Sad news...

[tomgrrrl]

Popular grade school teacher was killed yesterday in Woodside, CA. riding her bike....

here's the story:
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2005/10/04/TEACHER.TMP

[Bustertb]

That is awful. It's such a shame because it was so preventable. I bet she thought she'd go out for a nice Sunday morning ride. You'd think with bike lanes you'd be safer. Guess not!

[Trek420]

I'm so mad at my local (Bay Area) news channel for their coverage this morning, the "teaser" blurb saying a cyclist was killed while "riding on a dangerous road".

She was in the bike lane, she had a helmet, was with the flow of traffic, in the middle of the day when it's light doing everything right.

F*&^% it then, *All* roads are dangerous to us. Tell me where when and how are we supposed to ride that it's safe?

Plus it just sounds like she was a great teacher, a great gal, this is so senseless. :( From what I read the driver will not be charged. Even if he was that does not bring her back.

Let's all be careful out there :o

[bikerchick68]

what a tragedy... :( Sounds like she was a wonderful person and a positive part of the community... I'm sure she will be missed greatly...

[jobob]

I ride that section of Woodside Road road very often. It has very wide shoulders and imho it's one of the safer roads one can be on in the Bay Area.

If it happened where I think it happened, it was right after a bend in the road just before the entrance ramp to 280 north. The bike lanes are quite well marked, except at the spot where the bike lane moves over from the shoulder to the left hand side of the lane leading to 280.

But that's absolutely no excuse for an inattentive drivers' actions. :mad:

Since that's one of my favorite rides, I'll keep riding it.

- Jo.

But as someone so aptly pointed out on the VeloGirls list, "Bike lanes are painted sticks - not a force field."

[doctorfrau]

:( From what I read the driver will not be charged. Even if he was that does not bring her back.

Let's all be careful out there :o

Not Charged????!!!!

He KILLED someone with his vehicle because of his inattention!! Does that not amount to vehicular manslaughter? What if he had hit a pedestrian instead? Doesn't matter if he MEANT to or not - he still KILLED her and should be charged with SOMETHING!!!!!! :mad:

[Trek420]

yep, that'w what they said on KGO 7 morning news.

I agree, he should be charged. I'm not a lawyer, don't play one on TV so don't quote me.

Is there a lawyerfrau in the house? :cool:

[shewhobikes]

but if he admitted his attention was "diverted," causing him to drift into the bike lane and KILL someone, then he indeed should be charged with manslaughter. So what if he was from out of town and trying to read a map? He should have pulled off the road in a safe place to get his s**t together.

[RoadRaven]

Ah, tragic seems to be an understatement

... at a loss for words right now....

*fervently pleads with the Goddess of the roads that justice is seen to be done...*

[skibum]

Not Charged????!!!!

He KILLED someone with his vehicle because of his inattention!! Does that not amount to vehicular manslaughter? What if he had hit a pedestrian instead? Doesn't matter if he MEANT to or not - he still KILLED her and should be charged with SOMETHING!!!!!! :mad:

Sadly, it probably happens quite often that a motorist does not have to bear the responsibilities for his actions. I am riding a century this weekend that is a memorial to a rider that was killed in this area last year. The driver was not charged in that case either. I know of another case in this area where a young woman was killed. The driver was charged but was found not guilty. In these cases, all you can hope for is that the driver suffers with the pain of knowing he took someone's life.

[slinkedog]

I don't know why they decided not to charge this guy, but I can kind of see both sides a little. My husband's best friend, Greg, was killed in a car accident that was not his fault. He was driving on a country road (his friend still lived in Indiana where they grew up) where there is really no speed limit, and the other driver was at a stop sign, blinded by the sun and went right in front of him. Greg didn't have time to stop his car. Greg's family didn't want to charge the guy for a few reasons. The guy felt horrible and it was an accident. Yes, he was negligent and not careful, but they didn't feel that charging him with something would make a difference because the other guy was a good kid who had never gotten in any trouble. He just made a bad decision that unfortunately cost a life. Greg's family figured that living with what he had done was going to be hard enough. The second reason was that they didn't want to go through all the legal proceedings because they had been through enough pain and didn't want to keep re-living everything.

I suppose the D.A. could have charged him anyway, but they didn't. I have no idea whatever happened to the guy who hit Greg. But my hubby sure misses his buddy.

I feel awful about this poor woman. I hope her family, friends and class can heal and go on. This event makes me realize that I need to be even more careful. I know I often take it for granted that cars will make room for me. I need to be more proactive about protecting me.

[Blueberry]

I actually am a lawyer (embarassed now), but know absolutely nothing about California Law (I only have a NC license) and I don't do criminal work so I'm relying on what I learned in law school.... :D

That said, absent exigent circumstances, I would think he would have been charged. If he had run over a child crossing a side street, I think he would have been. Many times the DA's office will try to follow the wishes of the victim, but other times they don't want to prosecute what they think will be an unpopular or unwinnable case. In NC, DA's are elected officials, so they have to prosecute what their constituency wants them to prosecute. Sad, but true. Many of these folks are hardworking people who strive to do the best they can at their jobs - I don't mean to suggest that they don't - but there are certain pressures on them that aren't necessarily obvious. I *hope* that isn't the reason the guy isn't being prosecuted... :mad: :mad:

We have such an uphill battle for bicycle rights here. Just yesterday, someone sent a link for a letter to the editor to the local bike club email list. Essentially, the author was upset that bikes were in his way because he "likes to drive." He made the common argument that since bikes don't pay taxes, they have no right to "get in his way" on the road. His solution: tax cyclists, page greenways and get bikes off the road. So he can enjoy using natural resporces to drive 2.5 miles to return a video that weighs less than a pound without being inconvenienced by passing a vehicle that has a *right* to be on the road. Great. :mad: :mad:

I started to write my own letter outlining NC law on the subject, but it would never get published and, even if it did, I doubt it would do any good. It's so sad to see that kind of stuff, especially after the same newspaper has been running stories about air quality and alternative means of transportation. If those cyclists had been in cars, there would have been a major traffic jam.

Sorry for the rant...it's been quite a week and I'm out of town with no bike and thus no way to work off stress. :( :(

[bikerchick68]

CAinNC... people seem to forget that most cyclists are also DRIVERS! No way in He%$^&! I should have to pay DOUBLE taxes just because I ride a bike too... grrrr...

it would be interesting to know why this driver is not being held responsible... :confused:

[Blueberry]

bikerchick68 -

You're absolutely right about taxes and biking. I too drive, and certainly pay my share of taxes.

What's really interesting to me is that the cars and car taxes here in NC apparently aren't even providing enough $ to expand and repair the roads. They're looking at toll roads and other funding solutions. That expansion wouldn't be necessary with more bikers. Plus we *really* don't cause the kind of wear and tear on the roads that motorized vehicles do....

*sigh* Gotta love living in the south - where the pickups roam free...

[Trek420]

bikerchick68 "people seem to forget that most cyclists are also DRIVERS!"

And even if I didn't drive a bit...property taxes, sales taxes, other govt. fees, the part of the cost of everything we buy that passes on those costs, we all pay for the roads.

And as for Mr. "I like to drive" you gotta be some kind of incompetent driver if you can't avoid an object 2' x 6' long or so. If he likes it so much and is so good at it, pass us! Drive without running into us! Sheesh.

Want to bring this up again

http://www.rideofsilence.org/main.php

[Trekhawk]

bikerchick68 -

You're absolutely right about taxes and biking. I too drive, and certainly pay my share of taxes.
What's really interesting to me is that the cars and car taxes here in NC apparently aren't even providing enough $ to expand and repair the roads. They're looking at toll roads and other funding solutions. That expansion wouldn't be necessary with more bikers. Plus we *really* don't cause the kind of wear and tear on the roads that motorized vehicles do....
*sigh* Gotta love living in the south - where the pickups roam free...

On another thread there was an interesting article posted (sorry cant remember by who) about tax and cycling, the author was sick of people saying cyclists didnt pay tax, registration etc etc. He worked out that by cycling instead of using your car you were actually paying more than your share because you were not causing as much wear and tear to the road. There was a lot more to the article and it stated a lot of good facts and figures. :)

[tomgrrrl]

Here's a link to the elementary school where she taught and the website they put up with her photo and information http://www.oakknollschool.com/Mazzei/Mazzei.html

....apparently, according to something else I read, CALTRANS (the state Highway agency responsible for this section of road) had recently (within the past couple of years) reconfigured the bike lane....here's what someone else wrote about it:

"I shuddered when I read about Rose Mazzezi's death this past
weekend. This is the very spot where a friend of mine, Larry Witham,
had a serious accident on his bike that landed him in the hospital
and physical therapy for months. Larry was riding in the same place
Rose was, and the driver changed lanes and hit Larry from behind.
The driver has no insurance, and was cited for "unsafe lane
change" -- Larry could've died.

Larry is convinced that part of the problem has to do with the
recent lane reconfiguration that Caltrans implemented; he'd like to
see it changed to its former state. He's been working with his
lawyer, etc but not getting ver far. Larry's since moved out of the
area but wants to connect with this group to find out more from
local riders, and try to lobby to get changes made to that
particular interchange."

Perhaps a fitting legacy to this young woman would be for those of us in the Bay Area to lobby CALTRANS to fix this hazard!!

[MomOnBike]

Digging deep in the bowels of my memory, it seems to me that the vehicular taxes we pay only account for ~ 30% of the costs of roads. The rest comes from property taxes, etc. Thus the steam coming from my ears when I'm told that I on my bike "don't pay taxes." :mad:

I'll cut the rest of the rant short, we've all heard/declaimed it.

On a related note, I hear that in Japan if you hit a bicyclist your licence is jerked. Period. End of discussion. And they tax cars based on engine displacement. The combo makes for small, well designed cars driven by polite drivers. This almost makes me want to move to Japan. Almost.