Tag Archive for vehicular assault

Is it time for ESPN’s Tony Kornheiser to go?

March 18, 2010 / / One comment

Tony Kornheiser wants to run you down.

As noted at the end of this morning’s post, Kornheiser — former sports columnist for the Washington Post, and longtime host of Pardon the Interruption on ESPN and the Tony Kornheiser Show on Washington’s ESPN980, recently went off on a more than six minute anti-cyclist rant.

Evidently, he doesn’t have many listeners. Even though the show aired a week ago, it didn’t make any waves until word reached Lance Armstrong — who responded by tweeting his 2.4 million followers on Twitter, calling Kornheiser a “complete, f-ing idiot.”

And when Lance tweets, people listen.

The segment starts out as a rant against a planned bikeway on Pennsylvania Avenue. And quickly devolves into a vile condemnation of cyclists, including repeated suggestions to just run them over.

Yes, he actually urges his listeners to commit violence against another human being. Or rather, countless human beings, most of whom he has never met, and probably never will.

Yet he still wants to kill you. Or maim you. Or maybe just scare you and fuck up your bike, since he later backs off and says “So you tap them. I’m not saying kill them.”

In other words, he only wants his listeners to commit assault with a deadly weapon, not murder.

Well, thank God for that.

Of course, it’s still a crime to incite violence. Had he suggested that his listeners pull out a gun and shoot African Americans or Hispanics or Asians or Gays or Muslims, he would have been off the air in minutes.

And probably be standing before a judge before the day was over. Especially if anyone was fool enough to act on his suggestion.

But fortunately for him, he only suggested running down cyclists. Which makes it okay, I guess.

Now Lance says he just got off the phone with Kornheiser, who is “very sorry for his comments re: cyclists.”

Yeah, I’m sure he is.

So was Dr. Thompson after he was convicted. And I’m sure all those cyclists who have been the victims of road raging drivers take comfort in that.

Myself included.

Armstrong says he’s going on Kornheiser’s show in the morning to talk about it. If you want to listen in, you can hear it by clicking on the Listen Live tab at the ESPN980 website between 7 am and 10 am PDT.

Then again, if you’ve already had enough, you can tweet them at @ESPNRadio980 to express your displeasure, or call Red Zebra Broadcasting — owners of ESPN980 — at 301/562-3776. Or just email them through the station’s website; I already did.

And some people are already taking more direct action; however, despite my earlier comments, while Disney owns ESPN, they don’t own the radio station where Kornheiser made his comments.

We’ll have to see what he has to say to Lance tomorrow. And just how much he’s willing to work with local cyclists to make up for the damage he’s already caused.

My guess is, not much.

Or at least, not enough.

Category: General / Tags: , , ,

A more responsive LAPD confirms: We do take road rage reports seriously

November 20, 2009 / / 6 comments

Today’s story has two heroes.

Both wear blue. And both reflect the courtesy, support and responsiveness this city deserves from its police department. Yet which so many cyclists have learned not to expect, based on their own experiences.

Myself included.

Both are unidentified here, after requesting anonymity — something I will honor to keep them from getting swamped by cyclists seeking high-level help. And to keep that channel open for the next time.

The story begins last week, when I got a second-hand report that a local cyclist had been threatened in a road rage incident, and that the LAPD had refused to take a report about it.

By itself, that would be disturbing enough.

Too many cyclists encounter angry drivers on the roads as it is; if we can’t count on police protection, they might as well declare open season on anyone on two wheels. But it was especially troubling in light of the Mandeville Canyon case, in which prior incidents involving Dr. Christopher Thompson established the pattern of behavior that led to his conviction.

Even if there’s nothing the police can do, having a record of such complaints could establish a paper trail that might eventually lead to another prosecution. Because chance are, Thompson isn’t the only driver willing to use a car to threaten, intimidate or injure another human being.

As a result, I wanted to find if it really was LAPD policy not to take road rage reports from cyclists. So I reached out to Bicycle Advisory Committee Chairman Glenn Bailey, who suggested that I contact one of the top commanders at the new police headquarters downtown.

I sent an email explaining who I was, what I had heard, and asking for clarification about the department’s policies regarding road rage incidents. And then I moved on with my day, assuming I’d be lucky to get a response within a week. Or ever.

To my surprise, though, I received an email half an hour later asking for more information. And within two hours, I had phone messages waiting for me from the Commander, as well as a Lieutenant he had asked to look into the matter.

Both were very helpful when I returned their calls. The Commander, especially, was surprisingly friendly for such a high-ranking officer. Unfortunately, they both agreed that there was nothing they could tell me without more information.

I told them I was trying to get in touch with the rider involved, and would get back to them as soon as I knew more. And hung up the phone, fully expecting to never hear from either of them again.

A few days later, though, I got an email from the cyclist, who confirmed much of what I’d heard and agreed to talk with the Lieutenant.

(In light of the Thompson case, in which Patrick Watson’s emails were subpoenaed by the defense, I agreed not to disclose his name or any details of the incident.)

I forwarded his phone number to the Lieutenant. Later that day, I heard back from both of them that they had spoken, and the matter had been satisfactorily resolved.

The Lieutenant went on to explain that no one at the department had refused to take a report, and that it is police policy to take any road rage case seriously — but that what constitutes road rage can be subject to interpretation.

For instance, if a driver yells at a cyclist to get off the road, it probably wouldn’t merit police involvement. But if the driver uses his vehicle to threaten or attack a rider, they want to know about it.

And he assured me that they will take it very seriously.

Without going into specific detail on this case, he added that miscommunication sometimes occurs because the people involved are highly excited in the heat of the moment, and may have trouble communicating exactly what happened. Police officers are trained to calm them down and get the information they need, he said — but some officers are better at it than others.

When this rider was able to explain more clearly what had happened, it was clear that a crime may have occurred. As a result, the case will be investigated by a detective as an Assault with a Deadly Weapon.

He also gave me some advice on what to do if you find yourself in a situation like this — which I’ll try to get to in another post next week.

Bottom line, the cyclist was satisfied with the result. And I was pleasantly surprised, not only that such high-ranking officers would respond, but that they would take the time to investigate the situation and keep me in the loop every step of the way.

The Lieutenant also added one final thought, which I’ll let him explain in his own words from a follow-up email:

Finally, the Department is continuously evaluating its operations in our attempts to improve.  We are looking at ways to better educate the community and the Department employees on bike safety issues and traffic accident prevention.  In order to develop a comprehensive plan to minimize to the risks to bicyclists we will need their input and cooperation.

Maybe things really are getting better.

………

On a related note, Asst. D.A. Mary Stone, prosecutor in the Thompson case, has requested letters from cyclists to present to the judge next Monday prior to Thompson’s sentencing. Will Campbell offers his letter as an example; you can see additional letters on Streetsblog, as well as Damien Newton’s advice on how to structure your letter.

Category: General / Tags: , , , , ,

Officer Krupke, you’ve done it again — Cyclists plan to Storm the Bastille

April 30, 2009 / / 3 comments

Man the barricades.

Last week saw a vehicular assault on a group of cyclists, which was followed by threats of gun and gang violence — not to mention the crushing of several bikes as the driver attempted to flee the scene in his plate-less two-ton Hummer.

Then, in an action many cyclists recognize as typical of the LAPD, the driver was allowed to leave the scene without so much as a warning — despite being stopped by the police with a bicycle still lodged beneath his vehicle. And to top it off, the officer in charge not only said that he would have done the same thing, but implied that he might have used a gun himself.

Clearly, whatever may have lead up to this event, cyclists will never be safe on the streets of Los Angeles until we have the full support and protection of the LAPD that should be the right of every citizen of this city — and something that is promised by the 1st, 3rd and 4th clauses of the recently adopted Cyclists’ Bill of Rights:

1) Cyclists have the right to travel safely and free of fear.

3) Cyclists have the right to the full support of educated law enforcement.

4) Cyclists have the right to the full support of our judicial system and the right to expect that those who endanger, injure or kill cyclists be dealt with to the full extent of the law.

This past Tuesday, a group of cyclists met with Los Angeles Police Commission and the police Inspector General to file a protest.

Now riders are being called on to attend this Friday’s City Council meeting at the Van Nuys City Hall to express our dissatisfaction and demand action from the city government. If you can’t attend in person, contact your city council person now.

I’ll leave it to Dr. Alex to explain why immediate action is necessary.

Because we all have the right to be safe on our streets, whether we use two wheels or four.


Gary rides bikes, and now tweets, too. Lance starts his comeback at New Mexico’s Tour of the Gila. Coconut Grove cyclists take a page from the Dutch. The good news is, California no longer leads the nation in cyclists killed; the bad news is, we’re number two. Our rash of hit-and-runs spreads to neighboring Arizona, while a Utah driver who intentionally drove into a group of cyclists is sentenced to just 30 days in jail. An Iowa cyclist is injured after being struck with a full can of beer thrown from a passing car. Finally, a judge in Australia blames a rider’s accident on not having a headlight — even though he was hit from behind, despite his rear flasher.

Category: General / Tags: , , , , , , ,

Officer Krupke, you’ve done it again — LAPD’s anti-bike bias

April 28, 2009 / / One comment

Earlier this month, Dr. Alex left a comment on something I’d written. The last line in particular has stuck with me for the last few weeks:

…I feel more and more that the leading edge of bike activism is in law enforcement issues, not urban planning

You see, in the 10 months since I started this blog, I’ve become more and more focused on the politics of cycling — the need to elect candidates who actually support bicycling and will work to change the laws to help encourage riding, and keep cyclists safe and alive.

But Alex has a damn good point, especially in light of the LAPD’s apparent failure to enforce the laws prohibiting vehicular assault this past weekend — let alone protect riders from threats of gun and gang violence.

Unfortunately, it’s nothing new.

My own experience with police bias dates back to a road rage incident I’ve mentioned before, when a driver intentionally knocked me off my bike while I was stopped at a stop sign.

Once the police finally got there, the driver insisted that she never hit me or my bike, and in fact, had no idea why I was upset or why I was blaming her. According to her version, she was just minding her own business, driving patiently behind me, when I blew through the stop sign without even slowing down, and simply fell over when making a right turn.

The officer in charge listened to her, then came over to me, and — without bothering to get my version of the events, either from me or the officer I’d given my statement to — said he believed her, “because none of you bike riders ever obey stops signs.”

I realized then that nothing I said was going to influence how he wrote his report.

Of course, I tried.

I pointed out the injuries on my left side, to show that I had fallen to my left. Which meant her version would make me the first cyclist in history to fall to the left while making a fast right turn. But his blank stare confirmed my suspicions that beginning physics isn’t a required course at the police academy these days.

Then I pointed to the long arc of deep gashes on my right calf, and showed how they lined up perfectly with the teeth on my large cog. And explained how that proved my foot was planted firmly on the ground when her car struck me, since my leg wouldn’t have hit it like that if I’d been clipped in.

Finally, I pointed out that the damage to my bike, while minor, was consistent with my version of the events, and could not have occurred the way she described it. Yet when I got a copy of the accident report, he’d written that there was no damage to my bike.

And that’s exactly what her insurance company cited as justification for denying my claim.

In the end, she left without even a warning, while I was threatened with arrest for filing a false police report. And it was then that I realized that cyclists can’t count on the LAPD for protection or support.

And nothing that has occurred in the years since to change that opinion.

Of course, not all officers are like that. And as Zach Behrens pointed out on LAist, there are two sides any story.

But it’s up to the police to protect the rights and safety of all citizens, without bias. Not protect the right of those on four wheels to attack and intimidate those of us on two.


L.A.’s Channel 2 covers last weekend’s Ghost Bike installation. An Ohio paper offers nine good tips for safe riding. Stephen Box reports on the “not my job” jurisdictional failure of the Orange Line Bike Path. The Weekly profiles Flying Pigeon’s Brayj-Ali brothers among their LA People 2009. Colorado’s common-sense bike safety bill awaits the governor’s signature, while Wisconsin passes an anti-dooring bill. Great Briton considers a Pounds for Pedals plan to encourage people to trade in their old bikes. Finally, a cyclist injured in a Santa Rosa collision is suspected of BRWI (that’s bike riding while intoxicated).

Category: General / Tags: , , , , , ,

Ghost bike for Echo Park cycling fatality; Police-blessed vehicular assault Downtown

April 24, 2009 / / 2 comments

Stephen Box managed to get the information I couldn’t find anywhere else.

Earlier in the week, I’d written about the cyclist killed by an intoxicated hit-and-run driver in Echo Park early Sunday. Despite my best efforts, I wasn’t able to learn any more about the victim than had been included in the initial reports; Box reports that he was a day laborer from Sonora, Mexico, who used his bicycle as his primary means of transportation.

Just one of the countless nameless, faceless workers we Angelenos pass every day without a second thought.

Yet he died as one of us. 

And he is being memorialized this evening where he was killed on Glendale Blvd. As Box put it:

Let’s work together to make sure this is the last Ghost Bike placed in our community.

Meanwhile, the local cyber wires are buzzing with the news that a cyclist was injured late last night when he was struck by a driver in Hummer with no license plates — apparently intentionally. The occupants of the vehicle then threatened the other riders with guns and gang violence, and ran over several of their bikes when they tried to block the vehicle until police arrived.

But the real injustice came when the lead officer let the driver go, and told the cyclists that he would have done the same thing the driver did — and suggested that he might have used a gun, as well.

So who exactly is he trying to “protect and serve”?

As a number of people have commented on the Midnight Ridazz forum, some of the other officers on the scene were far more sympathetic. But this represents an anti-cyclist bias that seems far too common in the L.A.P.D. — one that I’ve experienced myself, when I was threatened with arrest after being the victim of a road rage incident a few years back.

The difference is, now there really is a cycling community in Los Angeles, and protests are already being planned for next week. And in fact, may be occurring right now, as there were plans to extend the Ghost Bike ride into a protest at Parker Center.

And less than a week after Jesus Castillo was killed in Echo Park, another cyclist was the victim of yet another hit-and-run in Orange County today.

Some run away.

And some just get away with it.

Category: General / Tags: , , , , , ,

Massachusetts Bicyclist Safety Bill vs. Dr. Doom and his Disciples of Death

January 22, 2009 / / 2 comments

The last few days, I’ve been reading, with increasing degrees of stomach-churning disgust, the comments that followed the Times’ article about the good doctor’s not guilty plea on their L.A. Now blog

Stomach churning, because many of our fellow citizens seem to believe they are justified in using their car as a deadly weapon, should any cyclist have the audacity to annoy or inconvenience them — and that the good doctor did nothing wrong, despite intentionally injuring two fellow human beings.

Stomach churning, in that many of the comments said that the cyclists were to blame, accusing them of tailgating the good doctor — despite the fact that he admitted intentionally cutting in front of the riders, then slamming on his brakes to teach them a lesson. Or at the very least, that their obnoxious behavior somehow justified sending both to the emergency room.

And stomach churning, in the appalling lack of knowledge of regarding the rights of cyclists under California law — and the belief that roads were made exclusively for motorized vehicles.

While I recognize that some — but by no means most — cyclists may ride in a dangerously aggressive manner, it is disingenuous at best to blame all riders for the actions of a relative few. As I was discussing with an employee at a local bike shop over the weekend, many drivers remember the single rider they saw blow through a red light, but never notice the others who waited patiently for it to change.

Then there are those who don’t believe we even belong on bikeways that were designed and built for our safety.

So despite the progress made in L.A. with the Cyclist’s Bill of Rights, it’s clear that we still have a very long way to go.

Contrast that with the new bill that was recently signed into law in Massachusetts. The Massachusetts Bicyclist Safety Bill applies common sense solutions to many of the problems we face everyday, on every ride.

Like making it clear that signals are not required when they would interfere with safe operation of the bike, such as when both hands are needed for braking or steering. Banning dooring, as well as cutting riders off after passing or when making a turn — something I’ve addressed previously.

And requiring that all police recruits receive training on “bicycle-related laws, bicyclist injuries, dangerous behavior by bicyclists, motorists actions that cause bicycle crashes, and motorists intentionally endangering bicyclists.” In-service training on the same subjects is optional for more experienced officers.

Imagine a police force that is actually knowledgeable, familiar with the rights and responsibilities of cyclists, and how motorists can cause cycling accidents — intentionally or otherwise.

I’ve been struggling lately with the question of what comes next, now that the Cyclists’ Bill of Rights is well on it’s way to becoming law.

As indicated above, I’ve made some suggestions for ways the California Vehicle Code could be changed to better protect riders and encourage cycling. (Scroll down to “Change the law. Change the world.”, then back up to see the individual suggestions.)

Another step would be to take the Cyclists’ Bill of Rights to the state level and make it part of the Vehicle Code. And require that drivers be tested on the full range of state cycling laws when they apply for their licenses.

As indicated in my previous post, Brayj had an excellent suggestion yesterday, when he said that the MTA could be sued to force funding of bicycle-related projects. And Ingrid Peterson of Rearview Rider added to his concept by suggesting that it’s time for a local coalition of cyclists and lawyers to protect our collective interests.

But we could do a lot worse than taking the full text of the Mass. law directly to our state representatives, and insisting that they use it as a platform for reforming our cycling laws.

Once they get off their collective asses and do something about the damn budget mess, that is.

 

Australian riders blame helmet laws for keeping cycling commuters off the road. Evidently, New York Police ignore hit-and-run accidents involving cyclists — as well as requests for more information. And cyclists fight back against bike thieves with exploding locks.

Category: General / Tags: , , , , , , ,

Bike law change #11: Investigate and prosecute any reported incidence of vehicular assault as a criminal violation

October 23, 2008 / / 2 comments

Awhile back, following the infamous Mandeville Canyon brake test, a woman wrote to describe her experience as bicycle commuter along a major east-west thoroughfare in the San Fernando Valley.

Like many streets in this city, there was no shoulder or bike lane, so she was forced to ride in the traffic lane, as impatient drivers honked or raced closely past her. One in particular, apparently angry at being stuck behind her at a red light, revved his engine and lurched forward, actually making contact and lifting her rear wheel off the ground in what she could only interpret as a not-so-subtle threat.

Actually, it was a crime. Or if it wasn’t, it certainly should have been. Because while most of us see a car as simply a means of getting from here to there, in the wrong hands, it can be a deadly weapon.  And there is no real difference between threatening a cyclist with a car or with a gun, since both are capable of inflicting serious injury or death.

Sections 240 – 248 of the California Penal Code define assault as “…an unlawful attempt, coupled with a present ability, to commit a violent injury on the person of another;” battery is defined as “any willful and unlawful use of force or violence upon the person of another.” Meanwhile, section 245 sets a penalty of up to 4 years in prison for assault with a deadly weapon other than a gun.

Like a car, for instance.

Of course, there are other ways a car can be used as a deadly weapon, from intentionally causing an accident by striking the cyclist or forcing the cyclist to strike the car, as the good doctor has been charged with doing, to intentionally striking a rider with an open car door, or forcing the rider off the road or into another vehicle.

Any one of these can cause serious injury or death. Even simply throwing something at a rider from a moving vehicle — as has happened to many, if not most of us, at one time or another — can cause a rider to lose control of his bike, with potentially deadly consequences.

But just try to report something like that to the police; in most cases, they’ll say that since they didn’t see it, there’s nothing they can do. Or if they do bother to respond, usually because of an injury to the rider, they’ll investigate the incident as a traffic accident, rather than the criminal activity it is.

Yet they would never tell the victim of an armed robbery that there’s no point in investigating, since they didn’t actually see the crime take place; nor would they investigate a mugging as a simple accident. Even a report of someone brandishing a gun in a threatening manner is enough to provoke a massive police response.

But commit the same crime with a car, and you’re virtually guaranteed of getting away with it.

So let’s demand the protection we deserve. Let’s contact our legislators, and insist that they amend sections 240 – 248 to clearly specify that anyone who uses a motor vehicle to threaten, intimidate, attack or injure a cyclist or pedestrian can, and should, be charged with assault and/or battery with a deadly weapon, and subject to a prison term and seizure of the vehicle, as well as permanent loss of driving privileges.

And insist that any report of a motor vehicle being used in such a manner be investigated by the police to the fullest extent possible as a criminal matter, rather than a traffic infraction.

Because your life, and mine, may depend on it.

 

 

An elderly woman was hit and killed by a teenage cyclist on his way to band practice yesterday. Vision Zero attempts to end the body count; isn’t it time Los Angeles got on board? Green LA Girl plans on attending the LACBC’s Bicycle Road Skills Class (and early wishes for a happy birthday); meanwhile, C.I.C.L.E. is offering an Intro to City Riding for eight lucky riders, which takes place the same day as the inaugural Tour de Ballona, none of which I’ll be attending unless these damn allergies improve. Evidently, L.A. now has its own version of N.Y.’s popular Bike Snob. And finally, this is just one reason why those allergies are killing me today.

 

Category: General / Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,
  Recent Entries »
Wordpress Theme by ThemeZee