LA MD pleads Not Guilty

[rePhil]

Check out the comments too.


http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/01/a-brentwood-phy.html

[SoCalSteve]

I have ridden the same canyon road that the incident took place on many times. I am riding it again next weekend...

There is enough evidence against the Dr. (the police statements alone are enough, I would think) to find him guilty.

We can only hope.

Just sayin'

Steve

[jpw]

To counter the dangerous attitude some drivers have in believing that they own the road and that cyclists have no right to be there, I've always felt that cyclists should be legally compelled to pay for some form of annual road tax or road usage licence. In this way drivers might begin to reconsider how they view sharing the road with the HPV community.

In the case highlighted the doctor ought to be sanctioned by his professional peers with a suspension (beginning after he is released from detention), lose his drivers licence for five years (also beginning after his release), and be legally required to cycle to his place of work for that period of time.

*%#"er!

[LegendRider]

Comment #1:

My sympathies are with the doctor. Far too often I see pretentious idiots wearing tights who think they are Lance Armstrong riding bicycles recklessly. This incident is an excellent example. How fast does a bicyclist have to be moving to generate enough force to ram their head through the rear windshield of a car.? The fact of the matter is that these bicyclists were riding way too fast and were a hazard to everybody on that road. By their own admission when the doctor told them to ride single-file (AS REQUIRED BY LAW) they hurled profanities at him and made threats. I'll bet they were chasing the car and thought they could catch him at the bottom of the hill.



Fantastic response:
My sympathies are with the bicyclists. Far too often I see pretentious idiots in BMWs who think the road belongs only to cars. This incident is an excellent example. How quickly does a car have to slam on the brakes to generate enough force that a bicyclist would end up ramming his head through the rear windshield?

The fact of the matter is that doctor felt he owned the road and was a hazard to everybody on that road, whether in a car or on a bicycle. By his own admission to the police officer, the doctor told them he was going to "teach them a lesson". I'll bet he thought he was entitled to use violence toward the young men.

[R2D2]

To counter the dangerous attitude some drivers have in believing that they own the road and that cyclists have no right to be there, I've always felt that cyclists should be legally compelled to pay for some form of annual road tax or road usage licence. In this way drivers might begin to reconsider how they view sharing the road with the HPV community.

In the case highlighted the doctor ought to be sanctioned by his professional peers with a suspension (beginning after he is released from detention), lose his drivers licence for five years (also beginning after his release), and be legally required to cycle to his place of work for that period of time.

*%#"er!

Roads are usually financed by income tax, road use tax and gas tax.
I already pay income tax..........

[Vancouverdave]

To counter the dangerous attitude some drivers have in believing that they own the road and that cyclists have no right to be there, I've always felt that cyclists should be legally compelled to pay for some form of annual road tax or road usage licence. In this way drivers might begin to reconsider how they view sharing the road with the HPV community.

In the case highlighted the doctor ought to be sanctioned by his professional peers with a suspension (beginning after he is released from detention), lose his drivers licence for five years (also beginning after his release), and be legally required to cycle to his place of work for that period of time.

*%#"er!
A special tax? God, I hate that idea! It's about the equivalent of if Hitler had asked Jews to chip in for the gas bill!

[Volant]

It's truly a shame that we even have to have these discusssions. :(

[jbrainin]

It's about the equivalent of if Hitler had asked Jews to chip in for the gas bill!

It wasn't enough that they were charged for the cost of their trip to the death camps?

[jpw]

I can't pay only income tax and then legally drive on public roads. Sure, tax is the major component of the price of fuel, but I've always felt that the hostility of drivers towards cyclists is fuelled by a feeling that cyclists aren't paying their way (pro rata) and therefore ought not to be there.

The point is this. If cyclists were to make a direct financial contribution for their road usage then governments and their friends would have to treat cyclists as a valid constituency that needs to be listened to and respected when it lobbies for change, neither of which happen at the moment.

I also feel that if cyclists were only allowed on public roads if they displayed some form of ID (like a mini licence plate or whatever) they would behave more appropriately more of the time. This is about everyone on the roads being safe and behaving safely, not a civil liberties/ big brother issue.

:beer:

[mikki]

Comment #1:

My sympathies are with the doctor. Far too often I see pretentious idiots wearing tights who think they are Lance Armstrong riding bicycles recklessly. This incident is an excellent example. How fast does a bicyclist have to be moving to generate enough force to ram their head through the rear windshield of a car.? The fact of the matter is that these bicyclists were riding way too fast and were a hazard to everybody on that road. By their own admission when the doctor told them to ride single-file (AS REQUIRED BY LAW) they hurled profanities at him and made threats. I'll bet they were chasing the car and thought they could catch him at the bottom of the hill.



Fantastic response:
My sympathies are with the bicyclists. Far too often I see pretentious idiots in BMWs who think the road belongs only to cars. This incident is an excellent example. How quickly does a car have to slam on the brakes to generate enough force that a bicyclist would end up ramming his head through the rear windshield?

The fact of the matter is that doctor felt he owned the road and was a hazard to everybody on that road, whether in a car or on a bicycle. By his own admission to the police officer, the doctor told them he was going to "teach them a lesson". I'll bet he thought he was entitled to use violence toward the young men.


The fantastic response echos my sentiments also. My own recent accident has taught me many things about the law that I would just as soon not have had to learned, such as "recklessness" as mentioned in the first comment. True legal reckless is not mere negligence or even grossly negligent. It is premeditated, with an intent to harm. This is a VERY difficult to prove title unless someone is drunk, etc. So, how does this responder get off thinking he can call the cyclists "reckless"?? Additionally, "single file" is actually NOT the law in most instances where the bike lane is of ample size. Two abreast is legal, here in California.

I would actually love to drive up to the court and be part of the audience for the hearing. I would stand and applaud should he be convicted.

[pjm]

I'm a cyclist and a BMW driver....I must be a REAL jerk!! :rolleyes:

[Ken Robb]

Look guys--I have nothing to add to the debate about whether we bikers have a right to be on the road. I just want to reiterate what I've written before. When we wear lycra bike outfits we are perceived as people "playing in the street" or "training for our sport" in the street just like kids playing hop scotch, stickball, touch football, etc. It's not right but that's the way it is.

When I ride in my "fred" outfits--regular clothes, maybe even long pants/jeans, drivers treat me lots better than when I'm in lycra, padded shorts, etc. A fred looks like someone trying to get somewhere who maybe can't afford a car--poor guy. A racer looks like he should be traing at the velodrome or anywhere but in trafic.

We just have to live with it and watch out for unfriendly drivers. The bigger our packs the more we look like we are racing on public streets and the drivers know THEY aren't allowed to do that so they get annoyed. Too bad for us.

[Dekonick]

I'm a cyclist and a BMW driver....I must be a REAL jerk!! :rolleyes:

There is only one JERK. He lives across the hall... :)

I am amazed at the hostility in CA towards cyclsits. I always viewed CA as a cyclists haven.

[paczki]

The comments are very depressing, it makes me frightened to ride.

[Keith A]

The comments are very depressing, it makes me frightened to ride.My thoughts exactly. And here's just another example...

"The road is for CARS, not bikes. These idiots think they can slow down our roads just because they wear tights that say USPS on it."

[gemship]

I can't pay only income tax and then legally drive on public roads. Sure, tax is the major component of the price of fuel, but I've always felt that the hostility of drivers towards cyclists is fuelled by a feeling that cyclists aren't paying their way (pro rata) and therefore ought not to be there.

The point is this. If cyclists were to make a direct financial contribution for their road usage then governments and their friends would have to treat cyclists as a valid constituency that needs to be listened to and respected when it lobbies for change, neither of which happen at the moment.

I also feel that if cyclists were only allowed on public roads if they displayed some form of ID (like a mini licence plate or whatever) they would behave more appropriately more of the time. This is about everyone on the roads being safe and behaving safely, not a civil liberties/ big brother issue.

:beer:


So what does the car driver or the bicyclist become when their machine breaks down and they're forced to hoof it the rest of the way or will there be a special id for walking down every road of America as well? Nice idea, I get the gist of it but how many things must we tax that ought to be free. just saying.....


I also think the driver's hostility will persist regardless of your idea at work because when people get in cars they want to get "there" right now and there's this ego driven feeling of being large and in charge.

[BumbleBeeDave]

. . . the majority seem to be in support of the cyclists, even if they are from people who do have anti-cyclist bias.

I liked this one . . .

"Far too often I see pretentious idiots wearing tights who think they are Lance Armstrong riding bicycles recklessly." - James Sullivan
Not to stoop to your level, but next time I see a pretentious idiot wearing kaki paints driving a Lexus and talking a the cell phone, I will remember to hit him in the head with a baseball bat, right? Because that makes sense?

Most disappointing are those in the vein of "These cyclists are getting in our way. Something should be done!"

Jesus . . .

BBD

[Ken Robb]

when I ride alone or with Leslie in my "fred" outfit most drivers are very considerate. In my lycra--not so good. I ride the same in either outfit.

We can deplore the situation but that's the way it is around my neighborhood.

[CaptStash]

My father and his wife (the evil step mother -- and I mean that sincerely) live in Santa Monica, not far from the scene of the crime. Last summer I had dinner with them, and this very incident came up. Their first comments were along the lines of "well from what we hear the bicylists were riding very irresponsibly and cursed at the driver", to which I (in an amazingly calm tone) asked if that made it acceptable to attempt to cause grave bodily injury and even take the risk of killing them?

I then suggested (still calmly, but in my best Big Ship Captain and YOU WILL OBEY voice) that it is never ok to think that just because you are annoyed, you may hurt someone. And that hurting people was not an acceptable response in ourt civilization. "Don't you agree?" I finished. Even my dad, the attyorney, had to agree. Things got kind of quiet around the dinner table for a few minutes.

To be frank, one of the things I miss least about living in southern California is that bizarre cars own the road and you are only as good as what you drive ethos that still seems to be so important down there. About this time of year I sure miss the mild weather. But other than that, do I miss L.A.? Not so much.

CaptStash (Child of the westisde and Bel Air escapee)....

[Seramount]

when I ride alone or with Leslie in my "fred" outfit most drivers are very considerate. In my lycra--not so good. I ride the same in either outfit.

We can deplore the situation but that's the way it is around my neighborhood.


and your point is...?

[toaster]

Justice would be served, in my mind, if the Dr. were to be fined in the tens of thousands of dollars, stripped of his driver's license, his cars impounded, and forced to use public transportation, walk, ride a bicycle, pay for cabs and generally stuck without the convenience of self-controlled motorized travel.

[dvs cycles]

Justice would be served, in my mind, if the Dr. were to be fined in the tens of thousands of dollars, stripped of his driver's license, his cars impounded, and forced to use public transportation, walk, ride a bicycle, pay for cabs and generally stuck without the convenience of self-controlled motorized travel.Nothing short of jail time will satisfy me.
He assaulted two guys with a deadly weapon just as if he had used a gun or a knife. Unfortunately his money and the right jury will get him off. I hope I'm wrong. :crap:

[michael white]

I hope he gets rear-ended in State . . .

HEY I didn't say that! Who's been using my laptop?!

[Ken Robb]

and your point is...?

my point is when we look like we are "playing in the street" we annoy some drivers and they can get nasty toward us. It isn't legal but that's the way it is so we have to deal with it. If you can get comfortable riding in clothes that don't look like race gear you will probably experience less hostility from drivers.

[William]

So it’s vestiges of Puritanical genes floating around in the brain stem of certain individuals that cause them to react with hostility towards riders in skin-tight lycra & bright colors? The more we cover up, the nicer they will be?

Pete, the Nuns having fun on the tricycles is the key. Put it back!!


;) ;) :)

William

[WadePatton]

Lookit those reckless nuns--three abreast (or is that six?).

Power too 'em.

We have "bicycle route" markings here on many roadways with paved (albeit gravel, glass, and metal strewn) shoulders, but they're never the sort of roads I'll ride. Too much traffic-but it is the State indicating that bicycles are recognized as legitimate vehicles.

As to taxes and fees. I can't think of a single cyclist who doesn't buy fuel and pay annual registration for his automobile(s)--and when he/she takes the bicycle instead of the motor vehicle, I have the impression that there is less wear and tear on the tarmac. MOF we have a new state law explicitly stating that motorist MUST give three-feet to cyclists. Unfortunately fatal cyclists/auto incidents led to the legislation.
http://www.jeffrothcyclingfoundation.org/

Hope the MD loses his license to practice.

[jpw]

Lookit those reckless nuns--three abreast (or is that six?).

Power too 'em.

We have "bicycle route" markings here on many roadways with paved (albeit gravel, glass, and metal strewn) shoulders, but they're never the sort of roads I'll ride. Too much traffic-but it is the State indicating that bicycles are recognized as legitimate vehicles.

As to taxes and fees. I can't think of a single cyclist who doesn't buy fuel and pay annual registration for his automobile(s)--and when he/she takes the bicycle instead of the motor vehicle, I have the impression that there is less wear and tear on the tarmac. MOF we have a new state law explicitly stating that motorist MUST give three-feet to cyclists. Unfortunately fatal cyclists/auto incidents led to the legislation.
http://www.jeffrothcyclingfoundation.org/

Hope the MD loses his license to practice.


In England the law allows a cyclist to take the entire width of the lane if they feel the need to do so.

I think it is important to remember that the pedestrian came first, followed by the horseback rider, followed by the horse and cart, followed by the cyclist,...and then finally the internal combustion engine in all its 'glorious' forms. Get in line and show some respect.

[djg21]

To counter the dangerous attitude some drivers have in believing that they own the road and that cyclists have no right to be there, I've always felt that cyclists should be legally compelled to pay for some form of annual road tax or road usage licence. In this way drivers might begin to reconsider how they view sharing the road with the HPV community.


I already do. I own and have registered two cars on which I pay taxes. I also pay a state tax and local property taxes. I therefore pay for road usage, irrespective of the means by which I choose to use the road.

The better way to command the respect of drivers for cyclists is for cyclists to remain courteous, to educate drivers, and to prosecute those who use motor vehicles as a weapon.

[oldguy00]

...

I think it is important to remember that the pedestrian came first, followed by the horseback rider, followed by the horse and cart, followed by the cyclist,...and then finally the internal combustion engine in all its 'glorious' forms. Get in line and show some respect.

Love it!
:beer: