Hit and run on the Natchez Trace

[HenryA]

http://www.tennessean.com/story/news/local/williamson/2017/07/09/hit-and-run-cyclist-natchez-trace-williamson-county-caught-video/462473001/

This should be interesting.

[smontanaro]

I'm way behind on updates to my spreadsheet, but my original impression was that relatively few bike/motor vehicle cranes resulting in death of the cyclist were hit-and-run. My feeling now is that it is actually quite high, between 25% & 50%.

[weisan]

.

[Louis]

They'll most likely try the "I didn't realize that I'd hit him" defense.

[Louis]

What happened to the rear wheel on the bike?

[Liberace]

What happened to the rear wheel on the bike?

The vehicle appears to have run over the rear wheel.

[OtayBW]

Oh yeah - this is on Federal property. That will be interesting....

That video was hard to watch for 2 reasons: 1) the driver fleeing was infuriating, and 2) (and don't kill the messenger) the cyclist appeared to be left, or well left of the center of the through lane which wouldn't have been my choice. That in no way excuses that douchbag from hitting him - seemingly willfully, if you ask me - but I would not ride in that position on that road and at that location from what I can see in the video unless I was intentionally taking the lane for some reason, or if I just spaced out and drifted over.

Hopefully the guy is OK. Hopefully that POS driver gets his ass handed to him and quick.

[Peter P.]

I'm sorry, but I don't care whether the law allows cyclists to take the entire lane on the Natchez Trace. From the video, I see the victim had no reason to occupy the entire lane. He was way too far to the left of his riding companion.

Do I think he was entirely at fault?-no. Partially at fault?-well no, at least not according to the law. But he was just begging to piss someone off.

Now I can't say pissing off the driver was what caused the accident-the driver could have been drunk for all I know, but it sure looks like the cyclist could have done considerably more to prevent this collision.

I will concede I can't understand how the driver could not pass the riders safely as he had an entire clear lane to do so.

I hope someone can keep us in the loop about this accident. I'd love to hear how Mr. Neely's case ends.

[cnighbor1]

FRANKLIN, Tenn. (WKRN) – An administrator of a private school in Nashville has been placed on a leave of absence after his arrest in connection with the hit-and-run of a bicyclist Saturday on Natchez Trace Parkway in Williamson County.

According to the National Park Service, 58-year-old Marshall Grant Neely III was booked into the Williamson County Detention Center on Saturday night, where he is charged with reckless endangerment, leaving the scene of an accident, failure to immediately notify of an accident, and failure to render aid. He could face federal charges, too

Marshall Grant Neely III

Neely was the Dean of Students at University School of Nashville, according to the Williamson County Sheriff’s Department.

The incident was captured on video by Greg Goodman, who provided the video to News 2.

Goodman said he recorded the crash on his GoPro as he rode a bicycle alongside his friend Tyler Noe around 11 a.m. Saturday.

Roughly eight miles south of the bridge, there are a number of signs posted that say bikers may use the full lane. But that did not stop the accident from happening.

In the video you can see a white truck passing the bikers giving them plenty of room.

A few seconds later, a black SUV hit Noe, throwing him to the ground. The driver never stopped, even though the video clearly shows he hit the cyclist.

Noe was treated at a hospital. He is now recovering at home after suffering cuts and bruises.

(Photo: WKRN)

The National Park Service has safety guidelines for bicyclists on the Natchez Trace Parkway online. They are supposed to share the road with drivers, and follow the same rules of the road, riding single file on the right.

The Williamson County Sheriff’s Department says Neely is out of jail on bond. He is scheduled to appear in court on July 20.

University School of Nashville issued the following statement to News 2 on Sunday afternoon:

“
Marshall Neely served as dean of students at University School of Nashville before transitioning to a part-time role this summer. He also is parent of two alumni. As of today, USN has placed Mr. Neely on leave of absence while we investigate the circumstances. All other matters related to his employment are confidential. We appreciate the work of law enforcement on this matter and will cooperate fully with their investigation. Our thoughts are with the cyclist and his family as well as the Neely family during this difficult time.

[tuscanyswe]

Another jerk willing to risk somebody else's life cause they think they are doing something the wrong way. So sad, luckily he dident look to be that badly hurt.
I love the fact that so many cyclists now are starting to ride with cameras (as do i). Sometime in the not so distant future drivers will not think they can get away with shi* like this as they apparently do now.

[R3awak3n]

I'm sorry, but I don't care whether the law allows cyclists to take the entire lane on the Natchez Trace. From the video, I see the victim had no reason to occupy the entire lane. He was way too far to the left of his riding companion.

Do I think he was entirely at fault?-no. Partially at fault?-well no, at least not according to the law. But he was just begging to piss someone off.

Now I can't say pissing off the driver was what caused the accident-the driver could have been drunk for all I know, but it sure looks like the cyclist could have done considerably more to prevent this collision.

I will concede I can't understand how the driver could not pass the riders safely as he had an entire clear lane to do so.

I hope someone can keep us in the loop about this accident. I'd love to hear how Mr. Neely's case ends.

What? The law says they can use the whole lane. Guy uses it and then its his fault? Sure he should not use it and take more space than needed so maybe he was being an ahole. The moment the driver flees the scene though, nothing before that evem matters anymore... there is no discussion, the deiver is at fault and is the huge ahole here

[verticaldoug]

I bet the driver was distracted texting or was drinking. It seems to me the only reason you leave the seen of an accident is you are drunk and hope for enough time to sober up.

[OtayBW]

What? The law says they can use the whole lane. Guy uses it and then its his fault? Sure he should not use it and take more space than needed so maybe he was being an ahole. The moment the driver flees the scene though, nothing before that evem matters anymore... there is no discussion, the deiver is at fault and is the huge ahole hereThe fleeing is one thing. Guy's a POS - non-negotiable.

Beyond that, yes - you can take the lane if necessary, but like most places, it also says you need to be as far right as you can ride safely. Sure, this guy was entitled to ride where he got hit, but my comment would be 'you want to be right, or do you want to get home in one piece'?

[weisan]

please don't pile on the folks who commented about the victim, you already know they are not defending the driver. Personally, I won't ride like that and if I am riding with someone that I care about who is riding like that, I would say something.

[carpediemracing]

This is one of those "I'm entitled" things that makes other hate cyclists. It would piss me off, that's for sure, but I'd still wait to pass safely.

In a situation like that the cyclist can't just think about themselves because, as posted earlier, they're just dying to piss someone off (perhaps literally, the former bit). Sure, the cyclist is right, dead right. Might not be worth it to "be right".

I borrowed that phrase from an article I saw (in Bicycle Retailer? Maybe 25 years ago?) about someone that got killed about 20 minutes after sundown and riding with only reflectors... the law stated taillights necessary 30 minutes after sundown and so the cyclist was in the right to ride with just a reflector. However that didn't change the fact that the rider was now dead.

In addition the park's site says cyclists need to be single file when in traffic. It doesn't take much effort to look back and single up when necessary.

It's also just common courtesy, something severely lacking everywhere in this situation. I'm not making light of hitting someone on a bike, it's worse than not singling up, but common courtesy from both sides would have made this into a total non-event.

Today two people strolled out casually directly in front of my car. They assumed I'd slow down and not strike them so they did it. I did as they assumed and didn't run them over. However, if I was an unreasonable person, I might have struck them. Best situation would be not to stroll out in front of a car going 30 mph.

[tuscanyswe]

please don't pile on the folks who commented about the victim, you already know they are not defending the driver. Personally, I won't ride like that and if I am riding with someone that I care about who is riding like that, I would say something.


This world needs a serious attitude change and its not going to start when ppl keep saying that the victims could have behaved better. Even if true its the wrong debate and will not lead to anything good imo.

Bit like "well she was wearing a short skirt and i just couldent help myself".

[gdw]

The article states that this was the first time the cyclist who was hit had ridden a bike since he was a kid.... I doubt he was intentionally trying to piss anyone off.

[tuscanyswe]

The article states that this was the first time the cyclist who was hit had ridden a bike since he was a kid.... I doubt he was intentionally trying to piss anyone off.

Or felt very "entitled". Perhaps rejuvenated tho. Maybe in car lingo thats the same

[makoti]

I bet the driver was distracted texting or was drinking. It seems to me the only reason you leave the seen of an accident is you are drunk and hope for enough time to sober up.

I saw this on FB & it was mentioned that this is possibly not an isolated incident for this guy. Witnesses said they saw a similar SUV "try" to hit a cyclist on the Trace before.

Quote from the guy who posted the video: "Three hours ago this person intentionally hit my friend Tyler Noe on Natchez Trace. We had a witness behind us who said he has seen this same Volvo try to hit someone else last week. Tyler is at the hospital and doing ok. He is one TOUGH DUDE!

[ultraman6970]

Last week was the 1st day my kid rode the road bike in the street with me before heading to the trail, he was scared as hell... 10 y/o... while riding 1st thing I told him...

- stay as close as you can from the edge of the road or the cars are going to run over me...

- ride with conviction, the driver see you like you know what are you doing they will drive with confidence around you, thats what I call "self shield".

- before getting to the 1st light asked him, what will happens if you ride in the middle of the lane??? _ I will get run over--- ok.. but why??? and here is when he couldnt give me a straight answer... the real answer to me and that like 99% of people like the dude that was run over in the video (sucks tho) is that many cyclist thinks they have the same rights (they technically do) than a car so they think they have the right to ride in the middle of the line. A car can't go to the edge of the road so they go in the middle... a driver is not expecting (specially the texting ones) to find a f.... cyclist riding in the middle of the road and thats why those geniuses have more chances to be run over by a car or a truck.... My kid said... OOOOOOOOOOOOHHHHHHHHHHHH....!!!!

Based in this little story I do agree with many, those two idiots were riding at least 2 feet way to the left. The car driver idiot that sure will lose (maybe he is fired already) his job being a dean in a school for not being more sharp and just go around the guys completely (cyclists sure were not confident in the road riding f... straight!!!) and by failing to stop....driver deserves a punishment for sure!!!

But the idiots riding the bike sure did something wrong and from the video they were taking 3/4 of that line when they can take a half or less.

Always in this accidents you have to see both sides. Look at the video, you can see the front wheel of the other rider going in and out of the frame. he was going like 1 or 2 feet of the median yellow line and the guy with the camera was at least 1 or 2 feet away from the edge.

I do not consider myself the sharper guy ever because im not but between you and me, the world is full of geniuses of bike riders like those two in the video and im grateful of their existence because they make me look like Einstein in steroids when I see stuff like that.

[bikinchris]

Last week was the 1st day my kid rode the road bike in the street with me before heading to the trail, he was scared as hell... 10 y/o... while riding 1st thing I told him...

- stay as close as you can from the edge of the road or the cars are going to run over me...

- ride with conviction, the driver see you like you know what are you doing they will drive with confidence around you, thats what I call "self shield".

- before getting to the 1st light asked him, what will happens if you ride in the middle of the lane??? _ I will get run over--- ok.. but why??? and here is when he couldnt give me a straight answer... the real answer to me and that like 99% of people like the dude that was run over in the video (sucks tho) is that many cyclist thinks they have the same rights (they technically do) than a car so they think they have the right to ride in the middle of the line. A car can't go to the edge of the road so they go in the middle... a driver is not expecting (specially the texting ones) to find a f.... cyclist riding in the middle of the road and thats why those geniuses have more chances to be run over by a car or a truck.... My kid said... OOOOOOOOOOOOHHHHHHHHHHHH....!!!!

Based in this little story I do agree with many, those two idiots were riding at least 2 feet way to the left. The car driver idiot that sure will lose (maybe he is fired already) his job being a dean in a school for not being more sharp and just go around the guys completely (cyclists sure were not confident in the road riding f... straight!!!) and by failing to stop....driver deserves a punishment for sure!!!

But the idiots riding the bike sure did something wrong and from the video they were taking 3/4 of that line when they can take a half or less.

Always in this accidents you have to see both sides. Look at the video, you can see the front wheel of the other rider going in and out of the frame. he was going like 1 or 2 feet of the median yellow line and the guy with the camera was at least 1 or 2 feet away from the edge.

I do not consider myself the sharper guy ever because im not but between you and me, the world is full of geniuses of bike riders like those two in the video and im grateful of their existence because they make me look like Einstein in steroids when I see stuff like that.

Oh, man. Where to start?
Cyclist inferiority complex?
(Ride like you are) Invisibility shield?

All of those are wrong.

Riding on the every edge of the road will get you run off the road far more often than asserting a position in the lane that you can defend as being safe and VISIBLE. People will always fill up all of the space they can drive into. When they think they can pass you while they are meeting a car head on, they WILL most likely do it. So riding on the very edge is a bad practice. Plus you are far less visible to overtaking traffic as well as traffic pulling out of side roads or passing head onto you.

Most people don't want to hit you. If they do really want to hit you, they will. No matter where you are on the road. Or even off. I know two people who were killed while standing on the side of the road. We put those kind of people in jail.

[shovelhd]

This will be one to watch, but my money says the perp will skate. Yes, he hit a bicycle, yes he ran. However, the bike was in traffic. The bike ignored the horn of the first vehicle. The bike was not riding single file in traffic as the law says to. All of this is on video and verifiable. Plea deal at best, fine and community service.

[Plum Hill]

Having ridden the Trace and Skyline Drive/Blue Ridge Parkway, these were some of the most dangerous places I've ridden due to the lookie-loo drivers. They're out there gawking at the scenery, not the road in front of them.

[rallizes]

This will be one to watch, but my money says the perp will skate. Yes, he hit a bicycle, yes he ran. However, the bike was in traffic. The bike ignored the horn of the first vehicle. The bike was not riding single file in traffic as the law says to. All of this is on video and verifiable. Plea deal at best, fine and community service.

For a felony hit and run?

[shovelhd]

For a felony hit and run?

A good defense attorney will tear that video apart.

[rallizes]

A good defense attorney will tear that video apart.

Somehow showing the driver not striking the cyclist, injuring the cyclist and not stopping?

You sure?

Everything up until the leaving is not necessarily criminal. When the driver keeps going everything changes.

[shovelhd]

Somehow showing the driver not striking the cyclist, injuring the cyclist and not stopping?

You sure?

Everything up until the leaving is not necessarily criminal. When the driver keeps going everything changes.

Let's see how it turns out, ok? What's your prediction? I gave you mine.

[Peter P.]

I bet the driver was distracted texting or was drinking. It seems to me the only reason you leave the seen of an accident is you are drunk and hope for enough time to sober up.

No; the trick is to get home and pound down some booze before the cops arrive. Then they can't charge DUI because you muddied the waters.

[R3awak3n]

Let's see how it turns out, ok? What's your prediction? I gave you mine.

I am with you. The cyclist is "fine" so drive will walk with a slap on the wrists.

[ultraman6970]

How much leverage the location of the accident has in the case??? At least the dude is not dead, he got lucky.

[ColonelJLloyd]

Ugh. That video made my stomach turn even though I knew it was coming.

[rousseau]

The driver is schitt-bucket. Beyond question.

That said, what on earth was the cyclist doing riding so far out into the road like that? I only ride two abreast on deserted country roads where you can go many minutes in between encountering solitary motorized vehicles, but even then we're practically touching shoulders.

But when we hear a car coming we squeeze together, and sometimes even revert to single file.

How could the cyclist in the video not get over when he heard the cars coming? The car driver should get jail time, and there is no excuse whatsoever for what he did...but that cyclist was a jackass and an idiot for riding like that.

[bicycletricycle]

Article says it was first day on the bike in years. Riding that wide for no reason may be legal a but it is not correct. The car before honked at him before passing and they made no effort to make room for it. Obviously riding double is in no way deserving of a bashing with a car.

We need to share with the cars, most people in cars share with us ( we just tend to concentrate on the ass holes)

Hope this dude gets more than a fine or something.

[oldpotatoe]

What? The law says they can use the whole lane. Guy uses it and then its his fault? Sure he should not use it and take more space than needed so maybe he was being an ahole. The moment the driver flees the scene though, nothing before that evem matters anymore... there is no discussion, the driver is at fault and is the huge ahole here

Agree with all above but...wouldn't want to be 'dead right'...gotta ride defensively, as if your life depended on it, because it does.

[bpiecuch]

Geez, I'm finding it shocking that a bunch of cyclists are "kind of" siding with the driver on this one.

I don't care if the cyclist was a seasoned professional or a 1st time rider.
I don't care if the cyclist was not riding as defensively as possible.
I don't care if the cyclist was too far into the lane.
I don't even care if it was a person standing in the middle of the road...

The driver visually identified the rider in the road, aimed his car at the rider, and drove into him. Legally or not legally riding in a road is no reason to attempt to kill the rider with a car. The driver hit the rider, then drove off with no regard. Would be okay with your spouse or child doing this to another rider?

There is no (moral) grey area here, he purposely drove into the cyclist. End of story. The only person who felt "entitled" here is the driver of the car.

[makoti]

Geez, I'm finding it shocking that a bunch of cyclists are "kind of" siding with the driver on this one.

I don't care if the cyclist was a seasoned professional or a 1st time rider.
I don't care if the cyclist was not riding as defensively as possible.
I don't care if the cyclist was too far into the lane.
I don't even care if it was a person standing in the middle of the road...

The driver visually identified the rider in the road, aimed his car at the rider, and drove into him. Legally or not legally riding in a road is no reason to attempt to kill the rider with a car. The driver hit the rider, then drove off with no regard. Would be okay with your spouse or child doing this to another rider?

There is no (moral) grey area here, he purposely drove into the cyclist. End of story. The only person who felt "entitled" here is the driver of the car.

While I am not SURE of the driver's intentions, it looked that way. And I agree with the rest of this. The road was quiet. You could see a good distance. Who hasn't slid up next to who you were riding with to talk on such a road? To listen to some people go on about how he was riding, I'm guessing they never leave their windtrainers.
This was fully the fault of the driver.

[weisan]

I find the constant insistence that we do not find fault with the cyclist in a motorist-related incident just as mind-boggling as Flash's constant public flogging of Peter Sagan.

Both share misguided priorities.

[Big Dan]

Sorry guys, no excuse for hitting the cyclist.
Can't believe some of the crap I'm reading here from fellow cyclist.

[djg21]

Geez, I'm finding it shocking that a bunch of cyclists are "kind of" siding with the driver on this one.

I don't care if the cyclist was a seasoned professional or a 1st time rider.
I don't care if the cyclist was not riding as defensively as possible.
I don't care if the cyclist was too far into the lane.
I don't even care if it was a person standing in the middle of the road...

The driver visually identified the rider in the road, aimed his car at the rider, and drove into him. Legally or not legally riding in a road is no reason to attempt to kill the rider with a car. The driver hit the rider, then drove off with no regard. Would be okay with your spouse or child doing this to another rider?

There is no (moral) grey area here, he purposely drove into the cyclist. End of story. The only person who felt "entitled" here is the driver of the car.

You make a lot of presumptions that are not supported by the 21 second video. There is no way of telling whether the driver “visually identified the rider,” or whether he intentionally “aimed” his car at anything. All we know is that the car struck the cyclist from behind. Let the police do their investigation.

[Lovetoclimb]

Geez, I'm finding it shocking that a bunch of cyclists are "kind of" siding with the driver on this one.

I don't care if the cyclist was a seasoned professional or a 1st time rider.
I don't care if the cyclist was not riding as defensively as possible.
I don't care if the cyclist was too far into the lane.
I don't even care if it was a person standing in the middle of the road...

The driver visually identified the rider in the road, aimed his car at the rider, and drove into him. Legally or not legally riding in a road is no reason to attempt to kill the rider with a car. The driver hit the rider, then drove off with no regard. Would be okay with your spouse or child doing this to another rider?

There is no (moral) grey area here, he purposely drove into the cyclist. End of story. The only person who felt "entitled" here is the driver of the car.

THANK YOU. I am rapidly losing faith in in my fellow cyclists the more I read this thread.

[tommyrod74]

I find the constant insistence that we do not find fault with the cyclist in a motorist-related incident just as mind-boggling as Flash's constant public flogging of Peter Sagan.

Both share misguided priorities.

I don't, because I am sick and tired of "both-siding" coming from fellow cyclists.

If both are wrong, but one person's "wrong" = at worst minor inconvenience to the other party involved, while the other = possible death to the other party (and, in this case, obvious malicious intent), why do you feel the need?

[Gummee]

THANK YOU. I am rapidly losing faith in in my fellow cyclists the more I read this thread.Makes 2 of us.

There is absolutely NO excuse for hitting anyone with your vehicle.
There is absolutely NO excuse for passes that are too close.
There is absolutely NO excuse for any of the things we see on a daily basis: passing into traffic, into blind corners, at the crest of a hill, etc

Regardless of method of transportation

M

[zap]

Park website states that one must ride single file when there is traffic.

Motorist will be fined. imnsho, license should be suspended (for leaving the scene) for 3 months. He can ride his bike to work.

[fuzzalow]

We, as bicyclists, will endlessly shoot ourselves in the foot, done in by the riding as conducted and displayed by the rider who was struck.

There are improved protections for bicyclists in the legal realm that have been put on the books over time. There is also the ongoing public opinion about bicyclists that makes it up to each of us to ride with an awareness not just for ourselves but also to ride in a manner that serves a bigger cause outside of ourselves.

No question the motor vehicle driver was guilty in negligent operation of his vehicle. The DMV law broken is already on the books.

The bicyclist struck is guilty of being ignorant and obtuse to the appearance of his behaviour which brought the consequence of being struck onto himself. Just because the rider is legally entitled to the entire lane doesn't mean that he should - riding right near the double yellow is giving the finger to drivers. There are lots of wackos out there that will view such actions as provocation and these type of confrontations are best avoided both for the safety of the rider and for the political damage to the image and perception of bicycling & bicyclists.

The real world instance that comes to mind is an example of a gay wedding couple that might choose to insist that a baker bake them a wedding cake knowing that the baker objects to their type of union. Legally the couple are right and legally the baker is required to bake the cake. Some couples, emboldened by their standing in protections now in the law, might take a militant stance and insist on the baker's compliance to the law and bake them their cake. This behaviour is the couple giving the finger to the baker.

So as far as both the cyclist and the couple being right about their rights but stupid and blind about everything else - why go there? Ride with self discipline and self restraint to not look like an asshole to drivers who already don't like seeing bicyclists on public roadways. Find another baker because they forgot they wanted a cake and went looking to pick a fight instead. There are bigger things going on here and it is not forever & always about YOU. (general you not you you)

Progress doesn't just happen all in one shot. It often takes time and little steps that amount to a much bigger journey for a much bigger goal than the small ball of taking the whole lane 'cos the law says you can or buying a cake 'cos the law says not to discriminate.

[makoti]

I find the constant insistence that we do not find fault with the cyclist in a motorist-related incident just as mind-boggling as Flash's constant public flogging of Peter Sagan.

Both share misguided priorities.

Do not allow blatant disregard of someones safety to be accepted in your desire to be "fair". Do you blame the road worker hit by a car while doing his job because he was "in the road"?

[djdj]

Geez, I'm finding it shocking that a bunch of cyclists are "kind of" siding with the driver on this one.

I don't care if the cyclist was a seasoned professional or a 1st time rider.
I don't care if the cyclist was not riding as defensively as possible.
I don't care if the cyclist was too far into the lane.
I don't even care if it was a person standing in the middle of the road...

The driver visually identified the rider in the road, aimed his car at the rider, and drove into him. Legally or not legally riding in a road is no reason to attempt to kill the rider with a car. The driver hit the rider, then drove off with no regard. Would be okay with your spouse or child doing this to another rider?

There is no (moral) grey area here, he purposely drove into the cyclist. End of story. The only person who felt "entitled" here is the driver of the car.

+1. The vehicle that passed a few seconds before obviously had no problem avoiding the cyclist. Was it illegal for the rider to be two abreast? Maybe. Was it discourteous for the rider to be in the middle of the lane? Perhaps. However, nothing excuses the driver's actions.

[OtayBW]

I do not believe that anyone here is siding with, or making excuses for, the driver in any way, shape, or form. To even think such a thing I find astounding. Without weighing or qualifying any of the factors involved, there were bad decisions made on both ends of the equation. To think otherwise is shortsighted, IMO....

[kookmyers]

It would be interesting to be able to analyze the sound of the horns of the truck and the Volvo. My guess is that it was the Volvo's horn we heard.

[AngryScientist]

not familiar with the Natchez Trace, but from what i can gather it's a "scenic highway".

IMO, the driver should be held more accountable for his actions on such a road because it should be the driver's responsibility to be more vigilant and patient on a scenic highway that is frequented by cyclists.

does anyone know what the speed limit is on this stretch of road?

[makoti]

I think I read it was 40mph for most of the Trace.

[Jgrooms]

The max speed limit is 50. In some areas its 40.

Any driver familiar w the NTP expects to encounter cyclist. It is a NP & promoted extensively by the NPS for cycling use.

While I haven't seen all 400 plus miles, the sections I have seen had no shoulder, were narrow & presented challenging sight lines.

While I don't know where this happened, my experience with locals where I was indicated they avoid it & use faster alternatives that are typically available.

So my take is you have an entitled driver expecting to use the Trace as a normal transportation route, which it most assuredly is not.

Combined with a novice rider who thought this would be a great place to go ride.

Fortunately he wasn't crushed under the car and killed.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[tommyrod74]

Do not allow blatant disregard of someones safety to be accepted in your desire to be "fair". Do you blame the road worker hit by a car while doing his job because he was "in the road"?

It was OK to sexually harass her, because she was wearing a really short skirt.

[Gummee]

I do not believe that anyone here is siding with, or making excuses for, the driver in any way, shape, or form. To even think such a thing I find astounding. Without weighing or qualifying any of the factors involved, there were bad decisions made on both ends of the equation. To think otherwise is shortsighted, IMO....

Sure they are: 'the cyclist shouldn't have been in the lane' etc Effectifvely, siding with the idiot that ran over a bicyclist because 'they were in the way,;

M

[OtayBW]

Sure they are: 'the cyclist shouldn't have been in the lane' etc Effectifvely, siding with the idiot that ran over a bicyclist because 'they were in the way,;

MNope - I don't buy that they are in any way excusing what the driver did.

[gdw]

No one has sided with the driver. They have simply pointed out that the cyclists should have ridden defensively and not take the whole lane. That is their opinion and does not condone the actions of the driver in any way.

[shovelhd]

No one has sided with the driver. They have simply pointed out that the cyclists should have ridden defensively and not take the whole lane. That is their opinion and does not condone the actions of the driver in any way.

I didn't even go that far. I made no judgement on either party. I said that the video has enough evidence in it to make a case for BOTH parties, and historically, if the cyclist can be in any way proven to be partially at fault, the driver usually gets minimal punishment. I sincerely hope that I am wrong in this case.

[holliscx]

The driver slammed into the guy because he didn't move after the white truck honked. The cyclist was practically straddling the yellow line which would be like riding 4 abreast. I went to college in Tennessee and rode the Natchez Trace. You can't fault the cyclist much on such a low-travelled road or condone the driver's dreadful behavior but this is classic TN road rage. I'll bet you a Coca-Cola on the driver's political party.

[Plum Hill]

The video was shown on CBS Morning News in the 90 second teaser at the beginning of the show.
I didn't see the coverage, choosing to get out for a ride before the temps soared.

[daker13]

I love the fact that so many cyclists now are starting to ride with cameras (as do i). Sometime in the not so distant future drivers will not think they can get away with shi* like this as they apparently do now.

I just did my first ride with a Fly6 yesterday and I totally agree that this is the future. Whether this guy skates or not, he has his name in the paper, video on the web, and a bunch of cyclists talking about him, and that's a pretty strong disincentive, too.

[zap]

edit

I'll bet you a Coca-Cola on the driver's political party.

Dean at a local college........I don't know. In my experience (purely based on stickers adhered to backs of automobiles), stupid aggressive drivers come from varied political interests.

:rolleyes:

[djg21]

Nope - I don't buy that they are in any way excusing what the driver did.

At the very least, the driver was negligent. The video makes that much clear.

Whether the driver should be criminally culpable is another issue. As that question largely revolves around the driver’s state of mind, i.e., were his actions intentional or undertaken with reckless disregard for human life. We just don’t have sufficient facts to make that call based on the 21 second video and on an unreliable statement from another driver who purportedly saw either the same vehicle, or perhaps a similar vehicle, target cyclists previously.

And no, the fact that someone rides a bike doesn’t given them a pass for riding foolishly. This incident could have been avoided. There are asshole drivers who do have it in for cyclists. Why give them an opportunity?

[benb]

I ride really defensively, but also adhere to the Effective Cycling principles pretty religiously and am assertive and all that, but you can't fault the cyclist here at all.

You're not supposed to hit people with your car, no matter what. It wouldn't matter if he and his buddy were butt naked in the middle of the road high on drugs playing cards, you don't hit them.

I think we all cling to this "cyclist wasn't being defensive enough" fallacy because we are afraid of getting hit and it's a mental coping tool. "I ride defensively, I'm a skilled rider, I'm not like that guy in the video, so I won't get hit."

It's a fallacy.. if the driver is going to hit you they're going to hit you IMO, and unfortunately I've been hit when doing "everything right" so it's personal in my case. We're all just waiting for our number to come up. All the things we do might help our odds a little bit but they don't matter much if a driver is super malicious or negligent.

[redir]

This world needs a serious attitude change and its not going to start when ppl keep saying that the victims could have behaved better. Even if true its the wrong debate and will not lead to anything good imo.

Bit like "well she was wearing a short skirt and i just couldent help myself".

Exactly!

Thank you.

I can't believe people blaming the victim like that. THis is exactly why, mark my word, this guy who just committed attempted murder will get off with a slap on the wrist. It is ALWAYS the cyclist fault if for any other reason the judge, jury, prosecutors, and everyone else in that courtroom hates us.

[bshell]

And I'm choosing not to watch/listen to the video because my coping tool is threadbare at this point. I've been taken down three times in my 29 years on road bikes... I couldn't begin to guess as to how many collisions I've avoided due to negligent acts I have anticipated.

There is one basic responsibility for driving. Do everything possible not to hit stuff.

If there is a farm tractor, a horse drawn cart, an animal, a boulder, or **even a lowly person on a bike** you do what it takes to pass safely. Period.

[dekindy]

It is clear that with normal driving skills the car would not have hit the cyclist and that the cyclist appeared to be riding predictably and on the proper side of the road. One thing that is seldom brought up is how difficult it is to judge speed and distance when there is such a disparity between vehicle size and speed and that drivers rarely encounter cyclists and do not get much practice.

I don't know why pointing out that the cyclist was crowding the center line when he was supposed to be riding single file would be viewed as a problem. I ride exclusively on the road and also drive a car and I am sick and tired of cyclists not following the rules and assuming car drivers are fault whenever an accident occurs. It is always car strikes cyclist, or car kills cyclist, never cyclist doing anything wrong. Just the other day I did something incredibly stupid and luckily was not struck by a car. Just a few minutes prior to me doing something stupid, I had to ride defensively to avoid being struck in a roundabout.

I also don't know how anyone viewing this video could possibly determine intent or cause of the accident, or who the heck's horn was blowing. Someone mentioned that another motorist witness the car previously targeting cyclists?

[tommyrod74]

It is clear that with normal driving skills the car would not have hit the cyclist and that the cyclist appeared to be riding predictably and on the proper side of the road. One thing that is seldom brought up is how difficult it is to judge speed and distance when there is such a disparity between vehicle size and speed and that drivers rarely encounter cyclists and do not get much practice.

I don't know why pointing out that the cyclist was crowding the center line when he was supposed to be riding single file would be viewed as a problem. I ride exclusively on the road and also drive a car and I am sick and tired of cyclists not following the rules and assuming car drivers are fault whenever an accident occurs. It is always car strikes cyclist, or car kills cyclist, never cyclist doing anything wrong. Just the other day I did something incredibly stupid and luckily was not struck by a car. Just a few minutes prior to me doing something stupid, I had to ride defensively to avoid being struck in a roundabout.

I also don't know how anyone viewing this video could possibly determine intent or cause of the accident, or who the heck's horn was blowing. Someone mentioned that another motorist witness the car previously targeting cyclists?

Well, we can certainly determine intent once the "accident" occurred. The driver's intent was to get the hell out of there, the life of the human he just hit was of no concern in comparison with concern for his own.

I'd love to know what world you live in that is full of news reports blaming drivers, or drivers being punished for hitting a cyclist. Hell, even when a cyclist is mowed down by a drunk, the news always has to insert a "the cyclist was not wearing a helmet at the time", as if that means the drunk was entitled to run him down.

[Jgrooms]

^ This! People he drove off. You believe he didn't know he hit something? If so, then his license needs revoked if that's going to be his 'defense'!




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[BobO]

Well, we can certainly determine intent once the "accident" occurred. The driver's intent was to get the hell out of there, the life of the human he just hit was of no concern in comparison with concern for his own.

According to the arrest affidavit, Marshall Grant Neely III, 58, told the National Park Service rangers that a man and woman were standing in the road on July 8 at 11 a.m. He reported that the two threw the bicycle into his black Volvo.

http://www.wbir.com/news/local/hit-and-run-on-cyclist-on-natchez-trace-in-williamson-county-caught-on-video/455314691

I'm going to go out on a limb and say that the driver thought he could get away with this. This also hints at premeditation.

It also notes in this article that the cyclist was a novice. So we have a novice cyclist on a roadway with signage that states he can use the full lane, and he gets run over.

[Jgrooms]

http://www.newschannel5.com/news/natchez-trace-driver-responds-to-video-of-cyclist-being-hit

Claims he didn't know he hit him & now, of course, he is the victim of death threats.

Its a wonderful world!

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Jgrooms]

Right on the home page, imagine, cyclists!

https://www.nps.gov/natr/index.htm


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[BobO]

http://www.newschannel5.com/news/natchez-trace-driver-responds-to-video-of-cyclist-being-hit

Claims he didn't know he hit him & now, of course, he is the victim of death threats.

Its a wonderful world!

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The lies are piling up.

[Matthew]

You hit a grown adult on a bike and you didn't know it?!!!! I know when a rock gets flung into my car because I CAN HEAR IT and you didn't hear/feel a bike and human?!! ***! This POS is full of it.

[OtayBW]

You hit a grown adult on a bike and you didn't know it?!!!! I know when a rock gets flung into my car because I CAN HEAR IT and you didn't hear/feel a bike and human?!! ***! This POS is full of it.
Yep - I just heard the interview with the driver linked above. POS is absolutely correct....

[djdj]

It wouldn't matter if he and his buddy were butt naked in the middle of the road high on drugs playing cards . . .

Hey, I resemble that remark!

[BobO]

He didn't know he hit him, but, he did know that the two people standing on the side of the road threw a bike at him? Keep talking buddy, it's working well for ya. :p

[djdj]

http://www.wbir.com/news/local/hit-and-run-on-cyclist-on-natchez-trace-in-williamson-county-caught-on-video/455314691

I'm going to go out on a limb and say that the driver thought he could get away with this. This also hints at premeditation.

It also notes in this article that the cyclist was a novice. So we have a novice cyclist on a roadway with signage that states he can use the full lane, and he gets run over.

This report says he told the police that the riders threw the bike at his car.

In the audio report, he says he didn't know he hit anything.

Just a slight contradiction.

[GregL]

It never stops amazing me how many sociopathic individuals are out there driving on the roads. Be careful and ride like every driver will deliberately try to hit you! Always have an escape path in mind.

Greg

[Jgrooms]

This report says he told the police that the riders threw the bike at his car.



In the audio report, he says he didn't know he hit anything.



Just a slight contradiction.



Two separate incidents. Plus there is a report that he had another altercation, but maybe this bike throwing one is the same? I know that my first thought is to throw my bike ;-)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[R3awak3n]

We hit a deer a month ago, trust me, you know that you hit something. Unless this 50 year old dude was bumping the new 21savage with his 2 woofers in the trunk, he knew he hit something. Also, do you not look at your mirrors? This whole thing stinks.

[djdj]

Two separate incidents. Plus there is a report that he had another altercation, but maybe this bike throwing one is the same? I know that my first thought is to throw my bike ;-)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Same incident:

NASHVILLE - UPDATE JULY 10, 2017: The University School of Nashville administrator charged with hitting a cyclist on the Natchez Trace Parkway in Williamson County this weekend claims the bicycle was thrown at him.

[makoti]

http://www.newschannel5.com/news/natchez-trace-driver-responds-to-video-of-cyclist-being-hit

Claims he didn't know he hit him & now, of course, he is the victim of death threats.

Its a wonderful world!

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

He didn't know he hit them, but he knows they threw a bike at his car? You gotta think this will be an easy one for the prosecutors.

[Jgrooms]

He didn't know he hit them, but he knows they threw a bike at his car? You gotta think this will be an easy one for the prosecutors.



Got it. Lots of conflicting reports. Its wonderful what video does. Otherwise, this is a non story imo.

However, there is still the report that a car similar to the perp's was hassling cyclists prior to this.

[Matthew]

What's also disgusting is the comments by people on other sites where this story is posted. Overwhelmingly negative toward cyclists. I always tell myself to not look at them but then I do. From the jerk got what he deserved to the gay clothing we wear to we think we own the road it is very frightening to think people feel this way. I often think the world is going to s&*# in a hurry.

[William]

If anything it's a very important example of the benefit of having a video camera when you ride.





William

[BobO]

What's also disgusting is the comments by people on other sites where this story is posted. Overwhelmingly negative toward cyclists. I always tell myself to not look at them but then I do. From the jerk got what he deserved to the gay clothing we wear to we think we own the road it is very frightening to think people feel this way. I often think the world is going to s&*# in a hurry.

I wouldn't put too much stock in the rants of a bunch of keyboard cowboys. People tend to be less brave in person.

[kevinvc]

I can't look at the video, but, from what others have said and looking at the photos, he seems to be riding on the left side of his traffic lane. When I'm riding on a road like this one, I'll usually stay about 3' from the right side of the lane so that I have room to go in either direction if something unexpected comes up. If there's a car behind me I'll move a little to the right, but no way am I hugging that white line when there's no shoulder.

I'll possibly move even farther left if there is a car coming up behind me if I'm about to enter a blind curve. It's amazing to me how many cars are willing to pass me even when they can't see what's coming around the corner straight at them. If there happens to be an oncoming vehicle, guess which way they're going to swerve (hint: towards the small squishy thing on the right). Not saying that's what's going on here, just countering some of the "stay all the way to the left" comments I've seen here and elsewhere.

In this instance, courtesy would say that the cyclist should have been farther to the right. But that's it, just courtesy. No excuse for the driver to be so upset or obtuse as to try to pass unsafely or, obviously, hit the cyclist intentionally.

I don't think any video can say definitively if he hit the cyclist intentionally, meant to buzz pass him, was distracted by his phone, etc. His comments don't indicate he's particularly bright, though. Giving contradictory statements to what happened aren't going to help his case. IMO, that's a good thing since it could potentially improve the odds of him getting more than a couple hundred dollar fine and a few hours of community service.

[OtayBW]

I don't think any video can say definitively if he hit the cyclist intentionally, meant to buzz pass him, was distracted by his phone, etc.Sorry, but unless I'm mistaken, it's been pretty well established that someone threw a bike at him. :rolleyes:

[Jgrooms]

I wouldn't put too much stock in the rants of a bunch of keyboard cowboys. People tend to be less brave in person.



True, however, I believe its been pretty well est that SM/comments are not exactly having a positive role in how people feel about 'others'. I think the online rant re cyclists spills over into the 'real' world.

On a positive note, imo, increased publishing of video one would think might have a sobering effect on people.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[sales guy]

Here's a good link to everything from the Heavy.

https://heavy.com/news/2017/07/marshall-grant-neely-tyler-noe-natchez-tennessee-bicyclist-hit-and-run-video/

[oldpotatoe]

This report says he told the police that the riders threw the bike at his car.

In the audio report, he says he didn't know he hit anything.

Just a slight contradiction.

Yup, said he didn't see 'biker', didn't hear the 'hit'. And lying to his charges.

[Mr. Pink]

Well, I think cycling has lost a new, young participant for probably forever.

"Hey man, tomorrow's gonna be really nice. Why don't we rent you a bike and go for a ride on the Nachez? It's pretty safe there. They let you use the whole road!"

[Gummee]

True, however, I believe its been pretty well est that SM/comments are not exactly having a positive role in how people feel about 'others'. I think the online rant re cyclists spills over into the 'real' world. Behind the wheel and insulated from the world inside your quiet, safety-caged car, it certainly spills out. There's really no repercussions for you from inside your car if you hit anything any more.

On a positive note, imo, increased publishing of video one would think might have a sobering effect on people.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I hate to say 'you're dreaming,' but you're dreaming. 'Lookit them damn cyclists! Think they own the road! That guy 'taught them a lesson!'

...and read the comments in this thread. 'The cyclists shouldn't have been riding like that' etc etc etc

Nope. Ain't nuthin gonna change till more people are riding bicycles. More butts on saddles = more safety for us all

M

[Mr. Pink]

Nope. Ain't nuthin gonna change till more people are riding bicycles. More butts on saddles = more safety for us all

M

You're dreaming.

[shovelhd]

If anything it's a very important example of the benefit of having a video camera when you ride.

William

I don't ride without one, however if that was me and my video, it would only see social media after it was admitted as evidence for a trial. I don't get why you would give a known liar more facts to base his lies on.

[Jgrooms]

Behind the wheel and insulated from the world inside your quiet, safety-caged car, it certainly spills out. There's really no repercussions for you from inside your car if you hit anything any more.





I hate to say 'you're dreaming,' but you're dreaming. 'Lookit them damn cyclists! Think they own the road! That guy 'taught them a lesson!'



...and read the comments in this thread. 'The cyclists shouldn't have been riding like that' etc etc etc



Nope. Ain't nuthin gonna change till more people are riding bicycles. More butts on saddles = more safety for us all



M



You don't think the crap the perp is going to endure gives others pause to their actions if they believe it might be captured on video?

I can tell you first hand it does. Instead of getting into a verbal w a dick head driver, take out your phone & just pretend you are recording. They move along pretty quick. Every time.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[elcolombiano]

You hit a grown adult on a bike and you didn't know it?!!!! I know when a rock gets flung into my car because I CAN HEAR IT and you didn't hear/feel a bike and human?!! ***! This POS is full of it.
I can hear when a bug hits my car.

[djg21]

I don't ride without one, however if that was me and my video, it would only see social media after it was admitted as evidence for a trial. I don't get why you would give a known liar more facts to base his lies on.

That’s sound advice.

Did you end up getting the Fly12?

[shovelhd]

No, I have a rear Fly6 only. The Fly12 is way too big for my bars. 40cm, SRM PC8, and a Di2 junction A. No room underneath.

[djg21]

Same here. I was really hoping for a Fly6-type light with a clear lens or one with no light at all but Cycliq doesn’t appear to be interested.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Anarchist]

Somewhere today ( can't find it now) the driver claimed that he did not see the cyclist but he did see people on the side of the road throwing their bikes at him (?) ...

Interesting re-think ........

He then was quoted as saying that he hoped the cyclist "who collided with my car" was OK.

........ collided with my car .........

It's always all you damn cyclists, throwing your bikes at cars and throwing yourselves in front of them.

[93KgBike]

From the video, I see the victim had no reason to occupy the entire lane. He was way too far to the left of his riding companion.

At the very least, those stills look shot via a fisheye-lens - so can you say anything accurate about what happened? Why would you even try? Lecture first, revise later? SMH.

[moose8]

I talked to an acquaintance who is not a cyclist who lives ten minutes from that road and he told me that he would never use it because it's always full of cyclists and everyone around there knows that so locals don't usually drive on it. He also said it's all over the news there and the driver is coming off looking really bad to everyone.

[shovelhd]

Got it. Lots of conflicting reports. Its wonderful what video does. Otherwise, this is a non story imo.

However, there is still the report that a car similar to the perp's was hassling cyclists prior to this.

No doubt that his police report is damning. It's so far out there, I don't know how he will defend it other than "I misspoke". Not good for him. If the prosecution can find other witnesses that can place him definitively behaving badly around cyclists, or making derogatory statements about cyclists, then he's in even more trouble.

[josephr]

I don't ride without one, however if that was me and my video, it would only see social media after it was admitted as evidence for a trial. I don't get why you would give a known liar more facts to base his lies on.

interesting perspective... the public outrage factor seems to have had an affect in terms of putting the perp's entire life at risk -- he's suspended from his job and he certainly can't hide from friends/family. The justice system takes so long these days just to get a court date and the desire for social justice is strong these days. However, like you suggest....if you really want to make this guy pay...play it slow...have him and witnesses interviewed several times to separate out as many lies as possible....then let the video be the knock-out punch he never saw coming.

[redir]

interesting perspective... the public outrage factor seems to have had an affect in terms of putting the perp's entire life at risk -- he's suspended from his job and he certainly can't hide from friends/family. The justice system takes so long these days just to get a court date and the desire for social justice is strong these days. However, like you suggest....if you really want to make this guy pay...play it slow...have him and witnesses interviewed several times to separate out as many lies as possible....then let the video be the knock-out punch he never saw coming.

Yup a good detective will try and get you to 'admit' to as many lies as possible.

[earlfoss]

I wonder how the perp would feel if the roles were reversed, or if it was a loved one struck by a car in the same situation.

[shovelhd]

interesting perspective... the public outrage factor seems to have had an affect in terms of putting the perp's entire life at risk -- he's suspended from his job and he certainly can't hide from friends/family. The justice system takes so long these days just to get a court date and the desire for social justice is strong these days. However, like you suggest....if you really want to make this guy pay...play it slow...have him and witnesses interviewed several times to separate out as many lies as possible....then let the video be the knock-out punch he never saw coming.

Well, his attorney is going to see it in discovery, well before the trial, but I think this whole social media public outrage trend eventually works against the prosecution. It opens the door for the defense to say "he lost his job, he's had death threats, he's remorseful, he's paid at least a part of his price". If I was the victim I'd want zero price paid until the judge sentences him, and maximum price when it counts.

I'm not an attorney blah blah blah.

[ColonelJLloyd]

well, his attorney is going to see it in discovery, well before the trial, but i think this whole social media public outrage trend eventually works against the prosecution. It opens the door for the defense to say "he lost his job, he's had death threats, he's remorseful, he's paid at least a part of his price". If i was the victim i'd want zero price paid until the judge sentences him, and maximum price when it counts.

I'm not an attorney blah blah blah.

+1

[dekindy]

The fleeing is one thing. Guy's a POS - non-negotiable.

Beyond that, yes - you can take the lane if necessary, but like most places, it also says you need to be as far right as you can ride safely. Sure, this guy was entitled to ride where he got hit, but my comment would be 'you want to be right, or do you want to get home in one piece'?

Several replies have expressed this so I am not picking on you just using your quote because it was the only issue referenced. Natchez Parkway rules prohibit cyclists from riding abreast unless it is posted that it is legal to do so. Without knowledge of this particular stretch of road, we don't know if riding abreast is allowed here.

https://www.nps.gov/natr/learn/management/code-of-federal-regulations-bicycles.htm
See #4 under Prohibited Acts.

[ORMojo]

Here's another part of the driver's ever-changing story that I can't reconcile. If, as he claims, he didn't see the bicyclist(s) ("I did not see the man"), then why was he driving so far over the yellow line?

[shovelhd]

Here's another part of the driver's ever-changing story that I can't reconcile. If, as he claims, he didn't see the bicyclist(s) ("I did not see the man"), then why was he driving so far over the yellow line?

Good question.

[OtayBW]

Several replies have expressed this so I am not picking on you just using your quote because it was the only issue referenced. Natchez Parkway rules prohibit cyclists from riding abreast unless it is posted that it is legal to do so. Without knowledge of this particular stretch of road, we don't know if riding abreast is allowed here.

https://www.nps.gov/natr/learn/management/code-of-federal-regulations-bicycles.htm
See #4 under Prohibited Acts.
I hear you about restricted riding two-abreast. But if I recall correctly, a rider can still take the the lane when needed, which was apparently what happened here ('when needed' notwithstanding...). Personally, I've ridden all of the BR Parkway and Skyline Drive as well as parts of the Natchez Trace, and aside from the scenery, they are about my least favorite places to ride. No shoulders, bonehead RV operators, distracted 'gawkers', dark tunnels, etc.

This Natchez trace situation just seems to be a special case of when 'stupid meets a$$hole'.

[r_mutt]

liar.

:mad:

[Mr. Pink]

Yeah, but it's a trend these days for successful people. What's to lose?

[Mark McM]

The accused hit and run driver now facing federal charges:

http://wkrn.com/2017/07/28/driver-accused-in-cyclist-hit-and-run-facing-federal-charges/?utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook_WKRN-TV_Nashville

[Bruce K]

This will not be a slap on the wrist.

BK

[kookmyers]

This will not be a slap on the wrist.

BK

I sincerely hope you are right sir.

[ColonelJLloyd]

The accused hit and run driver now facing federal charges:

http://wkrn.com/2017/07/28/driver-accused-in-cyclist-hit-and-run-facing-federal-charges/?utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook_WKRN-TV_Nashville

I should infer from the article that the driver's son "turned him in" to the police, who then went to the driver's home to find him unconscious in his home?

If so, sounds like the driver may have employed this tactic Peter P. mentioned.

No; the trick is to get home and pound down some booze before the cops arrive. Then they can't charge DUI because you muddied the waters.

[redir]

Those are some serious charges. I'll still stand by what I said and wait for the outcome. He's still claiming that he 'didn't see nothin' and I've seen that work as an excuse too many times in our court system.

Interesting that his son basically turned him in. At least someone in the family has morals.

[gdw]

I should infer from the article that the driver's son "turned him in" to the police, who then went to the driver's home to find him unconscious in his home?

If so, sounds like the driver may have employed this tactic Peter P. mentioned.

The charges he's facing are very serious and if he was sober or can't prove he was impaired when the accident occurred the penalty should be more severe. Drunks behave irrationally, sober people are cognizant of their actions.

[BobO]

Marshall Grant Neely III, 58, has been charged with assault with a deadly weapon, providing a false statement to a federal agent and destruction of evidence. The charges carry a maximum prison sentence of 37 years.

I have concerns. The providing false statements and destruction of evidence are easy, but, neither is likely to carry any serious time in prison. While assault with a deadly weapon may be the appropriate charge, how is the prosecution going to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he intended to assault the victim with his car? We can certainly surmise what was going on in his head, and we are probably right that this was a red-mist assault with a car. But, we're not in his head and it's going to be hard to prove.

I would like to see some additional fallback charges centered around negligence which turns his "I didn't see him," defense into a liability.

[Tony Edwards]

Those are some serious charges. I'll still stand by what I said and wait for the outcome. He's still claiming that he 'didn't see nothin' and I've seen that work as an excuse too many times in our court system.

Interesting that his son basically turned him in. At least someone in the family has morals.

The fact that he removed decals from the back of the car upon returning home, but before his arrest, pretty well nullifies the defense that he didn't know he hit the cyclist in my view, and yes, I am a lawyer.

[kookmyers]

While assault with a deadly weapon may be the appropriate charge, how is the prosecution going to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he intended to assault the victim with his car?

An automobile is a deadly weapon and he assaulted the rider with it. How is driving into someone (in the conditions shown in the video) not the same as pulling the trigger of a gun? Seems very cut and dry to me.

[BobO]

An automobile is a deadly weapon and he assaulted the rider with it. How is driving into someone (in the conditions shown in the video) not the same as pulling the trigger of a gun? Seems very cut and dry to me.

For example if I were trying to lie my way out of this;

"I was fixated on missing the cyclist to the right side of the road, I did not see the other cyclist, I'm sorry, it won't happen again."

Deliberately driving into someone is assault with a deadly weapon, we all agree on this. Now, prove that's what he did beyond a reasonable doubt. The risk is that by overcharging him with something that will take some doing to prove to a jury leaves the door open for a not guilty verdict. Take the negligence in the criminal trial, its a lock, and we need victories.

[yinzerniner]

I have concerns. The providing false statements and destruction of evidence are easy, but, neither is likely to carry any serious time in prison. While assault with a deadly weapon may be the appropriate charge, how is the prosecution going to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he intended to assault the victim with his car? We can certainly surmise what was going on in his head, and we are probably right that this was a red-mist assault with a car. But, we're not in his head and it's going to be hard to prove.

I would like to see some additional fallback charges centered around negligence which turns his "I didn't see him," defense into a liability.
Copy and pasted from user solo at slowtwitch, the full statement regarding the charges. Seems like they have some pretty good evidence that the hit and run was intentional, and the biggest possible charges are from obstruction of justice:


This is remarkable--subject arrested federally. US Attorney Jack Smith is an IM athlete and active ST member...

Jack Smith

Acting United States Attorney

MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE

__________________________________________________ _____________________



FRANKLIN, TENNESSEE MAN FACING FEDERAL CHARGES RESULTING FROM HIT & RUN OF BICYCLIST ON NATCHEZ TRACE PARKWAY


NASHVILLE, Tenn. – July 28, 2017 – Marshall Neely, III, 58, of Franklin, Tenn., was indicted yesterday by a federal grand jury and charged with reckless aggravated assault; lying to a federal agent; and obstruction of justice, announced Acting U.S. Attorney Jack Smith of the Middle District of Tennessee.

The federal indictment is a result of an incident on July 8, 2017, on the Natchez Trace Parkway, where a bicyclist was struck by a vehicle and injured. The driver of the vehicle, later identified as Marshall Neely, III, failed to stop and left the scene of the incident.

“Middle Tennessee is an area where bicycle traffic is abundant and growing daily,” said Acting U.S. Attorney Jack Smith. “Our roads are used both by recreational bicyclists as well as a growing number of citizens who use alternative methods of transportation to get to and from their workplaces. To achieve the sense of community that we all want for our area we must respect the rights of others in our community to live and move about the area. That means drivers of automobiles respecting the right of bicyclists to use our roads and bicyclists respecting the right of drivers to use our roads as well. The wanton recklessness exhibited by this defendant could easily have taken the life of the victim in this case. Such indifference to human life cannot be tolerated as it places all our bicycling citizens in grave danger. Whenever such blatant disregard for our citizen’s safety occurs on roadways under federal jurisdiction, you can expect that this U.S. Attorney’s Office will move swiftly to seek the appropriate avenue of justice.”

According to the indictment, on the morning of July 8, 2017, two individuals were riding bicycles along the Natchez Trace Parkway in Williamson County, Tennessee, when a black Volvo struck one of the individuals from behind. The impact caused the bicyclist to be thrown from his bicycle and he sustained injuries which required him to be transported by ambulance to the Williamson County Medical Center for treatment. Despite the impact, the driver of the Volvo did not slow down or stop but instead, continued on.

As the indictment alleges, the incident was captured on video by a helmet-mounted camera being used by the other bicyclist. This video was later posted to the internet and used to identify the owner of the vehicle as Marshall Neely, III.

Late in the afternoon on July 8, 2017, the indictment alleges that Neely’s son went to the Williamson County Sheriff’s Department and reported that the vehicle that struck the bicyclist belonged to his father and stated that he recognized the “Dartmouth, “Rice,” and “Boston” stickers on the back windshield, as depicted in the video. When law enforcement officers arrived at Neely’s home that evening, the indictment alleges that the Volvo was parked in the grass behind the garage and the “Dartmouth” and “Rice” stickers had been removed from the back windshield. Officers also noted that residue from a cleaning agent was visible on the right front of the vehicle where it had struck the bicyclist.

The indictment further alleges that shortly after observing the condition of the Volvo, officers found Neely in his home and unconscious on the floor. After being roused by law enforcement officers, Neely told the officers that while he was driving on the Parkway, earlier that morning, a bicyclist threw his bicycle at him. The indictment also alleges that Neely admitted to removing the stickers from his vehicle to prevent him from being identified.

Neely was arrested at his home earlier today by U.S. National Park Service Rangers and will appear before a U.S. Magistrate later today.

If convicted, Neely faces 2-12 years in prison on the reckless aggravated assault charge; up to 5 years in prison for lying to a federal agent; and up to 20 years in prison for obstructing justice.

This case was investigated by the National Park Service and the Williamson County Sheriff’s Department. The case is being prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorney Sara Beth Myers.

[josephr]

Copy and pasted from user solo at slowtwitch, the full statement regarding the charges. Seems like they have some pretty good evidence that the hit and run was intentional, and the biggest possible charges are from obstruction of justice:

I think I like this Jack Smith guy!

[kookmyers]

For example if I were trying to lie my way out of this;

"I was fixated on missing the cyclist to the right side of the road, I did not see the other cyclist, I'm sorry, it won't happen again."



Oh! Then you could file suit against the other cyclist for distracting you! It's his fault! :rolleyes:

(My comment stems from the recent thread posted about the person who filed suit for pain and suffering for her killing a teen on a bike, or the suit brought against Apple for the FaceTime application being used by a driver that rear ended another car and killed a little girl.)

Your comment directly reminds me of the Seinfeld episode, The Bra.
I apologize for trying to bring humor to a very serious thread.

[kookmyers]

If convicted, Neely faces 2-12 years in prison on the reckless aggravated assault charge; up to 5 years in prison for lying to a federal agent; and up to 20 years in prison for obstructing justice.

Those can be stacked right?

[yinzerniner]

If convicted, Neely faces 2-12 years in prison on the reckless aggravated assault charge; up to 5 years in prison for lying to a federal agent; and up to 20 years in prison for obstructing justice.

Those can be stacked right?

From all accounts yes, max 37 years. All about those marginal (incarceration) gains......

[BobO]

Copy and pasted from user solo at slowtwitch, the full statement regarding the charges. Seems like they have some pretty good evidence that the hit and run was intentional, and the biggest possible charges are from obstruction of justice:

That is getting to be good news. Like I said, I have concerns, which amount to this scumbag getting away with it on technicalities. I have yet to see anything overwhelmingly compelling to prove that he meant to assault the cyclist.

[HenryA]

The state charges are nothing to laugh at either.

[redir]

The fact that he removed decals from the back of the car upon returning home, but before his arrest, pretty well nullifies the defense that he didn't know he hit the cyclist in my view, and yes, I am a lawyer.

He's been meaning to remove those decal's for a long time now, and since he went out to his car to check on the damage done by that idiot who threw the bike at him he noticed that the bike must have scratched the decals anyway, so he decided to take them off.

Reasonable doubt?

I hope you are right.

[Mr. Pink]

Wow, this is awesome. Thanks for the update. I feel better that there are some prosecutors out there thinking like that.

[shovelhd]

Prosecutors don't hand out sentences, judges do. That's where these deals always fall apart. Let's hope that there is an open minded judge on this case.

[Mr. Pink]

Prosecuters plea deal. Hopefully this guy gets ten years in a jail with nasty people all around him.

[Keith A]

Not sure if this has already been posted, but here is an update on this hit and run...

http://www.bicycling.com/culture/natchez-parkway-hit-and-run-driver-to-face-federal-charges?utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=Social&utm_term=1011731228&utm_campaign=Bicycling

[Cicli]

Not sure if this has already been posted, but here is an update on this hit and run...

http://www.bicycling.com/culture/natchez-parkway-hit-and-run-driver-to-face-federal-charges?utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=Social&utm_term=1011731228&utm_campaign=Bicycling

Awesome!

[seanile]

Not sure if this has already been posted, but here is an update on this hit and run...

http://www.bicycling.com/culture/natchez-parkway-hit-and-run-driver-to-face-federal-charges?utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=Social&utm_term=1011731228&utm_campaign=Bicycling
glad to see this part:
Thankfully, 24-year-old Noe will make a full recovery from his injuries—road rash and severe bruising to his kidneys and legs—and plans to get back on his bike.

[shovelhd]

Pretty cool how this news was delivered.