Muppet that caused 60 bike pile up last year is truely a knob

[Jonny26]

The guy on trial has no idea at all, he stated in court that bikes are only allowed to travel in the emergency lane... How did he get his license?!

http://www.smh.com.au/news/national...ccuses-cyclists/2009/01/28/1232818495327.html

"
Harriet Alexander
January 28, 2009 - 12:14PM

A man accused of causing a pile-up involving up to 60 cyclists on Southern Cross Drive last year has told a court the riders were in the wrong for cycling in his lane.

Hassan Bakr, 34, of Claymore, who was representing himself at Downing Centre Local Court, has cross-examined his victims today over the accident last May at Mascot.

Bakr has been charged with not supplying his particulars, negligent driving, cutting in front of vehicles and travelling in a transit lane.

On May 8, the cyclists had met at the Darlinghurst cafe Bar Coluzzi before riding towards Mascot, down Southern Cross Drive, two abreast, and travelling about 45kmh, the court heard.

One professional cyclist, Kate Nicholls, told the court that Bakr was about half a metre away from the cyclists when he veered into their lane as he drove by.

"Next thing I heard [was] a lot of shouting and everyone crashing, and I saw the car right in front of me, and I fell over other riders that had crashed," Ms Nicholls said.

"While I was still in shock someone called out to get the number plate and at that stage I looked up and the car was 50 metres in front and drove off. It was too far away from me to get the number plate."

Bakr suggested to Ms Nicholls that she had incriminated herself by admitting she was riding in the left lane.

"By law it's not your lane, your lane is the emergency lane," Bakr told Ms Nicholls.

Magistrate Chris Clisdell said that cyclists were permitted to drive in traffic lanes.

Another cyclist, Khalid Toefy, told the court he had seen Bakr swerve into his lane before slowing down in front of the group of cyclists, which he believed was intentional.

Bakr asked Mr Toefy: "What gives you the right to say it was intentional, are you a psychiatrist?"

Mr Toefy replied: "That's just my opinion."

Bakr said: "Just your opinion, it's not worth enough."

Also involved in the crash were former Olympians Ben Kersten, Ms Nichols's father Kevin, Graeme Brown, Michelle Ferris and Matthew White.

Three cyclists have given evidence today.

The hearing continues."

People like this guy really piss me off, I am sure he will only get a slap on the wrist. He should lose his license and be charge with GBH and using his car as a weapon! Not that I am a lawyer, but the above penalties sound plausable

 

[Comic Book Guy]

Muppet is too polite. Oxygen thief is more like it.

Cheers,
CBG.

P.S. Please note this muppet is not representative of Campbelltown residents, so no westie jokes please.

 

[Christo]

Sounds like the fact he's chosen to defend himself is a ploy to allow a mis-trial/appeal if the case goes against him.

A powerful example of the ignorance of road rules as they apply to cyclists by the general public.

This is a compelling argument for funding for an awereness campaign of national TV ads etcetera.

 

[BigSplashBear]

What is the truism of things legal?

Something along the line of a person representing themselves in court has a fool for a client, isn't it?

The really sad part is that whether a cyclist or pedestrian being in the right does not help you recover from injuries. This trial is quite a timely reminder given the very sad news on the weekend from the incident on the M7. One cyclist killed, one critically injured. My thoughts and condolences go out to the family and friends of the men involved.

I'm very glad that the defendant in the 60 rider pile up did not cause a fatality. I think he may have had different counsel if that was the case.

 

[scoobydid]

That he's representing himself should hopefully assure a conviction; assuming he is not a practicing lawyer or is very well acquainted with the law.
I believe he will be found guilty of a range of offenses. The problem is, what kind of penalty will he face and how harsh will it be? The current track record of convictions for other offenses you read about lately says the law will not be that harsh on him. I hope I'm proven wrong.

 

[Tazed]

Punish this guy all you want, it won't help solve the problem.
A significant number of motorists are unaware that bikes are legal vehicles and have rights 95% the same as other vehicles on the road (the other 5% generally cover specific needs/rights of the bicycle, in our favour).
Add to that that a reasonable proportion of drivers don't think bikes should even use the road at all, and you have the crux of the problem (hey, remember, we cyclists don't pay road tax... oh, except lots of us drive, too...).
In more bicycle tolerant societies, bikes exist just fine amongst the traffic and are seen with much more legitimacy than here.
The only trouble with the above argument is the number of idiot cyclists out there. There's enough bad riding around to ensure the cyclists' arguments are able to be countered pretty easily. I watched tens of cyclists ride through red lights every day on my commute, just to cite one example.
Anyway, it's a problem, but in general, higher levels of tolerance, understanding and courtesy from all sides would be necessary to make things genuinely safer.
This bloke included.

 

[stinkybigmacc]

Punish this guy all you want, it won't help solve the problem.
A significant number of motorists are unaware that bikes are legal vehicles and have rights 95% the same as other vehicles on the road (the other 5% generally cover specific needs/rights of the bicycle, in our favour).
Add to that that a reasonable proportion of drivers don't think bikes should even use the road at all, and you have the crux of the problem (hey, remember, we cyclists don't pay road tax... oh, except lots of us drive, too...).
In more bicycle tolerant societies, bikes exist just fine amongst the traffic and are seen with much more legitimacy than here.
The only trouble with the above argument is the number of idiot cyclists out there. There's enough bad riding around to ensure the cyclists' arguments are able to be countered pretty easily. I watched tens of cyclists ride through red lights every day on my commute, just to cite one example.
Anyway, it's a problem, but in general, higher levels of tolerance, understanding and courtesy from all sides would be necessary to make things genuinely safer.
This bloke included.

I have to agree and after 18 years of road riding I have had enough.
I have hung up the cleats and got myself some new five tens. I have missed it but at least I know I am in control and no idiot is going to run me down when I am out amongst the single track.

 

[vx255]

It is good too see that at least he's finally getting his day in court, after all the stuffing about and not fronting the last 2 times.

The article reminds me of the saying
"A man who represents himself, has a fool for a lawyer"

 

[kirb]

i hope

well i hope he gets what he deserves in the end, it doesnt matter what happens now all the karma will come straight at him at once

 

[edo1]

It is good too see that at least he's finally getting his day in court, after all the stuffing about and not fronting the last 2 times.

The article reminds me of the saying
"A man who represents himself, has a fool for a lawyer"

I think you will find the saying is that he has a fool for a client...which makes lots more sense.

Its a tad scary just how ignorant this bloke is, I mean he has fronted in court without actually checking the road rules. That sort of stupidity will hopefully be punished by the court.

 

[vx255]

I think you will find the saying is that he has a fool for a client...which makes lots more sense.

Its a tad scary just how ignorant this bloke is, I mean he has fronted in court without actually checking the road rules. That sort of stupidity will hopefully be punished by the court.

yep, I stand corrected, hot day, brain fade etc.

You're spot on too, you would think if you are going to defend yourself, you would prepare a "brief" of sorts, fact checking would be high on the list of priorities.

I don't know how would you describe it.. I think he honestly believes that cyclists are second class to drivers, and he doesn't need to take the case seriously, as he "knows" he's right, and so must the court. Is it arrogance or stupidity?

The mind boggles.

 

[DeBloot]

You really have to feel a bit sorry for arse slime cretins like this
The only way he can gain a bit of control in his life is to do the old pull in front and brake manouevre- on cyclists
The rest of his life must be filled with joy

 

[McPete]

Most drivers in this country are pretty reasonable sorts. We just get the odd one who thinks his ideas are binding law and tries to enforce them with the might of a motor car. However, I'm not about to take one step back from my rights on the road, even in the face of such events.

...we cyclists don't pay road tax...

I may be about to be proven wrong here, but at what point precisely are motorists paying a "road tax"? Such a demon exists in the horrid US taxation system, but I'm fairly confident that our taxation and government revenue systems eliminate the requirement for specific user-pays taxes in most situations.

P.

 

[niftydog]

Well, he's been found guilty, but he got off lightly IMHO.

Shame it's not illegal to be a complete yutz.

...Magistrate Roger Clisdell found Bakr guilty of not keeping wholly within the lane, negligent driving and not supplying particulars after an accident.

Bakr was fined $1,200 plus court costs.

A fourth charge of cutting in front of a vehicle after overtaking was dropped.

Mr Clisdell denied the damages claim of $45,000.

 

[Unlearn]

The bototm line is, he is endagering lives! with a very real chance of killing a person.

People like this should never, ever have licence to drive, at least not without spending 6 months on a road bike (or bicycle used for road cycling).

Pure ignorance... and clearly has no respect for people's lives...

 

[Beerismyfriend]

Absolutely moronic act and a fairly obvious outcome in court today, however...

Man, there are some knobhead cyclists on the road. The worst I have seen are in WA. I used to drive down to the pool in Fremantle around dawn and there were swarms of the idiots out there in the dark without lights or hi-vis gear, all over the road, being belligerent twats.

I've been clipped on a road bike and I would hate to do it to someone else. Got frighteningly close in Freo.

 

[herzog]

I'm not a big fan of the so-called "Spandex Brigade", however this driver clearly has something wrong with him.

Seems to have got off very lightly too.

 

[24alpha]

Remove him from the gene pool.

 

[skwiz05]

Yes, the guy is a knob and a moron, but, so are the 59 other cyclists who piled up, on top of the first one who crashed.

If its good enough for cars to travel at a safe distance, same road rules should apply to cyclists.

I for one give the utmost respect to a cyclist, when I pass in a car. But im sick of the 'Pack' mentality of large cyclist groups, who I believe make it unsafe for themselves some of the time.

Safe stopping distances apply to everyone on the road. What if a car was following? Then more may have been run over and killed even. All because too many riders ride too close to the next guy.

All the sympathy in the world to the first one who got barrelled by that moron in the car, but, a little less to the morons following who didnt stop in time......

 

[doug89]

Do you think that if he had done this to another car he would be liable for the damage to the vehicle? I would think most likely. Obviously a different story if you damage thousands of dollars worth of bikes .