A Threefold 'Thank You' to Los Angeles
Canter's & Ice Cream Sandwich Could Live in Perfect Harmony
Dear Los Angeles: I'm Thankful For...
-thumb-110x110-213475.jpg)
A Photo Gallery of the Things I am Grateful for This Year
7 Reasons to Love L.A.
This past Friday, a cyclist was riding on Santa Anita Avenue in El Monte, only to die under the wheels of a Foothill Transit Bus.
The incident received a small amount of coverage in the LA Times and the San Gabriel ValleyTribune, just enough bad coverage to cause a few members of the cycling community to give a collective WTF?
The LA Times quoted El Monte Police Lt. States as saying "He (the cyclist) was not in the crosswalk and was pronounced dead at the scene."
This quote sent up the first red flag. Why would a cyclist be in the crosswalk? Are cyclists simply rolling pedestrians in the mind of this Police Lt.? In addition, there was no crosswalk at the scene of the incident. In fact there was no intersection.
The San Gabriel Valley Tribune quoted El Monte Police Lt. Fatner as saying "It looks like the guy just wasn't paying attention."
A cyclist stands on the median strip of a wide street, pauses for traffic and somehow makes it to the #3 lane before finding himself under a bus and the Police determine that the cyclist wasn't paying attention. What was the bus operator thinking about? Did anyone think to ask if the bus operator was paying attention?
According to both Lt. States and Lt. Fatner, a review of the video from the onboard bus camera indicates that the cyclist was in the median strip of Santa Anita Avenue, that he paused as a car passed and that he then began riding, either attempting to cross Santa Anita or riding NE on Santa Anita, when he was hit by the bus as it traveled N in the #3 lane.
Hmmm! This sounds like a bus overtaking a cyclist as the cyclist rode NE bound, merging across 3 lanes of a wide street. If not, how does a cyclist ride directly into the side of a bus as it passes and then get under it?
Lt. States, who didn't witness the incident and indicated that the video did not have any footage of the actual collision, somehow concluded that "the biker was at fault." She went further to explain that the man on the bike was not a "real cyclist" as evidenced by his lack of appropriate "cycling gear."
Attempts today to clarify with the officers in charge of the investigation raised the biggest question of the day; Who's got the video?
More than four days after the cyclist's death, Officer Metoyer of the El Monte Police acknowledges that he still hasn't seen the video, after all, it is not in the possession of the Police Department and it will not be in the possession of the Police Department until it is released by Foothill Transit which will apparently take a court order.
All of which begs the question, does one have to be a "real" cyclist in order to get a "real" police investigation?!
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
wtf mate?
I hope LAist stays up on this story to keeps us updated when/if they release the video; or better yet, helps to accelerate its release.
hmmm.
it kinda sounds like the cyclist was trying to cross 3 lanes of traffic rather than trying to merge into traffic or just cruising along. maybe that's why they threw in the "not in a crosswalk" comment. i am just speculating...obviously the situation is f-ed up either way.
Oh, I guess I'm not a "real cyclist" either, because I wear jeans and T-shirts while riding instead of bright yellow spandex. Shoot, I better be even more careful while riding my 15-20 miles every day.
Oh man, I'm really bummed about that cyclist. Have we found out who he is? I wish there was something we could do to show these people how pissed off we are. They seriously need a fucking wake up call if they're daft enough to think that this guy was not a real cyclist. Especially since there are a hell of a lot more people cycling now that high gas prices are here to stay.
Thanks for posting Stephen...
It doesn't sound like the author of this post knows too much information about this accident either, yet for some reason, he's taking a ludicrously strong stance against the police.
As long as we're throwing wild theories out based on nothing at all, maybe we could propose that while the man was trying to help an old woman across the street, a police officer decided to shoot him, and instead of planting a weapon and drugs on him, he decided to plant a bent up Schwinn and claim a bus hit him.
Obviously, this particular incident requires more investigation before anyone can say for sure what happened, but...
I almost hit a biker last week who was doing a similar 3-lane crossing stunt. Instead of acting like a car and merging parallel to traffic, he was acting like a jay-walking pedestrian and just zipped across 3 lanes of traffic. I'd like to think that I'm sympathetic to the biking cause, but if you're going to ride on the street, you have to obey the same traffic laws as cars. Otherwise, get off the street and use the crosswalk like a pedestrian. You can't just make up your own rules somewhere in between.
andytseng writes "It doesn't sound like the author of this post knows too much information about this accident either, yet for some reason, he's taking a ludicrously strong stance against the police."
Not only do I not have much information, neither do the police, and yet Lt. States was able to state, without investigation "The biker was at fault."
I've spoken to three watch commanders and one investigator at the El Monte Police Department and one person at Foothill Transit, all in an effort to ensure that a thorough and fair investigation takes place.
I've drawn no conclusions, other than this; The Police don't yet have the evidence (the video) and that doesn't sound like Foothill Trails is cooperating with the Police investigation.
I think the cyclist deserves better.
You can call that a wild theory if you choose, I'm stickin' with it!
SoapBox...
I actually agree with you. I'm glad you haven't drawn any conclusions. My point is, if you're going to accuse the police of making assumptions based on little to no information, don't go ahead and do the same thing: "Hmmm! This sounds like a bus overtaking a cyclist as the cyclist rode NE bound, merging across 3 lanes of a wide street."
Update: This morning I spoke to both the El Monte Police Department and Foothill Transit and it looks like we're making progress.
Foothill Transit has a DVD in hand and is ready to give it to the El Monte Police Department, no court order necessary.
Conclusion - check
Evidence - standing by
Investigation - pending
What's wrong with this sequence?
This is tragic. Not just for the cyclist, but for LAist because two sacred cows -- public transportation and cycling -- are in conflict.
*head explodes
wow. really messed up. i think we're gonna have to do something.
Today started off with assurances from Foothill Transit that the video was in the hands of the El Monte Police Department and the claim that the investigation has already demonstrated "that it was not in any way our fault."
Some time later Foothill Trails acknowledged that the El Monte Police Department did not have the video but assured me that the Director of Operations has a DVD in his hand and was ready to turn it over to the El Monte Police Department, no court order necessary.
Excellent!
Regardless of the content and the outcome of the investigation, the least we can offer the cyclist is a fair and thorough process and assurances that all evidence will be collected and maintained by the Police Department.
I ask for nothing more, I expect nothing less.
Stephen,thanks for the report and the follow up. I'll be most interested to find out what the video reveals and what the full investigation ultimately reports. Please keep us posted!
Word on the street is that the family of Quanhai Mao has initiated a lawsuit against Foothill Transit.