Sunday, November 11, 2007

Update on Fallen Cyclist

The unidentified cyclist who was struck today at 11:03 a.m. at the intersection of 9W and Tallman Park entrance, is 23 years old, and was taken to Nyack Hospital in Nyack, NY where he was treated for abrasions and an unspecified leg injury, according to Sgt. Chris Strattner of the Orange County police department.

According to the accident report, both the cyclist and the driver of the green Toyota were proceeding south along Rte. 9W, when the cyclist motioned to turn left to Tallman Park, and was struck by the traveling vehicle, and was "ejected" from his bicycle, hitting the windshield of the car, said Strattner.

Strattner said the accounts of the cyclist and of the motorist both reflected the same information, and that the cyclist was conscious when he recounted the details.

The vehicle's speed was not assessed by the police department using throw distance estimates because they are not required to do so unless there has been a serious physical injury or death, said Strattner. When pressed for what constitutes serious physical injury, Strattner said such a condition would likely constitute a "tremendous" injury for the average person.

The speed limit on this section of 9W is 45 mph, and the motorist was traveling at a slight incline.

No summonses were issued to either the driver or the cyclist, an indication that the cyclist was wearing a helmet at the time of the accident: helmets are mandatory for all bicyclists under Rockland County law, noted Strattner, who said he also is a cyclist.

No records are currently available for previous accidents at this location.

An employee answering the phone at Nyack Hospital refused to comment on the condition of the cyclist or whether he had been released.


Eugene said...

Jen, Why did you comment on the cyclist's helmet use? Does it matter? would he have been at fault if he weren't wearing one? Was the motorist wearing a seat belt?
The reason I bring it up is that too often, people look for reasons to blame cyclists. And they often justify their own irresponsible behavior by pointing at something irrelevant-- it's a quick way to relieve themselves of responsibility.
Also, cyclists are often in a position where they have to prove that they were doing *everything* properly before we can begin to examine motorists' behavior. So there.
I'll see you on the road,

Jen Benepe said...

Well of course I told the Sgt. that cyclist don't want to hear about whether a cyclist was wearing a helmet after they are hit by an car, and that we don't find it relevant. In this particular instance I am doing my job as a reporter and telling you what he told me. The Sgt. also noted he is a cyclist and we argued about the relevance of whether a helmet is worn or not: you could also argue that a helmet was not worn by the drivers of the motor vehicle. However, he said that it is Rockland County law that cyclists wear helmets, and that in this instance, no summonses were issued, and because of that he said it appears the cyclist was wearing a helmet. (BTW the cyclist was NOT wearing a helmet when I came on the scene, if that means anything.)

Chuck said...

Can we get to the important stuff...




Anonymous said...

Did you know that right now you can get your business listed on so it can be seen by thousands of Rockland County NY residents and other businesses? Check them out today.
Thank you.