Yates - discussion of the "facts" and why the police got it wrong
Hopefully with my clever use of emphasis you've noticed the police charged a bicycle rider for violating rules specifically for the operation of motorcycles. Really?The Baltimore City police concluded as follows in the accident reconstruction report:
“the bicycle rider was riding in a lane occupied by parked cars, and in turn was improperly passing the Mack truck. Under Maryland Transportation Article 21-1202 all traffic laws apply to bicycles and motor scooters. Based upon these conclusions the rider of the bicycle was in violation of Maryland Transportation Article:
(1) 21-1205(a)(3) each person operating a bicycle at a speed less than the speed of traffic shall ride as near to the right side of the road as practicable and safe, except when passing a stopped or slower moving vehicle.
(2) 21-1205(c) each person operating a bicycle on a roadway shall exercise due care when passing a vehicle.
(3) 21-1303(c) the operator of a motorcycle may not overtake and pass in the same lane occupied by the vehicle being overtaken.
(4) 21-1303(d) a person may not operate a motorcycle between lanes of traffic or between adjacent lines or rows of vehicles.”
Per the statement by the police "You have the same rights as a motor vehicle and also the same obligations." This is exactly the same flawed logic that MVA used to imply that cyclists can impede traffic rather then note how bicycle rules when going slower then the speed limit are very similar to slow moving vehicle rules. So for benefit of the reader I will quote what the law actually says:
So for impeding traffic we have this rule: § 21-804.(a) A person may not willfully drive a motor vehicle at such a slow speed as to impede the normal and reasonable movement of traffic.§ 21-1202. Traffic laws apply to bicycles and motor scooters.
Every person operating a bicycle or a motor scooter in a public bicycle area has all the rights granted to and is subject to all the duties required of the driver of a vehicle by this title, including the duties set forth in § 21-504 of this title, except:
(1) As otherwise provided in this subtitle; and
(2) For those provisions of this title that by their very nature cannot apply.
And by it's very nature cannot apply to bicyclists because it only applies to a motor vehicle. (See Can cyclists be charged with impeding traffic)
Now I have some empathy for the MVA because within the discipline they work with § 21-1202 is just summarized by it's title "Traffic laws apply to bicycles and motor scooters" and impeding traffic is defined in terms that only drivers of motor vehicles need understand. They never even look at what the law actually says, that's some other department's job. But with the police citing a bicyclists at fault and while quoting law and they write out "motorcycle", you would think some bells would go off.
"The investigators within the unit are very educated and experienced in all types of crashes and have attended several schools specific to the physics of a pedestrian crash and a cyclist fatal crash."
In regards to this statement by the police I call complete BS. Please take some time to learn traffic laws as they pertain to bicyclists or consult with someone knowledgeable.
OK now lets review the bicycling specific "violations" mentioned.
Based upon these conclusions the rider of the bicycle was in violation of Maryland Transportation Article:
(1) 21-1205(a)(3) each person operating a bicycle at a speed less than the speed of traffic shall ride as near to the right side of the road as practicable and safe, except when passing a stopped or slower moving vehicle.
This describes exactly how Yates was riding, so how could he be in violation of this?
(2) 21-1205(c) each person operating a bicycle on a roadway shall exercise due care when passing a vehicle.
This implies cyclists by law are required to be mind readers and yield to drivers that fail to signal. Really?
If you are as outraged about this as I am contact your City Council rep.
http://cityservices.baltimorecity.gov/citycouncil/
The police's statement to the bicycling community just after the crash is after the fold:
Additional information: One of the sloppiest police investigations in a fatality that I personally have seen in yearsI am the commander of the Traffic Section within the Baltimore Police Department. I supervise the Crash Team and therefore the e-mail you authored to Mayor Sheila Dixon was forwarded to me for a response.
I was at the scene of this tragic crash and I know that this incident was investigated thoroughly from the very beginning as a very serious issue, as all fatal crashes are. We have obtained a video of this incident that shows the entire event.
There are only some aspects of this case that are public record. I will tell you that the video clearly shows the cyclist to be at fault. There is no "right to the road" as a cyclist. You have the same rights as a motor vehicle and also the same obligations. The cyclist was not operating within those parameters. The tanker truck that the cyclist struck was a large one. The cyclist struck it in the rear. There is no evidence to support that the driver was ever aware there was an impact. Do not believe what the media reports as entirely true regarding this or any event.
The investigators within the unit are very educated and experienced in all types of crashes and have attended several schools specific to the physics of a pedestrian crash and a cyclist fatal crash. With regard to the question of it being investigated as a hit and run accident, not only was it investigated as such but the truck was located by investigators within a few days of the incident.
Please feel free to contact my office if you have any further questions.
Lt. Leslie Bank
Traffic Commander
Baltimore Police Department
What's Related