junction correctly and safely so I make sure I get across ahead of the traffic (assuming of course the chain doesn't skip, a gear misalign, a tyre spin or some other mechanical occurs)"

Red light jumping on bikes and in motor vehicles is against the law, it is dangerous, impatient and anti-social and in reality lots of us might do it occasionally; but we shouldn't!

Rant over!

Avatar
sihall34 replied to shay cycles | 11 years ago
0 likes
shay cycles wrote:

I get a bit fed up of repeated claims that sometimes it is safer not to stop at a red light. I get even more fed up that it is rarely challenged by the majority of cyclists who stop at red lights because (a) it is the law and (b) it is safer.

The only time it is safer not to stop at a red light is when you've already done something wrong putting you in a more vulnerable position. Sometimes we get it wrong, as do drivers, and we need to learn to accept when we've got it wrong rather that trying to justify it with excuses.

For example "it would not be safe to stop so quickly" really means "I was going too fast and didn't think I'd be ablen to stop quickly enough" or "riding through on red gets me out of the way of the traffic" really means "I'm not really sure how to handle the junction correctly and safely so I make sure I get across ahead of the traffic (assuming of course the chain doesn't skip, a gear misalign, a tyre spin or some other mechanical occurs)"

Red light jumping on bikes and in motor vehicles is against the law, it is dangerous, impatient and anti-social and in reality lots of us might do it occasionally; but we shouldn't!

Rant over!

I agree, jumping red lights is against the law, there is no REAL defence of it, regardless of the reasons people give to try and justify it.

Avatar
kie7077 replied to shay cycles | 11 years ago
0 likes

@ shay cycles

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uj5t-eiTfBU

Had no choice but to blow the light.

Lights where hidden by vehicles and I simply didn't see them until too late.

Perhaps the solution here is to have those high up lights over the centre of the road because buses and lorries can easily obscure one's view of the lights here.

http://goo.gl/maps/lEQaC

Note the parking space on the right, a lorry can park there and completely block the view of the light, All it takes is a bus on the left and the lights are both obscured, seems like bad design to me.

Avatar
shay cycles replied to kie7077 | 11 years ago
0 likes

Well, My youtube channel, I've watched the video and it confirms what I said before - I.e. you had already made the mistake which resulted in your "need" to jump the red light.

You were travelling too close to the van meaning that you couldn't see far enough ahead for the speed at which you were travelling. You should always be able to see clearly much further than your stopping and reacting distance; that is pretty basic when cycling or driving.

Once you had made that error then you had put yourself in the position of needing to jump the light - it wasn't anyone else's fault.

Avatar
Bez replied to shay cycles | 11 years ago
0 likes
shay cycles wrote:

The only time it is safer not to stop at a red light is when you've already done something wrong putting you in a more vulnerable position.

This. Absolutely this.

We even get an example a bit further down (or so it seems, correct me if I'm wrong):

jasecd wrote:

Crossing the stop line is safer in a number of instances such as when traffic is filling the ASL or an HGV is directly behind you and due to the height of the cab you may be obscured from the drivers view.

Now, either you got there first and the HGV pulled up behind - in which case the driver would have been able to see you - or the HGV got there first and you've gone past it and sat in front of it - which is, as Shay says, putting yourself in a vulnerable position. (And crossing the red line is, technically, jumping a red light. Also it's illegal to pass the vehicle at the front of a queue unless you're doing so via the feeder lane to an ASL, which has no solid line.)

The big problem we unfortunately have is that in the absence of an advance light phase for cyclists, ASLs are simply an invitation for cyclists to put themselves in one of two really, really bad positions: either in the gutter alongside traffic that's about to move off, or in the blind spot of an HGV cab. They're just some green paint that encourages what would, hopefully, without the paint be an obviously risky thing to do. By far the safest place to be (aside from in a proper, segregated piece of infrastructure of course) is in the middle of the lane, in front of a vehicle whose driver you can be absolutely certain has seen you, and to stay in the middle of the lane at least until the traffic is moving at your cruising speed.

But, just as when some people are in a car and don't have the patience to wait a couple of seconds behind someone on a bike, I guess when people are on bikes they often lack the patience to sit behind a car in a queue.

Avatar
therealsmallboy | 11 years ago
0 likes

I tend to agree with 'mikeprytherch', we all need to ride defensively, assume that nobody has seen us and that we are always in danger. Of course, this doesn't do much for the cycling movement as a whole, but will keep each of us safer on the road in the mean time. I honestly believe I've saved my own life a few times by just interpretting a likely dangerous move from someone else and got out of the way beforehand. Don't undertake long vehicles, don't jump reds, don't turn right in front of traffic unless you're clear and indicating. Simple stuff really and it means you're likely to get home and give the wife a kiss.

Most cyclists are drivers too, so most of us also appreciate the idiotic decisions of cyclists that we've seen. I've lost count of how many times I've been in my car and thought 'I wouldn't have done that' after witnessing somebody do something utterly thoughtless on their bike. Red light jumping, cutting cars up without looking behind or indicating etc...

It has to work both ways, we all (road users) need to be more responsible and the only way to receive the respect we deserve is if everyone is treated equally when they make a bad decision.

Be safe people.

Avatar
Geoffroid | 11 years ago
0 likes

I trust the City of London police also distribute videos showing the effects of other road users disobeying traffic laws.

As a cyclist you need to learn early on that just because a collision is not your fault, it does not mean you can't prevent it. Clearly this incident was the fault of the cyclist, but it would be nice if all road users aimed to prevent collisions regardless of who is at fault.

Avatar
northstar replied to Geoffroid | 11 years ago
0 likes
Geoffroid wrote:

I trust the City of London police also distribute videos showing the effects of other road users disobeying traffic laws.

As a cyclist you need to learn early on that just because a collision is not your fault, it does not mean you can't prevent it. Clearly this incident was the fault of the cyclist, but it would be nice if all road users aimed to prevent collisions regardless of who is at fault.

Avatar
zanf | 11 years ago
0 likes

Sorry but this guy is an idiot and has experienced first hand the result of cause and effect.

He bowled through a red light assuming it was going to change in his favour (suggesting that he wasnt familiar with the light sequence of that particular junction), does so at a speed where he could not stop in time and then has the gall to do a PSA in the style of a crackhead saying "hey kids, dont do drugs".

The vast majority of RLJ's I see go through junctions do so sheepishly and check traffic in all directions. The only ones I see doing so that would end up with injuries like this guys are the fucking idiots that frankly, have it coming.

As for the prosecution of cars in the ASZ: it will never happen.

The Met & CoL police dont want to touch it and Boris Johnson has said that they will be decriminalised and TfL will manage them. BJ has been mayor for 5 years and Ive heard a lot of waffle from the guy but nothing of substance has come about.

Pages

Latest Comments