UPDATE: Video, Christine Dahab blew a .07, LAPD preliminarily blame cyclists
June 17th, 2011 
53 Comments
(there is a ride to visit and support the victims – the Justice Ride. It meets at Media Park AKA CRANK MOB Park in Culver City, which is at the corner of Venice Bl and Canfield. 2:30pm to 5:30pm tomorrow, Friday. I’m sure there will be rides to come, but if you can make it out tomorrow (Friday), please do. Facebook invite.)
UPDATE: two victims had surgery last night. Separately, one victim is in a medically induced coma with severe head trauma. A fourth victim cannot be found – no one knows her full name and law enforcement does not know what hospital she was taken too.
I went to the Cyclist LAPD Task Force this afternoon where Captain Kelly Mulldorfer, head of LAPD’s West Traffic Bureau, and Detective Jimmy Render briefed us on what LAPD knows about the vile collision in Culver City Wednesday night. By all reports Christine Dahab hit and injured at least 11 cyclists who were on the Kushtown ride. Several cyclists were in critical condition today, and several had surgery.
The most interesting details to me were 1) Dahab blew a .07 blood alcohol level at the station, and 2) LAPD stated, preliminarily, they believe the Primary Collision Factor (PCF) was “pedestrians in the roadway.” This latter portion only sunk in with me later, as I was late to the meeting, but it is a huge mistake and I think it demonstrates something of a bias in favor of motorists.
Before I mention some further details, CoolAssMike of 1000Bikes.org went to Dana “Dirtysouth”s hospital room and inteviewed her. Dana was hit hard by Dahab last night, and broke both legs. Needless to say they had her on a morphine drip during the video, so cut her some slack:
I’m tired as hell, so here’s some key details:
- Dahab blew .08 in an initial test, and later blew a .07 at the station.
- LAPD is preliminarily saying that the primary cause of the collision is “pedestrians in the roadway”
- Dahab, according to LAPD, has pristine driving record
- Culver City PD will be taking over the case in the next few days. The collision took place in Culver City near the border with LA, but in the dead of night, no one was sure whose jurisdiction it was in. Living in this area, I can believe that because the Culver City borders are crazy and convoluted.
- The assertion that Dahab came around a blind curve is a mountain of bullshit. Jefferson gently curves in that area. But it’s not a blind curve unless you’re driving 70 mph or you’re blind drunk. It is however a stretch of road that is mostly traffic light free, and motorists book it there.
- LAPD is still receiving (as of this afternoon) emails from witnesses saying their statement wasn’t taken.
- There were no skid marks at the scene.
- Three street lights in the area were out.
- Witnesses have said that Dahab tried to run. Captain Mulldorfer said that the collision did not qualify as a hit and run, and that Dahab indicated she drove some distance from the collision because she felt “the crowd was hostile.” Makes sense, they had every right to be hostile.
- One Cyclist LAPD Task Force participant mentioned that people had tracked down Dahab’s Facebook page, and that she had listed an 818 number as her cell phone number on the page. The Facebook page has since been disabled.
- LAPD would not be able to pull records of cell phone usage unless there was witness testimony that Dahab was using her cell phone.
- LAPD reports that Dahab has a pristine driving record.
I just want to rant briefly about LAPD’s preliminary finding that the primary collision factor (PCF) was “pedestrians in the roadway.” The PCF, even the preliminary PCF, informs and guides the investigation. With a prelimnary PCF that puts the blame on cyclists, investigating officers are likely to investigate with a bias in favor of the motorist. That’s a big problem, especially when you’ve got cyclists in the ICU and a motorist who was D.R.U.N.K.
Moreover, it doesn’t make sense. If you look within LAPD and SWITRS data on collisions, a PCF if always listed and determined. The PCF is listed as a code number for the California Vehicle Code – such as “21954 (a)”. This indicates that law enforcement believes that one of the parties violating 21954 (a) is the primary reason that the collision happened. Notice the underlying assumption – if a collision happens, someone must have violated the law . . . else how can list a violated code as the PCF? Now one can get real philosophical about that – do we really believe that there is no way for two lawful road users to follow the rules and still have a collision? I think that is far fetched, but that’s how most law enforcement think.
I’m not certain what CVC code was the PCF, but my hunch is that “pedestrians in the roadway” means they believe that someone violating this code – CVC 21954 (a):
Every pedestrian upon a roadway at any point other than within a marked crosswalk or within an unmarked crosswalk at an intersection shall yield the right-of-way to all vehicles upon the roadway so near as to constitute an immediate hazard.
is the PCF. I’d make a good case for being drunk as the reason Dahab clobbered a bunch of cyclists. I could make that case, or we can just keep reading CVC 21954 we’ll get to CVC 21954 (b), which says:
The provisions of this section shall not relieve the driver of a vehicle from the duty to exercise due care for the safety of any pedestrian upon a roadway.
Dahab had a duty to avoid the collision. If she somehow couldn’t see the upwards of 11 cyclists she injured, then she was driving too fast for conditions. Specifically, she was driving too fast for her headlights to adequately light the road in front of her. Or she was DRUNK (can we lower the legal limit already?)
So you could argue just as well that CVC 21954 (b) is the PCF.
Final note – Culver City PD isn’t fond of cyclists. They’re known for that. A lot of people know they don’t like CRANK MOB or Taco Tuesdays, but the fact is CCPD had a bad rep with cyclists as far back as I remember – all the way to the pre-Santa Monica Critical Mass days. I’m sure there are exceptions in the department, and I hope that there are, but I wouldn’t expect this to be any easy road to justice.
Author Info
Great write up, Alex. Stay on top of this.
I am not looking forward to CCPD getting their hands in this. Well, there is no choice, but i don’t see this ending well. I would love to be proved wrong.
There could be a homeless person sleeping drunk in the road or just a cat crossing the street, but you won’t see me hit either, because I’m not drinking and texting when I drive. Nobody would’ve run into her car at 45mph sending themselves to the hospital on their own. You need a neglectful driver driving a car to do that.
Great article. Thanks for all the legal code info. I hope they’re not able to put a spin on this and make it out to be the riders fault. That would not be good at all.
i can’t hear what she’s saying with the music.
What about wet/reckless? I believe one can get DUI penalties for being .04 or greater. It’s called wet/reckless and I don’t know if it:
Is at the officer’s discretion, or if it
Can be used in an accident situation.
Anyway, this might be a useful subject for an unemployed bike researcher to investigate.
=v= The bicyclist-blaming in the police report will now become part of the CHP’s official statistics. Those statistics are released every year and media sources will provide “databases” of them and generate graphs and charts and perpetuate claims that bicyclists are mostly at fault in collisions.
There were enough eyewitnesses at this particular incident for the truth to come forward, but the official statistics won’t be changed by that.
.07 can still be DUI under the law in CA. Any amount can be DUI, if it can be shown in court that the driver was under the influence. Officers’ and other witnesses’ testimony, the field sobriety test, which is videotaped, and the fact that the driver was involved in a crash can all come into play.
“Wet reckless” is DUI plea bargained down to reckless driving. Penalties are similar to DUI but you wind up with reckless driving on your DMV and criminal record, which doesn’t look as bad. It’s not uncommon if the driver was under, at, or slightly over the legal limit (.08), has a clean record, and there was no crash or injury.
In this case the driver is charged with felony DUI because of the multiple injuries and mayhem. I seriously doubt the prosecutor will go for a plea bargain.
hey you guys need to get a gang of bike lawyers on this.. I got hit by a car in Culver City several years ago and the lady tried to run. I am going to sound like a bad commercial but this guy knows his business http://www.bicyclelawyer.com/
His Name is Gary Brustin.. pass it on to whomever needs it
Well done.
+1 on background music making it hard to hear Dana.
I cannot hear her :(
+1 on the getting a good bike injury lawyer and get a group suit going. Make it expensive for the cities to enforce their automobile friendly thinking.
And I heard a brilliant example of how retro the Culver City Police are regarding bikes–just ask TWA about his incident with an off-duty CCPD officer yesterday who really needed to be right.
Agree: the news-broadcast-like music in the interview has to go–it’s hard to hear her!
Not to say this driver was right (she wasn’t) I do not drink but would like to point out that as much as you might want to blame the driver – she at .07 was not all that drunk. I am sure she was impared but not stumbling drunk. Just driving down a dark road late at night, no one would expect to find a bunch of bikes going half your speed or less.
Great write-up. Initial reports are always less-than-reliable, but as you point out, it’s the scene-setting intent behind these early statements that make them important – and problematic.
There is compromised factual reporting in the police report that complicates the assignment of liability – and in many collisions there can be established some degree of shared liability.
But then there is the confirmation of existing biases (evil cyclists!) and the seeding of new ones. That pernicious purpose is what bike activists have gotten hip to, and what we need to continue to prosecute. So thanks again for the perspective, Alex!
“1) Dahab blew a .07 blood alcohol level at the station”
With that said, determining her weight, and amount of time lapsed between the time of impact and the breathalizer test could determine that it was over .07 at the time of the accident.
Thanks for taking the time to compile all the details Alex. NO excuse here for using “Pedestrians in Roadway” as the PCF.
Does anyone know whether Dahab’s license has been revoked? Or is she driving around in her parents’ car right now?!?
Let the lawsuits begin. I wish I had a better solution for changing people’s car-centric mentality.
I had heard she admitted at the scene that she had been looking at her cell phone while driving. Is this correct? If it is, that sounds like perfect eyewitness testimony that would allow for the police to take a look at her cellphone usage leading up to the time of the incident.
What’s up with the two different blood alcohol level numbers? And wouldn’t the test taken closer to the time of the collision be considered a better representation of how drunk she was while driving? Are the police trying to protect her? Why?
I am truly disturbed by the rider that is missing.
There IS testimony that Dahab was using her cellphone, the riders need to come forth and give their names. As far as Dahab’s alleged claim that she didn’t have a phone in the car, well, we have this:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jericho1ne/5842561991/in/photostream/
I uploaded a better audio version of the interview. Please replace.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S1psoss5IQk
I’m pretty sure she would have to be found guilty by the courts of the misdemeanor to have her licence revoked.
not intending to hijack this thread so please email me if you know the answer at barleye at hotmail
I know you can’t text and you can’t hold the phone to your ear while talking on the phone while driving a car…what about holding the phone with it on speaker phone? or just looking at the phone reading emails, texts, etc…
recently a cop in long beach pulled aside me and questioned me about holding my phone in my hand. i showed him it wasn’t in use and he hassled me saying i had to put it down.
These are rhetorical questions that I fear I know the answer to already. I sincerely hope that I am wrong — that the police department(s) are NOT blatantly ignoring facts in order to support any kind of bias. But I would like to know whether or not she admitted she was looking at her phone (& to whom she admitted it, if she did). Meanwhile I am extremely suspicious of the two BAL tests.
I am digusted with not only the Culver City Police but all the folks out there that treat cyclists as if they shouldn’t be on the road! shame on them!
I would third and fourth the idea about lawyering up. I was driven into from behind(on purpose)by an aggressive driver who then drove off up here in SF. After two weeks of investigating SFPD finally tracked down the owner and driver of the plate # I gave. The driver tried to claim that I at 140lbs dove in front of his moving(speeding)car. The investigator called BS and now things are on the right track. Thankfully SFPD nowadays is a bit more in line with reality ie. bikers aren’t usually the culprits, but having a lawyer to inquire about the investigation helped as well.
I know it might be seem a bit of a stretch, but a good lawyer could also make a civil rights claim on behalf of the cyclists if the CC police refuse to conduct an appropriate investigation. We are entitled to fair and equitable trials, and with a biased investigation the trial in no way can be fair, or equitable.
Best wishes to all injured, and may guilt weigh heavy on the head of the drunk who tried to drive away.
@Nick
.07 IS “all that drunk.”
The initial breathalyzer indicated a BAC of .08; a later one registered the .07 the police are using in their report. This indicates that Dahab had likely consumed two alcoholic beverages prior to driving. But the fact is, TWO DRINKS = TOO MANY if you are going to be operating a motor vehicle. With a BAC of .07, facilities such as motor control, judgement, visual perception and attention ARE already impaired.
MADD was instrumental in getting this arbitrarily high number onto the law books, and they had to fight tooth-and nail for even THAT dangerously high measure because driving drunk is so ingrained into our society as acceptable, as your ignorant comment illustrates.
That this driver injured so many people in an instant is both horrific and tragic. That law enforcement appears to be blaming the victims is outrageous. I am so grateful for the army of activists working tirelessly to change the culture of our institutions for the better. I feel safer on the road because of them. Thanks Bikeside and AT for being a reliable source in a world of misinformation and skewed logic.
I read somewhere that she blew a .08 at the scene and then a .07 at the station. Seems like she’s being catered to. Also, mad props to roadblock for this: http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=217692804930684&set=a.153959307970701.30426.100000698992140&type=1&theater
OK, so the Culver City police will be investigating this incident. No a good sign. Secondly, you know she has hired a lawyer, or maybe a team of lawyers. They will be collecting information on all the victims (do they do drugs, drink, engage in risky behavoir, etc.) All that will be used in court to defend their client as a hapless victim who happened upon “gang of bicyclists known for their anarchistic attitude and illegal activity”:. So be careful what you post about the victims (eg. I used to drink with them at the park, had a sick ass time, then we would ride all hammered and shit…)
Yeah we may live in a supposed free country, but when someone hits you with a car and they have expensive lawyers, they end up making you look like criminals, ne’er do wells, undesirables and low-lifes who deserve to be wiped off the streets. Part of the problem is that there are segments of the bicycling community who chant “F*ck the Police!”, and actively break the laws like running through red lights, drinking in public, riding bicycles under the influence of alcohol and/or drugs. I am just sayin… When stuff like this happens, the whole bicycle commmunity is put under a microscope, and they bad behavior is amplified.
Real quick: I was in L.A. doing the crank mob, Culver City scene a few years back. It was fun.
Police do not like cyclists. That is true. Motorists don’t like cyclist, that is true as well.
I’m sympathetic to cyclists as I am one.
BUT!!!! The people that were riding were aggressive, confrontational, self-centered, hogged the road, ignored all laws of the road and were a general nuisance to the public and law enforcement on many occasions. Not ALL the time or even MOST of the time, but more so than ordinary behavior.
There mission was to be in the face of the law and the public and then wondered why people harbored ill feelings towards them.
I’m saying this not out of hatred or disrespect, as all cyclists are my brothers, I’m saying this because I think it’s time the cyclist community evolved.
The public KNOWS we’re out there now. Continuing to hold a mind-set of brash opposition and chaos for the sake of recognition isn’t going to help our cause any more. The time has come to show the public that we are law-abiding, well-behaved, respectable citizens.
Screaming, “NO ONE GIVES US RESPECT!” while flicking off an officer isn’t going to get you that respect.
However, there is a part of me that recognizes the cyclist movement isn’t about social justice or any lofty ideals like pollution control. There is a contingent that are just drunk/high idiots that have nothing better to do than cause a ruckus.
And unfortunately if we let that contingent run the cycling community, you will never see law enforcement and the public accepting our demands and our way of life.
This event is extremely unfortunate, from this post the driver is at fault and there should be dire repercussions. I’m just saying, as a cycling community we need to put our best foot forward and be respectful of the world if we want the world to be respectful of us. You can’t gain respect by pointing a gun at some one’s head and saying, “You either respect me or there will be consequences”. That’s fascism and it should be everything, we, as cyclists stand against. That is all.
It’s crazy, if my sister was not being lazy, i would have been at that ride. Lil sureal to think that i could have been #12.
This is a series of factors all of which should never have happened.
Common sense item 1, all drivers have a responsibility to ensure the safety of themselves and others by being sure that they are conscious and have appropriate judgement to drive. The driver failed to rise to that responsibility.
Item 2, the city has a responsibility to maintain its infrastructure to standards that ensure safety of the public. The lighting on the road was out.
Item 3, in general cyclists have responsibility to ensure their safety and others. I am a horseback rider and I am often endangered by cyclists who do pay attention to the rights of way, and often as a driver I need to take insane levels of action to avoid cyclists who don’t want to share the road they want to own the road. In this instance I do not believe that the cyclists did anything wrong (other than failing to plan their ride on a road with properly maintained infrastructure, but it is reasonable for a citizen to assume the city has maintained that infrastructure), however that does NOT excuse cyclists from their general responsibilities.
The bottom line is we are all people, with rare exception cyclists are also drivers and many drivers are also cyclists, joggers, equestrians, motorcyclists, etc.
We all have responsibility to learn the laws and the basic safety requirements of the activities we choose to participate in. In this case the driver failed. The cyclists were tragically injured and they may or may not have failed in their responsibility (there is not enough information to determine that). The city also failed to ensure the safety of its citizens, whether it be by not maintaining the lights, or by failing to identify locate and detain the drunk driver, or assuming that the fault WAS with the cyclists then the city failed in not identifying, locating and detaining THEM.
If the city intends to fail so completely then they should inform the cyclists that they are on their own. Or if that part of the roadway is unsafe for road sharing the city should either rectify that or inform the cyclists of that danger. You don’t see too many cyclists on the freeway because it is well understood that would be dangerous for cars and cyclists.
As to the driver pulling away, if the cyclists were hostile (which is not hard to imagine, though could be a fabricated reality) that is going to trigger a fight or flight instinct in anyone. As a people we have become generally very hostile in recent years, we should all try hard to see everyone’s point of view and even harder to realize that hostility is not the answer. Ask yourself this, if the driver felt like she was in danger should she simply have stood there and hoped that the (justifiably) enraged cyclists would do her no harm?
In the meanwhile I would recommend that cyclists do what I as an equestrian had to start doing years ago. Before you consider riding in a new area, go to that location, scout it out and see if it would be safe. It adds a lot of time and in some ways diminishes the sense of adventure but it is a worthwhile trade off. Additionally if you are going to ride your bikes on trails that allow horses, please slow down and keep an eye out. Your neon green bike flying around that corner at 20mph is more than enough to stress out my old mare and me and ruin our enjoyment of the great outdoors.
In short let’s all share responsibility and if everyone works a little harder to do their part then everyone can be a lot safer and we can avoid tragedy. Ultimately roads were designed for cars, they are set up for cars and for them to be safe for bikes changes need to be made to the infrastructure to ensure the safety of all. Bikes and cars cannot safely coexist any more than cars and horses can coexist. The solution is to give bikes their own infrastructure that meets their safety needs. In Northern California we have accomplished this by paving old abandon railway lines creating beautiful bike paths through some of the most amazing countryside, maybe that could work.
That’s my $0.02 maybe if enough people start thinking about way to make things better instead of assigning blame we can all live a little more safely and happily.
So a cyclist in L.A. is considered a pedestrian? Here in colorado you have just as much legal right to ride on the road as the cars have to drive on the road. As long as you have working lights if you ride after dark and are using your hand signals to make turns then you have just as many rights on the road as any vehicle. I feel like this would go a lot different here.
Numerous studies have shown that using a cellphone (even a hands-free device) while driving is a greater impairment than moderate alcohol intoxication. When are the laws going to catch up to this reality?
Blake, I realize you have good intentions but I found some of your statements troubling:
“Before you consider riding in a new area, go to that location, scout it out and see if it would be safe.”
Jefferson is a popular street for bike riding because you can use it to get to the Ballona Creek bike path and there aren’t many cars, especially at night. I’ve ridden there many times and I know many group rides have been there before. It’s a known quantity. Certainly it is not a “blind curve” as some have said without seeing it.
“Ultimately roads were designed for cars, they are set up for cars and for them to be safe for bikes changes need to be made to the infrastructure to ensure the safety of all.”
This is simply not true. Bicyclists were the first to call for and get paved roads in the United States. Many streets in Los Angeles, particularly in downtown, were not built specifically for cars and certainly not for the kinds of speeds many Angelenos seem to think is their absolute right to drive.
“Bikes and cars cannot safely coexist any more than cars and horses can coexist. The solution is to give bikes their own infrastructure that meets their safety needs.”
I hope you are not implying that bikes should get off the road or the trails. Bikes have a right to the road, while driving a private car is a privilege, it says it right in the DMV driver’s guide. There should be more infrastructure, yes, but really with subtle modifications even the existing grid could be vastly improved.
As far as the trails: Bikes and horses can get along! I’ve seen it. Please don’t perpetuate this myth. It’s simply a matter of consideration on both ends.
Just to be fair, someone should mention that the bikers were, at the time, in an area LAPD claims bikes are not allowed. I’ve never even been to that part of the world, so I can’t really talk more about it–at the least, it warrants further investigation.
That said, drunk driving is always a bad idea. There are also a lot of problems with bikers being allowed only in prescribed bike lanes, but perhaps the letter and not the spirit of the law lead to this “PCF” business.
“Just to be fair, someone should mention that the bikers were, at the time, in an area LAPD claims bikes are not allowed.”
It was a temporary stop to gather riders, the intention was not to linger.
@Coolassmike – Youtube video link updated. Thanks.
About the condoms in the area bullshit, here’s what ABC 7 reported Elex Michaelson had to say:
The quote was “a direct statement from a veteran LAPD officer who asked we not use his name on camera. I begged them to go on camera multiple times but they chose to talk only off camera at the scene yesterday morning.”
So blame both sides for not quite thinking it through, cop and reporter. According to Roadblock “while we were there, at least 4 cars pulled up with couples…. They walked up the hill and disappeared. Some were carrying blankets and sacks.”
good job, alex…
seems to me that regardless of whether they were stopped, moving, taking up all lanes or just one, shouting, chanting, etc… bikes have the right to be on the roadway – all people on the roadway have the responsibility of not causing damage or injury to anything else in front of them!
it’s kinda mucking up the waters, throwing in all the behavioral irrelevancies. if I am going half the speed of traffic, which is ALWAYS, I can reasonably expect that no car will ram me from behind – especially so in a group of cyclists (with lights) going the same speed as I. likewise, if I stop in the road, for any reason, without the immediate chance of being rammed, say for a bike malfunction (or a blown transmission, clutch giving out…), a stoplight, etc. it is reasonable that I should assume (on a bike or in a car) I won’t be rammed. this is because you are not supposed to be driving in a manner in which you cannot stop for obstacles that appear ahead of you… period.
that a person has ANY amount of alcohol in their system just further magnifies the fault.
also… good job on the video, coolassmike – it’s good to see Dana in high spirits. how frightening that must’ve been for all… even those who weren’t hit!
sounds like everyone pulled together to help out. what an awesome family!
innocent until proven guilty. are we becoming a lynch mob nation here?
The thing is that the people were in the road where they should not have been. But, if the driver had a couple drinks and then drove, especially if she was looking at her cell AT ALL, was a RETARDED thing to do. I mean, who drinks any amount of alcohol and then distracts themselves while on the road? You drive even more carefully, and go super slow, looking around you and being super cautious, if you have had a beer or something right? If you have had more than one drink, then JUST DON’T MUTH FUC KING DRIVE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!AND STOP LOOKING AT YOUR GD CELL PHONES PEOPLE!! PEOPLE ARE GETTING MAIMED AND KILLED CUZ SOMEONE TEXTED!! THAT IS THE STUPIDEST, MOST SELF-SERVING BUNCH OF IDIOCY. OH, I THINK IT’S BRITNEY, HERE, LET ME LOOK DOWN AND SEE…UM, YUP, SHE SAYS ” HEY, WHAT’S UP”. SINCE I AM SO FRECKING STUPID, AND CAN’T WAIT TILL I GET TO A LIGHT, OR A PARKING SPACE, OR MY DESTINATION, I LOOK AT IT, AFTER I DRANK ALCOHOL OF ALL THINGS…CHRISTINE DAHAB CARES ABOUT CHRISTINE DAHAB.
Thank you, Alex…TONS of awesome commentary here! And thank you to everyone that has assisted in getting the truth out about the incident. And to all of you (posters, readers, law enforcement, reporters, government officials, motorists, etc.) who think the cyclists were at fault, would you be so forgiving of the accused if that was YOUR loved one in a medically-induced coma with fluid on their brain or with 2 broken legs, ESPECIALLY if the accused was found to have been drinking AND distracted with cellphone usage? Spare me that “innocent until proven guilty” bullshit.
Fact is, even with the miscellaneous knucklehead bad apples (that exist in ALL walks of life, mind you), cycling STILL does a ton of good for our community, our environment and our health, yet people still can’t get past their own sense of entitlement and selfishness. That’s the society we live in and unfortunately, it usually takes this kind of tragedy happening to their loved ones before they understand the errors in their “logic”.
I moved from Davis (one of the most bicycle-friendly towns in America) to LA in January. I’ve managed to live close enough that I can still continue to bike to work most days. I’ve had people do some pretty asshole things while I’m on my bike. This horrible event is the first time I’ve realized how ass-backwards LA city codes are when it comes to bicycles. In Davis, bicycles have the right of way over cars AND people. I didn’t realize that cars have the right of way in LA, which is total bullshit since it’s unsafe for bicycles. So, if I have to make a left turn or I have to go into the driving lane to allow cars to make a right at an intersection, technically those cars can just ram into me!?! I really hope that some good comes out of this tragic event. I’ve already emailed the LA Times about covering the story. I’ll try to contact more news agencies and spread the word. Sadly, it may not do much good since it seems many people in LA feel like bicycles and cars can’t/shouldn’t share the road. Lawyers and making the city’s wallet bleed may be more affective. I’d like to help with any efforts or future fundraising. “I’m mad as hell and don’t want to take it anymore!”
I know everyone is upset and no one seems to want to take the blame
It was an accident caused by a multiple facts, and no one thing can be as culpable as another
Lets break down the facts and find solutions and not just blame , blame , blame.
Lower the alcohol percent for being intoxicated, not taking up the road in mass rides or blocking a roadway, and cell phone rules with a bite in them.
All together we can eliminate this type of accident.
The reporters on the scene seemed to hold the cyclist responsible and used some derogatory comments about bike gangs
From what I saw all the bikes seemed expensive and the riders were serious athletes as much as any other competitive
athletes.
I will have an update for everyone tomorrow. The situation is worse than I originally thought. 6 victims by my count are still in the hospital. The identity, status and location of the blond woman remains unknown. A 16 year old girl, who we will call C (for privacy purposes), is in a medically induced coma and in very bad shape. Another victim has a shattered leg, the other leg is broken, and has suffered a brain bleed. The bleed is thought to have resolved now. Other victims are stable and recovering but face further surgeries.
Drunkenness and driving too fast for conditions should be the PCF. If a drunk hit a bunch of inanimate objects littering the roadway we wouldn’t argue that they were hard to see – we’d argue they weren’t alert because they were tanked. The argument shouldn’t be any less for well lit cyclists.
“Innocent until proven guilty” is always followed by what phrase? “… in a court of law” – NOT “… in everyday life.” There’s a reason for that – we insist on the high standards of proof before we take away someone’s constitutionally protected freedoms. However, the people can and should still exercise their right to punish offenders socially – by calling attention to their malice and ostracizing the careless and evil from polite society. In other words – social consequences should still be in place for those who can finagle their way out of a rigged and biased justice system.
Hello everyone,
I’ve written another update, long overdue, which you can read here:
http://www.bikesidela.org/culver-city-crash-update-victim-statuses-new-interviews-and-the-justice-ride/
I hit 4 topis:
1) an update on the victims. Many are doing better, but some are worse.
2) a discussion of why Dahab can and should be charged with Felony DUI despite blowing .07 BAC.
3) some interviews from Mike Bowers of the victims and witnesses.
4) some photos I took on the Justice Ride to support the victims.