Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe UPS Forum
UPS Discussions
Terminated For Gross Negligence
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="dannyboy" data-source="post: 308841" data-attributes="member: 484"><p>Lifer</p><p> </p><p>I have to disagree a bit with the scene you painted.</p><p> </p><p>I have viewed the intersection in question at length, from several different angles. The time apears to be before noon, and in the area from where the cycled was coming, there are shadows since there are many large trees on both sides of the road. </p><p> </p><p>Now, change the angle of the shadows to reflect it being 2:30PM. There are some very dark areas where I could suspect a person just taking one look to the right, where I could understand him not seeing the cyclist, if he took just one look.</p><p> </p><p>Also, according to the witness statements, this cyclist had been weaving in and out of traffic since 58th street. I did a rough measurement of the distance, and it was about 2 miles.</p><p> </p><p>This road is very flat and straight.</p><p> </p><p>Now, if I remember the training correctly, look left right left, then proceed into the intersection. Right?</p><p> </p><p>All is well through the first two lanes you cross. But if you only looked one time to the right, and missed the cycle, then you would never have a clue what was coming your way. Only by looking the second time could you have seen, and then judged the speed of oncoming traffic.</p><p> </p><p>To keep it simple, as you state, it was our drivers error to see the cyclist coming at him at a high rate of speed. I dont know if he looked only once and missed him, or looked more than that and still did not see him (I find that very unlikely). Because, had he looked to the right before going across the last two lanes, he would have seen the cyclist less than 150 away approaching at a high rate of speed.</p><p> </p><p>Only L knows what he did or did not see, and how many times he looked. But I can see how, if he only looked right once, with the large shadows across both oncoming lanes, how he could have missed the cycle.</p><p> </p><p>But then we get back to what evidence the arbitrator had that we dont.</p><p> </p><p>Best</p><p> </p><p>d</p><p> </p><p>d</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="dannyboy, post: 308841, member: 484"] Lifer I have to disagree a bit with the scene you painted. I have viewed the intersection in question at length, from several different angles. The time apears to be before noon, and in the area from where the cycled was coming, there are shadows since there are many large trees on both sides of the road. Now, change the angle of the shadows to reflect it being 2:30PM. There are some very dark areas where I could suspect a person just taking one look to the right, where I could understand him not seeing the cyclist, if he took just one look. Also, according to the witness statements, this cyclist had been weaving in and out of traffic since 58th street. I did a rough measurement of the distance, and it was about 2 miles. This road is very flat and straight. Now, if I remember the training correctly, look left right left, then proceed into the intersection. Right? All is well through the first two lanes you cross. But if you only looked one time to the right, and missed the cycle, then you would never have a clue what was coming your way. Only by looking the second time could you have seen, and then judged the speed of oncoming traffic. To keep it simple, as you state, it was our drivers error to see the cyclist coming at him at a high rate of speed. I dont know if he looked only once and missed him, or looked more than that and still did not see him (I find that very unlikely). Because, had he looked to the right before going across the last two lanes, he would have seen the cyclist less than 150 away approaching at a high rate of speed. Only L knows what he did or did not see, and how many times he looked. But I can see how, if he only looked right once, with the large shadows across both oncoming lanes, how he could have missed the cycle. But then we get back to what evidence the arbitrator had that we dont. Best d d [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe UPS Forum
UPS Discussions
Terminated For Gross Negligence
Top