[funetical]

I think the biggest issue is none of the behavior was warranted. They both practiced revenge not justice. I can find myself easily siding with both, or neither. I think I would flip out though if a cyclist grabbed onto my car.

[Industry_Hack]

Originally Posted by ruggedscotsman

Hard to speculate on intentions, but I would guess the lawyer was not trying to kill the cyclist. I think that holding onto the vehicle was a dumb move on the part of the cyclist. Rage is a powerful emotion. If the cyclist had been involved in an altercation earlier in the evening, it may have clouded his judgement in this instance. Regardless, this is a tragedy for all sides.

Fear is pretty powerful too. If someone was hanging onto your car, and you didn't know their intentions, only that they were angry, how would your driving be?

[Industry_Hack]

Originally Posted by funetical

I think the biggest issue is none of the behavior was warranted. They both practiced revenge not justice. I can find myself easily siding with both, or neither. I think I would flip out though if a cyclist grabbed onto my car.

I like the way you think.

[ruggedscotsman]

I agree. wasn't trying to defend either party, just postulating how/why someone would grab onto a moving vehicle. and funetical's right, you don't grab onto a car, thats like messing with a mans horse.

[Industry_Hack]

Originally Posted by ruggedscotsman

I agree. wasn't trying to defend either party, just postulating how/why someone would grab onto a moving vehicle. and funetical's right, you don't grab onto a car, thats like messing with a mans wife.

Fixed that for you, American style.

[synack]

Originally Posted by ruggedscotsman

I agree. wasn't trying to defend either party, just postulating how/why someone would grab onto a moving vehicle. and funetical's right, you don't grab onto a car, thats like messing with a mans horse.

From what I read the vehicle was stopped when the cyclist grabbed it.

[ruggedscotsman]

moving or not, its not a great idea. I think funetical summed it up pretty well in post #11

[CTD50]

Followed this closely 'elsewhere', and saw a lot of video about it. There were also reports from different sources that the cyclist had some alcohol in his system that evening.

His name was Darcy Sheppard, btw. And the lawyer is Michael Bryant, former AG.

Sheppard may not have been the most civilized character in the province, but he didn't deserve to be pinballed off off trees and mailboxes and 50+mph, nor did he deserve to have the back wheel of the Saab roll over his head. A personal, hands-only assault of another person does not warrant vehicular homicide.

And, oh -- Bryant was trained in boxing, worked out regularly, and was known for 'alpha-male' assertiveness in his dealings on the job and off.

Never mind that they may have argued earlier in the evening -- Bryant had the chance to be the bigger man, and let sh** slide. He ran his car into Sheppard's bike, ON VIDEO, running it into the intersection -- the reason Sheppard attacked him at the car door. Bryant moved him, then tried driving around him to get on his way.

It was Sheppard's attitude of 'taking care of business' himself, rather than trust the system that had crapped on him his whole life, that led to his aggression.

Some people have said he got what he deserved for starting a fight he couldn't finish; and they are cyclists, as well!

I don't condone what Sheppard did, it was stupid -- but Bryant wound up killing him for it. No, not with intent, but he did pursue the course of action that killed Sheppard.

[whyeyebike]

Reading the initial article, I have to agree with Hack's statement that it is short on facts....that being said, they both seemed to have acted irrationally to allow something like this to escalate like it did.

I think this boils down to fight vs flight. Sheppard certainly appears like he was ready to fight while Bryant was ready for flight. I don't necessarily think Bryant's response was incorrect. Many people would react to an individual reaching into their vehicle that way. Hell, many police would tell you that in a "car-jacking" scenario, if you don't see a weapon and you have a clear means of escape, take it.

No doubt it is a sad story.....but the lesson here isn't about cycling safety per se....its that cooler heads prevail. At least I would have hoped so in this case.

[CTD50]

Y I... even a car-jacking escape scenario doesn't involve trying to scrape your 'aggressor' off the car with trees and fixture as 50mph. A sudden, skidding stop from 25 will dislodge anyone just as well, and a LOT less likely to be fatal.

For someone to think of using street fixtures belies any claim of panic -- that takes a certain degree of logistical thought. And Bryant's background doesn't indicate someone who would easily panic.

I don't know enough about this whole thing to make a definitive call, even for myself; but I've soaked up enough to call it like I see it, and our dear driver was no panicky victim.