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
13 comments
I have just heard that a rider was killed in the Seamon's CC open 25TT yesterday on the J2/9 - collision with a turning van is what I heard. No other details.
Very sad to hear of yet another cyclist being injured. I hope that she makes a good recovery, wishing her all the best.
Why is dashcam required when this is a dual carriageway and the driver hit the cyclist from behind? There are no mitigating circumstances that could absolve the driver from driving without due consideration surely? Hope she recovers well.
Especially given that it's now a requirement to have a rear strobe light to ride TTs and at 9.05AM will have been a clear, bright morning. It's a complete case of driver hits cyclist on clear day on a wide, and from google maps, almost dead-straight road. They cannot have been driving with due care and attention.
cough-cough-adjusting-entertainment-system... Because they "knew" there'd be nothing slower moving ahead of them.
Close to a junction so joined it / moved to leave it without checking properly?
We had a camera showing awful driving and the magistrates stated "no evidence to show......." being as it only showed the aftermath.
So I expect the Police want as much evidence as possible to prove the case (or blame the cyclist, you never know).
The police don't say if the van driver stopped or not. If not then they might need video to prove the van registration or, if it is a company van, who was behind the wheel at the time.
It doesn't say she was hit from behind.
No, but it does say they were "travelling in the same direction". Difficult to see then how the faster vehicle could have been anywhere other than behind prior to impact.
Could have been a side swipe.
Did you think through that statement?
You do you know that the driver was guilty of "careless driving"? There's every chance that they might be guilty of "dangerous driving". Maybe someone has dashcam footage of the van overtaking them at 100mph shortly before the collision or of the driver suddenley swerving into the cyclist.