A cyclist was seriously injured in a collision with a car in Wallingford yesterday afternoon.
According to police, at about 12:45 p.m., officers responded to an accident in the 200 block of NE 45th Street after, police say, a cyclist collided with the passenger side of a car making a left turn.
Medics responded and transported the 26-year-old male cyclist to Harborview with life-threatening injuries. Police say the driver was not under the influence of drugs or alcohol.
SPD’s Traffic Collision Squad is investigating the incident.
Look all ways before crossing, everyone, even if you have the right of way, and no matter what mode of personal transport you’re in. Pointing fingers won’t save your life once you get in an accident.
@47 – just don’t do it on the Aurora Bridge, ok? I think we distracted them by having all the suicides jump in from of the light rail for now …
The description of the accident sounds like it happened at the Dick’s, which is right across the street from the gas station. Either that or the record store/taco truck/doughnut shop parking lot. Either way, that’s a pretty dangerous spot for an eastbound cyclist. You’ve just come down a steep hill, there’s a lot of traffic at 12.45pm as cars start to back up on 45th heading for the freeway, and there are tons of people going in an out of the Dick’s lot. Also, there are sharrows on that road, and it’s pretty common for cyclists to ride between traffic and the sidewalk – either you’re going too slow and don’t want to hold up traffic, or you’re going too fast and want to pass the traffic that’s backed up.
Coming down that hill, it’s easy to get up to 25mph and it would be hard to stop suddenly for someone turning left in front of you. Especially if there’s a line of cars, it could be hard to see that one car had stopped to let another car through.
If that’s what happened – line of cars, one car let another one through and cyclist was going too fast down the hill to stop – it doesn’t sound like anyone was being an asshole. It was just bad timing at a dangerous spot where no one had good visibility. It was an accident.
I was with a friend once. We had just parked @ Alki Beach. My friend (who had been driving) opened the door to get out at the exact same moment a bicyclist swung out from behind the car and smacked right into the open driver side door and took the car door off. The poor guy was real hurt, my friend felt awful, but there was no avoiding what happened on their part. My friend looked behind them into oncoming traffic to make sure it was safe, but because the bicyclist was coming up right behind the car (rather beside it) they couldn’t see him coming.
The bicyclist was found at fault and not only had to pay their own medical bills but also for the door that they took off my friends’ car.
It’s not always the driver’s fault. But the bicyclist is the one that gets HURT most. Just be careful. Who care’s who is at fault if you could have prevented putting yourself in the hospital? Shouldn’t self-preservation be first and foremost in your mind? Not “I’m allowed to be here and therefore I can pay ‘less’ attention.”
I was staying out of this, but the sentence @48, “The car is at the mercy of the quicker more nimble bicyclist” just demands a response.
You, sir, are a dumbass. An average bicycle, with a rider on top of it, weighs 180 lbs. An average car, with a driver in it, weighs 4,021 pounds. There are approximately 250 million registered motor vehicles on U.S. roads, and approximately 2.8 million bikes. There is simply no question which is the dominant mode of transportation in this country. For all intents and purposes, bicycles don’t even exist as a mode of transit. On the rare occasion when the two do intersect, the bicycle and the bicyclist is ALWAYS the damaged party, often mortally so, regardless of who is at fault.
And the car is “at the mercy” of the bicyclist?!?! I reiterate: you are a fool, a moron, and a dumbass.
@55
I should add (in case anyone is questioning) that the fact that they bicyclist swung out from behind the car was based on statements from several others that witnessed what happened. All we knew (from inside the car) is that we didn’t see him and then he was suddenly flung over the door.
oops I meant to add that to my comment @54 not gurlgoggie @55 … sorry …
@51: I totally agree. All of us should be more careful/aware, not speed—both cyclists and cars—and more respectful of the fact that we have to share this crazy, overpopulated world, not carve out and defend our own personal space on it.
Cyclists, try to remember that cycling is FUN. Take it slow. If you’re in such a hurry then drive your car. Don’t make commuting, of all things, a race/competition.
Drivers, try to remember that cyclists are the least of your problems on our crowded roads. Consider how many times a cyclist has irritated you versus how many times a driver in a car has irritated you: I’m guessing a million times less, right? Give them a break.
If bicycles have to act exactly like cars, then they should take a full lane and get to go on the freeway. Cars can pass bikes, and bikes can pass cars. If you are turning you have to yield. Of course everyone has to be careful, and should only pass on the left, and shouldn’t go too fast for conditions, but still, bicycles are legally allowed to pass cars when there is one lane and a turning car has to yield.
The usual reason one car stops as a courtesy to let another car turn is that traffic is congested (as it often is on 45th) and backed up to an extent that would make it difficult for the oncoming vehicle to execute the turn at all in the normal flow of traffic.
If this was the case, the cyclist would have been overtaking not just one stopped car, but many.
@55 Gurldoggie you are the dumbass if you can’t understand the intent behind my point. It isn’t simply a matter of only the numbers and physics you pointed out. There is a completely different scenario of a large slow(er) moving vehicle (like a car doing 15-20 mph and entering an intersection, and a speeding bicycle going faster than 25 mph swerving around a stopped vehicle ahead of it and inserting itself into the intersection from behind an obstructed view (the afore mentioned stopped vehicle ahead of it) and plowing thru an intersection.
No tell me genius. Isn’t the lighter vehicle, that has the ability to make quicker turns, (ohhh and having the ability to STOP quicker given the very stats you used), and having a vehicle that can be manuevered faster make it MORE NIMBLE?
Dumbass.
Get the fucking bikes off the road and you wouldn’t EVER have this problem. Otherwise the bikes can follow downtown traffic laws, and be considered equivalent to cars concerning turning, overtaking, passing, and traffic light laws.
What’s with all the hostility?
I ride my bike and drive a car and can testify that I have seen plenty of dumb cyclists (riding against traffic on one-way streets, riding without a front light in the dark, riding too close to parked cars), and I have also had plenty of drivers do dumb things that have endangered me on my bicycle (pass too close, pass around blind corners, failing to yield when making left turns in front of me). The thing is, it’s probably 100 times more dangerous to the other party when a car does something stupid than when a bicycle does something stupid. Being on the streets–motorist, pedestrian or cyclist–is absolutely the most dangerous thing any of us do on a daily basis. The stakes are high. Be careful out there.
@61: where should the bikes ride, if not on the road? The sidewalk? Bike paths that don’t exist?
Otherwise, do you agree that cars should not be allowed to overtake cyclists on roads such as this one?
Reality Check says “Get the fucking bikes off the road and you wouldn’t EVER have this problem.” A better solution would be to get stupid douche bags like you off this planet and we wouldn’t EVER have any problems of any kind.
@ 61,
I decided to look up the Washington traffic laws regarding http://www.dol.wa.gov/driverslicense/dri…. If you download the state-issued driver’s manual (PDF), and scroll down to the section regarding bicycles (pp78-82), here are some things you should see:
There’s nothing in the report suggesting that the bicyclist was breaking the law. If that is correct (and the above quotes from the Washington driver’s manual would indicate that it is) then the bicycle was not at fault.
Rewind.
That HTML stuff SHOULD have the word “bicycles” in its place, so that the sentence reads, “I decided to look up the Washington traffic laws regarding bicycles…”
48. I’ll go a step farther: I think we need to find some way to require insurance for cyclists, or if that’s infeasible, at least encourage and proliferate it. Given the propensity and risk of accidents, it’s just a sensible thing to do for everyone’s sake.
@67: WA doesn’t even require motorcyclists to have insurance. Insane, right?
I ride a bicycle, motorcycle, and drive a car. I’m insured on the last two. I’m not sure if my renter’s insurance covers me for the first (it might, actually). I know my car/motorcycle insurance doesn’t cover me when I’m on my bike – I’ve asked them specifically about that in the past.
Bicycles are allowed to travel on the right side of traffic where ever it is safe. So we pass stopped or slow traffic on the right sometimes. It is up to us to be safe, hitting the passenger side of a turning car usually means the biker could have prevented the accident. It also usually means the car shouldn’t have been making the turn.
@10: Montlake is a total screw-up for cyclists. If you’re heading south, you’re probably on the sidewalk because that’s the safe (and designated) place to cross the Montlake Bridge. Then all of a sudden the sidewalk ends and you have to get yourself into traffic. This is true on both the east and west sides of the road. It just plain sucks riding through there. Hell, even being a pedestrian at Montlake is pretty scary.
I assume you were coming up the stairs on the west side of the street, then yeah, the cyclist is going to be looking back over their shoulder to see what’s coming, so they can try to merge into traffic. There’s really nowhere else to go, unless they try to deal with the crosswalks, the Hop-In and so on.
@70 All right I will totally give you that the intersection there sucks. So if the sidewalk is the safest place to be then, okay, but once you’re on the sidewalk it is just as much up to you to look out for the peds. Like I said, I was paying attention and avoided getting knocked on my ass (pay attention peeps it may be someone else’s fault, but what if you could have prevented it in the first place?). He was not paying attention and had I been less observant (or running to catch my next bus as many do coming up from those stairs) I might have gotten knocked on my ass.
Just saying, if you’re gonna be on the sidewalk increase your awareness and accept that the peds have the right of way. If that means you have to slow down at cross walks or places with heavy ped foot traffic, than just do it, or even (GASP!) get off the bike if necessary.
All that said though, I have come in contact with far more pleasant and polite bicyclists in that area than asshole cyclists (in fact I cannot think of anyone I have encountered on their bike that was intentionally being an asshole), and I am sure that it was not even this guys intent to be an ass in the least, I didn’t think he was an asshole even when it happened, I just thought ‘shit dude, pay attention.’ It is purely a matter of looking out for each other and for ourselves.
@71 Somehow the rest of my comment (which suggested cyclists need to be extra-careful on the sidewalk) was dropped when I posted. I always do my best to look out for peds, but it’s not always easy to avoid them, since many (particularly around bus stops) have headphones on and can’t hear when I let them I’m passing. No collisions so far, but more than a few near misses.
I think it’s well-established that cyclists eat the brains from live and screaming children, engage in human trafficking, and rape disabled seniors with their creepy little dildo-shaped bike pumps on a regular basis.
Seriously. I mean, roads are for cars. All the roads that were built during the 15,000 years of human history before cars were basically just prep work for the invention of cars. Like the roads in downtown Seattle; sure they were laid out in the 19th Century, but they were laid out for cars. And if bicycles want to use roads, they should be considered equivalent to cars. Especially downtown.
Also? Dogs should be considered equivalent to people and up should be considered equivalent to down.
Seriously. You dumbasses. Jeez.
@ 69, read the regs… you’re supposed to go on the LEFT because going on the RIGHT is incredibly dangerous…
@23 a perfectly good point.
@28 a better one. You win at the-internet-needs-to-remember-reallife-is-still-real.
@42: wrt your last question: that’s not an accident, it’s called homicide.
@59: bikes CAN go on the freeway, just not downtown – it’s how you take a bike trip to Cle Elum from Issaquah, for example.
@74: precisely why passing on the right is only okay if it’s “safe”. Safe of course is in the eye of the beholder… when I bike, ‘safe’ is a bike lane or zero traffic. Other folks it’s wearing a helmet but going 35mph downhill in stopped traffic. Just sayin’.
Speed of traffic? Illegal pass on right? Stupid yielding? Polite yielding? Did the bicyclist signal? Wear a helmet? Who knows… We could conjecture and complain al lday or we could use our considerable brain power (arguable) and spare time (at 75 comments: not arguable) to craft solutions that help reduce the city’s Car VS Bike attitude.
@70 & @71:
It’s way too dangerous for cyclists to stay on Montlake given all the traffic to UW and getting onto 520.
On Montlake crossing the bridge always take the sidewalk on the east side of the street whether you’re going north or south, and take it slow and safe because there’s often two-way traffic and peds. Once you’ve crossed the bridge, take either Shelby or Hamlin East-West and then cross 520 on the 24th ave bridge over to Lk Wa Blvd.
72. Slow down when you’re passing them?
So what if it was the cyclist’s fault? People make mistakes. I hope he’s okay.
There are a lot of speculations on this blog concerning this accident. I, however, was the driver of the car that was hit by the bicyclist so I guess it might be helpful to get my take on the incident. Traffic was at a standstill on 45th in Wallingford. I was at a dead stop in the turning lane (westbound), preparing to turn left into the parking lot of that record store next to Winchells and the taco truck. I eat at that taco truck almost every day and am well acquainted with the streets, high pedestrian traffic, as well as auto traffic common to that area. I was, as I said, at a complete stop, and a lady in a white car (also at a standstill, as were all the cars) who was headed eastbound on 45th waved for me to go ahead and cross in front of her car into the parking lot since she wasn’t moving anyway. Being, as I said, completely aware of high pedestrian traffic, I looked in both directions and saw absolutely noone. So, I proceeded to turn left into the lot. I did not do so in a rapid manner, since I was already at a stop and there was no need because there were no oncoming cars approaching me that I needed to avoid.
My shocks aren’t the greatest and there is a dip in the curb that goes into the lot so I was actually going at a crawl to get my front tires up onto the sidewalk (when given the option, I always do this when no cars are approaching me). After all, why make a fast rapid swoop into a lot if you can make a gentle and easier one. I know I had gotten my front wheels up onto the sidewalk and had just accelerated slightly to bring the rest of my truck into the lot when I heard and felt a tremendous bang into the side of my truck. At this point I should note that, even at this juncture, I still did not see anybody, even in my peripheral vision. In fact, the first thought I remember having was thinking that I had somehow scraped a fire hydrant or something and it had caught into the side of my truck. Then I remember thinking how odd that thought was because I don’t recall a fire hydrant being there and I eat there every day at the taco truck. So I brought my truck to a halt and got out, preparing to inspect my vehicle. Even now it had not even remotely occurred to me that it was a person that had run into me. Only after I exited the vehicle and looked up did I see the bicyclist lying in the road and I of course realized at that point what had happened. There were several people already running over, and, thankfully, a passing off-duty emt happened by and took charge until the ambulance arrived. I stayed on the scene of course and waited for the police. They performed their sobriety test on me and I passed with flying colors. I don’t even drink anyway. Given that my velocity was essentially zero (as collaborated by many witnesses) and judging by the size of the dent in my car the police tentatively concluded at the scene that I was not at fault and that the bicyclist had to have been going extremely fast. This is further attested to by the fact that none of the witnesses I am aware of saw the bicyclist coming either. To my knowledge, only one witness actually saw the bicyclist but that was only as he impacted the vehicle, not before. From my point of view it was as if he materialized out of nowhere seeing as how I purposefully looked to see if any pedestrians were coming. The investigative officer told me the next day that the bicyclists’ father had said that his son remembers nothing of the accident or leading up to it (which is common to accidents with head trauma).
They had the full investigative units there with yellow tape, cameras, etc to process the scene. I probably was there for a good hour and a half. I was pretty upset and worried about the state of the bicyclist. He wasn’t wearing a helmet so was pretty banged up.
Then the police impounded my vehicle for “evidence” and I was of course stuck with the tab for the impound lot and had to wait a day for the police to release the hold on the vehicle. This, despite the fact that they themselves said it was not my fault. Examining the tow receipt from the impound lot, I found that from the time the police called the towing company to the time it entered the impound lot was about an hour and six minutes. So, basically, the police didn’t have time to take it anywhere for processing of “evidence”. They did that stuff all at the scene. They just towed it for the sake of towing it I guess. Anyway, I apologize for the digression. I am in no way trying to compare my situation with that of the injured bicyclist. It is rather a nagging grievance with the Seattle PD. It seems inconceivable that a person who is found, albeit tentatively, at an accident scene to not be at fault, not impaired, have their car towed.
Well, thats about all I can contribute. I hope this clears up any confusions. Most importantly, the officer recently told me that the bicyclist is going to be OK.
Oh, one more thing….
The photo of the intersection must be a stock one as it shows no traffic and the price of gas is around 4 and a half dollars which is a bit higher then it is at present. And, most importantly, the photo doesn’t even show where the impact occurred. It would have been out of frame to the right of the photo. I only bring this to attention because I noticed at least one of the blogs reference the photograph in their posting.
Seattlite, thanks for sharing. This clarifies things greatly. I was wondering, did the cyclist pass the stopped car on the right or left? I’m guessing the right, which would make him almost impossible for you to have seen.
Not sure. I never saw him at any point and he doesn’t remember anything. And there were no witnesses to my knowledge that saw him beforehand either. This would seem to imply that he may have emerged from behind the car that waved me into the lot but I have doubts that would have given him enough speed to hit me as hard as he did. But I would agree that it would seem from the right-side of the vehicle that he came. There is a hill that I was approximately one block down from so I know he was at least heading downhill. All I can say with absolute certainty is that I never once saw him. The impact site is just behind my passenger door so when he did hit he wasn’t in my range of vision. Had he hit just a foot further up toward the front of my car he likely would have smashed into my passenger window.
Thanks for sharing Seattlite. It would appear that my posts @48 & @61 were completely correct.
Still believe the bicyclist was not at fault Matt (from your reply @ 65)? Hmm?
And Doceb your assumption @ 39 & 44 was WAY OFF and very WRONG.
A-hem.
Thank you for chiming in, Seattlite. I’m glad we got a clear first-hand account of what happened… and glad I reserved any judgment until then.
This cyclist had to be flying down 45th. Past slow and stopped traffic. And without a helmet on. Yikes. It figure he had no memory of the crash… I don’t think he was thinking even before it happened.
At least he’s okay. Let’s hope he learns from this.
@83: I’m just glad that the cyclist is going to be alright. Presumably you also feel that way, though you seem mostly excited to have been right on the internet.
(Besides, it’s not like I ever said that the cyclist wasn’t at fault. I suggested that accidents like this are not often single-fault, which is usually correct.)
a) i find it very strange that so many people, who have nothing at all to do with this accident have so much to say.
b) as the partner of the cyclist, reading these comments, it is very frustrating. i believe this was an ACCIDENT. no one is at fault, but there are certain factors that certainly could have prevented this situation.
c) my boyfriend was riding his bicycle in a BIKE LANE. If anyone has ever driven down 45th they would realize that there are bike lanes on either side of the road, which yes, bikes ride in, on the right of the cars next to them. if that woman had turned around and looked before waving someone on, she might have noticed the bike lane, and the bike. it seems to be a common issue here- no one knows the bike lane is there. if there is a stopped car in the middle of the bike lane at the base of a hill where you have acquired the most speed and there is a car to your left, you don’t really have anywhere to go.
d) it is true that he was not wearing a helmet. he usually does. however not a single injury was to his head, his face took all of the pressure. he had holes in his face, he is missing teeth and he has a disc fracture in his neck. please explain to me how a helmet would have prevented any of that.
e) i would like to add that the driver does not have insurance. hi driver! my boyfriend gets to pay for this all now because you were driving without insurance! sorry you got a dent in your big car, though!
Oh and just to for the record the driver of the car was considered at fault (according to the investigators) despite the unfortunate complexity of events.
@87 Bullshit.
a) we have so much to say because many of us are fucking sick and tired of irresponsible behavior by bicyclists causing accidents, and creating dangerous situations when they are playing in traffic in a dangerous manner. It is a continuing pattern of abuse(s) that continue to show that bicyclists cannot safely mix with automobile traffic and should be removed from arterial streets within city limits.
b) you bet there are. riding slow enough to not get into a major accident would be at the top of that list.
c) Not if the reported details of the accident are correct. You are covering for your partner’s negligence. He was clearly in the wrong.
d) You are correct a helmet wouldn’t have prevented any of those injuries. Those injuries would seem to indicate he was going at an extremely high rate of speed to sustain that kind of damage…. which clearly indicates that he was traveling in a reckless manner faster than conditions allow.
e) Why should his insurance have to pay anything, even if he DID have insurance? I fail to understand how his reckless and negligent actions should reflect on the automobile driver? Typical liberal bullshit response from you. Tell me genius… did YOUR BFF have insurance himself? Why not? Shouldn’t he also have insurance?
Thanks for being an incredibly genuine representative of the bicycling community! You’ve once again reaffirmed my stereotypes!
Just another reason we should never allow cyclists to play in traffic….
Moving on…
I’m not blaming bicyclist and I’m not blaming automobile drivers–the problem is far more complex than one vs the other.
It is a fact of matter that as an automobile driver your visibility is reduced and your response speed is reduces relative to your rate of movement (compare to standard human movement). The fact is homo sapiens have not had an adequate history operating motor vehicles to allow themselves the biological adaptations needed to step into a vehicle and suddenly gain a huge metal body/cage/carcass and then to travel at speeds such that we do. This is why automobile drivers are considered both clumsy and accident prone. This combined with the fact that while driving one must first look out for other drivers also prone to smash into oneself — this makes bicyclists the last thing in the back of any drivers head (see statistics on car accidents).
Despite the fact that bicyclists have an inherently greater awareness of personal space than someone in a metal box many times greater than someone’s own size (there are statistics about that too), they are still very much putting themselves at risk (more statistics). It’s illegal to ride your bike on the sidewalk which puts bicycles on the streets in direct danger of the above mentioned automobile drivers by law.
Solution: Lets remove bikes and cars from the same space. This is exactly why bicyclists of Seattle complain everyday about the need to put more bike only space in the city- ie bike lanes. Problem: This is a City and space isn’t cheap Cars already occupy 1/3rd of the land area of Seattle and that isn’t enough for their growing needs. We can’t take space away from cars and give it to bikes, that would upset too many daily automobile drivers who can’t sacrifice their over exploited space.
The government recognizes this catch 22 between bikes and cars and therefore grants bicyclists the rights to share the road with cars under legal protection of the law despite the inherent dangers, complexities, and social conflicts.
It’s just simpler to let a few people get hurt or killed each year in order to maintain some sort of flow or normalcy in our society.
THIS IS THE REEAAL PROBLEM!!!!! The secondary problem IS ASSHOLES LIKE YOU @88 AND the Vegan cyclist car hater who you undoubtedly picture giving you the bird in traffic, who fail to analyze the problem from a selfless perspective and decide to make the roads a battleground. How naive.
We’re talking about people’s life and death. Have some compassion. Show some respect. Stop promoting pain, negativity, and selfishness.
@86 and @87….
This is the driver of the “big car”. In actuality, though, its a 2-door Nissan Pathfinder. Not really that big. I’d lean more toward average-size in describing my vehicle. I’d say “big” would be more like a full-size SUV or something along those lines.
Anyhow, I’m not sure where to begin, so I guess I’ll start at the beginning. I’m a bit confused as to the very first sentence you wrote….
“i find it very strange that so many people, who have nothing at all to do with this accident have so much to say”.
Unless you were, unbenownst to me, riding on his handlebars, you have nothing to do with the accident either. Being the partner of the bicyclist does not qualify unless you were there, which I think we can both agree you were not. That being said, this is a blog-space, so you are certainly free to write any opinions on the matter (as are all these other folks).
Lets see….
“my boyfriend was riding his bicycle in a BIKE LANE. If anyone has ever driven down 45th they would realize that there are bike lanes on either side of the road, which yes, bikes ride in, on the right of the cars next to them”.
Now, according to the lead investigating officer who processed the evidence at the scene and with whom I’ve been in contact with a few times since the accident, your partner doesn’t remember anything after leaving that day, certainly not the accident itself. This was reportedly told by your boyfriend himself to his father, who passed it on to the officer who in turn told me. So, that being the case, (unless you believe the police officer to be lying) I find it odd that you are so certain where your boyfriend was riding just before he hit me. Also, I was struck by the fact that you capitalized the work “bikelane,” implying your boyfriend was exactly where he was supposed to be.
Toward the beginning of your blog, you state that you believe nobody to be at fault but I find it difficult to ignore the fact that you capitalized the word “bikelane,” implying your boyfriend was exactly where he was supposed to be and did no wrong. If I am incorrect in this assumption then I apologize. The thing is, though, people usually put things in all caps when they want to emphasize a point. Then I realized you also capitalized the word “accident” which really threw me for a loop. Are you saying one thing outright (noone is at fault) yet subtly hinting at something completely different (the bicyclist was just where he should have been)? I just cannot, despite my best efforts, figure out what it is you are really trying to say.
But, for the sake of clarity, let us assume he was indeed in the bike lane where you claimed him to be. Even if he were, its really beside the point if he is flying down the hill in said bike lane, whizzing past all those cars sitting stationary in traffic, going so fast that he seemed to appear out of nowhere (something I can myself testify to, having specifically looked westward and eastward before turning and seeing no pedestrians/bicyclists). The size of the dent also testifies to the fact that he was traveling much too fast.
Primarily due to these details and the testimony of on-site WITNESSES, it was, as I said before, tentatively concluded that I was not at fault. I was told this not just by the lead investigative officer but by two or three other officers as well. And yet, despite this, I see you stating that I, the driver, was found to be at fault. Forgive me if I believe the police who were at the scene (and whom I have spoken with since on the phone) over your assertion.
You also stated…
“it is true that he was not wearing a helmet. he usually does. however not a single injury was to his head, his face took all of the pressure. he had holes in his face, he is missing teeth and he has a disc fracture in his neck. please explain to me how a helmet would have prevented any of that”.
I’m don’t feel the need to “explain” anything. First of all, I am not a doctor. Second, I never said in the first place that a helmet would have prevented anything. I simply stated that he wasn’t wearing one and that basically he looked pretty banged up. I didn’t go into specifics on his injuries after I found out from the police about them because I figured that was personal information between him, his doctors, and the parties involved.
What else….oh, right.
“hi driver! my boyfriend gets to pay for this all now because you were driving without insurance! sorry you got a dent in your big car, though!”
Hi partner of bicyclist! Boy, you know, nothing gets a point across better than to begin it with a good dose of sarcasm. As I’m sure you can tell by now, I can return it in spades. So…on to the matter of insurance.
Now, all sarcasm aside, I do truly hope that your boyfriend achieves a 100% recovery. However, that being said, I don’t see why you are telling me that your boyfriend is forced to pay the bills because I didn’t have insurance. This statement itself implies that I was at fault. And, unless there is some court decision I am unaware of, fault has not officially been assigned to any party. Except of course tentatively, on scene by the investigators, who claim the opposite of you.
So, maybe I should follow your lead, sarcastically thanking the bicyclist for running into my door without proper bicycle insurance, and moaning about who is going to pay for the dent in my “big car”. Oh, and the impound fees were a joy to pay as well. Lets not lose sight of the fact that your boyfriend, though injured, was not the only one who suffered from this accident.
You know, I didn’t want to bring it up in previous posts because I found it largely irrelevant to the accident itself, but, I gotta say, these snide remarks of yours are forcing my hand. And I say forced because I hate sob stories, particularly if I am the one telling them. I don’t like anybody pitying me for anything.
However, I got to hear you relate your sob story about your boyfriends medical bills (which, according to some as yet unclear logic, you believe I or my insurance should be covering) so I’ll go ahead and lay mine on you.
That “big” car of mine, the one they towed after your boyfriend slammed into it as he flew down the hill, was not only my car but also my home. My wife recently left, along with my daughter, leaving me nothing but the clothes in my closet. Luckily, my sister gave me an old beat-up Nissan she no longer used so I’d at least have somewhere to sleep and keep my clothes. So, I’m terribly sorry I hadn’t had the time or money to get it insured. I’m actually a really good driver and have never been in an accident in almost 20 years of driving. What I of course hadn’t anticipated was someone on a bike of all things, engaging in such risky and unsafe riding, the result of which this entire blog is the subject.
In my previous blogs I have tried my best to just relay the facts as I recalled them without peppering my account with innuendoes and snide remarks. Whether or not your boyfriends perspective on the accident differs from yours I haven’t a clue. I would hope not.
P.S. Thanks @88.
@89 If being factually correct makes me an asshole, then I’m DAMN PROUD of it! I re-read my post from @88, and could find nowhere that I was being an asshole. Everything I typed was spot on. You may not like the facts… they may not agree with your politics… but facts are nasty little details that get in the way of political correctness.
Face it. You are mad that I’m right and there is no wiggle room to find a justifiable excuse for the bicyclist’s behaviour, hence the need for a personal attack, instead of attacking the facts.
You can go crawl back in your anonymous hole now…
Seattleite you have my condolensces. I would suggest that you contact an attorney and determine if they can take a pro bono case on your behalf to recover damages from the bicyclist. These types of fools need to learn that reckless behavior has consequences.
Seattlite, you’ve been in an accident now, and you didn’t have insurance, which is required in this state. Too bad you didn’t hit Reality Check’s car, not only damaging it, but maybe injuring him in the process. He might not be quite so sorry for you then.
You severely damaged a young man, and not on purpose. If you’re not at fault, your insurance would not pay for those damages anyway. If you are found at fault, you would have had the resources (insurance) to pay for those damages. As it is, even if you are found at fault, it doesn’t sound like you’ll be taking any of the financial responsibility that would normally be expected of the driver at fault, other than getting your car out of impound and fixing the dent. (oh, and a ticket for no insurance.)I’m sure the bicyclist would trade bills with you, let alone damages.
Let the courts decide who is at fault, obviously both parties are hearing what they want from the police, and all of us commenters are not going to be doing the deciding.
Just please get insurance or stop driving, safe or not.
@91:
“Am I wrong?”
“No Walter, you’re just an asshole.”
@92:
The way I see it I didn’t severely damage a young man. All parties on the scene, police and witnesses alike (to say nothing of the dent which speaks volumes itself), concur that he was going way too fast. The way I see it, he severely damaged himself. As I said elsewhere, I hope he heals completely but, given that I was at a dead stop and looked both ways before inching my car up onto the driveway, and the fact that he came down the hill (further increasing his speed no doubt), sailed past all the cars stuck at a standstill in traffic and plowed into me is not my fault. I took every precaution I could. My driving record of nearly 20 years is accident-free. I am well familiar with the rules of the road. The bicyclist was riding at hazardous speeds. That was his choice and there is absolutely nothing I can do about that.
And as for trading bills between myself and the cyclist, I bet he would trade if he could. His medical bills are going to far exceed my impound and no insurance ticket fee. But that, to me, would only be relevant if I had plowed into him and not the other way around. If my driving had been at fault, then you might have a point. As it is, your point falls rather flat in my opinion.
As for insurance, I have no money except to stay alive with. OK, fine, one might say…then stop driving. Well, as I said before, I live in my car. The laws as they exist right now prohibit any vehicle from remaining in the same place for something like 72 hours before it gets towed. Because of this, I periodically move my car to different neighborhoods, doing my best not to park in front of one individuals house longer than a night so as to keep my presence as unobtrusive as possible. So anyone who tells me not to drive should rethink the situation and wonder just what they would do had they no money and lived in their car. Before this incident, I was going to grab a burrito and head to Ballard to park for a week or so. The bicyclist seriously put me out quite a lot. You can compare my “damages” with his all you want, but its largely irrelevant. Apples and oranges. Again, I am going on the view that I am not at fault here. If I were then yes, you would have some valid points. The way I see it, a crude analogy would be if someone were to punch you as hard as they could in the back of the head, not hurting you a bit, but breaking their hand against your skull and then complaining about the damages to their hand. And let me clarify at this point that I am not implying that the cyclist himself is complaining about anything. The closest I’ve heard from him was the rather bizarre post sent by his girlfriend (see @86 and @87) in which she went, in the space of one blog post, from stating nobody was to blame, to sarcastically thanking me for her boyfriends medical bills.
Given all this, I may consider taking up Reality Check on the advice and suing for damages to my car, a point I had not really considered previously out of sympathy for the bicyclists’ condition. But I probably won’t, despite the ridiculous post sent by the cyclists’ girlfriend. As everybody I’m sure realizes, whether they are for me, the cyclist, or neither, the only two people, when all is said and done, whose thoughts and opinions are going to matter, are myself and the cyclist. And hopefully, things will be handled fairly and justice will prevail in the courtroom. I guess we’ll have to wait and see.
just to let you know..the SUV driver is 35 years old male who drives without insurance plus is such a pathetic immature LOOSER….he went and complained on his SLOG about hitting a bicyclist (A HUMAN who ALMOST DIED) and how it was annoying it was taking time out of his life…It shouldn’t mater if it was on a bike or car.. A “PERSON” ALMOST DIED…
Dear @95….
Read the facts before you blurt out your opinions. You sound like an idiot. Nobody “almost died”. There were some cuts on his face and a slipped disc. The fact that I am 35 and without insurance is irrelevant especially when I (and everyone else present including the police) do not believe I was at fault. Also, I don’t recall talking about how annoyed I was about anything (except maybe at the cop who towed my car/home). So, before you respond to something about which you obviously know nothing, you should take some time to actually read what it is you are responding to. After all, you certainly don’t want to come off looking like a “pathetic immature LOOSER”…….
Known Facts…
1. The cyclist does not have “just cuts on his face and a slipped disc” the cyclist is dealing with physical plus emotional trauma from the impact of the accident.
2. The cyclist is now sorting though paperwork from the complex medical bureaucracy hoping to find a way to pay for his medical bills while balancing his studies at the university of washington.
ONE LAST FINIAL BLURBED OPINION FOR THE CAR DRIVER…
The “spelling” of “looser” excuse me I mean “loser” is not relevant to this discussion of this bicycle accident but your non-actions and comments towards the bicyclist and his girlfriend have portrayed you as “the meaning” of “loser”. The your car is artificial my brother isn’t….
**Maybe focus less time writing your sob story and ego-driven responses on the SLOG..then possibly you could learn to help or even understand what others might be going through
Interesting…..
If this is some attempt to make me feel guilt over an accident that was 100% not my fault then you have failed miserably. If he wants to travel that fast on a bike while all other traffic is at a standstill then that is his business. And your blurb comes off as far more of a “sob story” than mine. Unless I’m mistaken, I don’t see anywhere on my blog where I bitch and moan about the dent in my car. In fact, toward the cyclist himself I have been nothing but fair and impartial while maintaining my innocence. You, on the other hand, began this discussion with immature name-calling to which I responded in kind. You’re not doing anybody any favors. Also, a little tip: If you are going to accuse somebody of something you should have it backed by facts. Congratulations, you have yet again proven what a complete fucking idiot you are. Keep up the good work.
If the meaning of loser is my “non-action” toward the bicyclist then I’ll wear that title with a badge of honor. What exactly did you expect me to do? Show up at his bedside with flowers? Once again, you are assuming guilt on my part. Your blurbs are incoherent at best and completely one-sided and idiotic at worst. I can’t even tell what you are trying to say in some parts, such as the following little gem: “The your car is artificial my brother isn’t” What the hell does that mean? The typo with the word “looser” was pretty funny since you went out of your way to put it in quotes and write it in all caps thus drawing direct attention to it. But this sentence topped it hands-down. You began a nonsensical sentence and then didn’t even finish it. Please write more. They’re hilarious.
Known Facts…
1. You are an idiot that struggles with the language of your birth.
2. You present arguments that, when legible, lack any kind of perspective other than that of the victim, thus ignoring the important fact that the cyclist was traveling at unsafe speed and instead focusing your argument on irrelevancies such as the age and insurance status of the driver.
But please don’t stop writing. Your blogs are truly priceless. The circular logic and nonsensical unfinished sentences have brightened my evening and for that I thank you….