03-29-2017, 06:43 PM
(03-29-2017, 06:18 PM)panamaniac Wrote:(03-29-2017, 06:03 PM)Markster Wrote: Their defence: The cyclist was wearing black!
I could see that going to mitigation at sentencing, but is there precedent in Ontario for it as a successful defence to the charge? I'm not a cyclist, but I would hope not.
It should depend on the details. If I recall correctly, the cyclist was riding legally, so it should be pretty hard to mount a successful defence if one has driven into them. At the same time, drivers can only be responsible for seeing that which is actually visible. An all-black cyclist with no lights at night can’t reasonably expect not to be at higher risk of collision. I don’t know the details in this case — for example, if the cyclist had appropriate lights then none of what I just said is relevant.
I was thinking about this in connection with the idea that strict liability should attach for driving into cyclists. In general, I think the idea is sound, but there has to be a limit somewhere. Suppose I drive into a wrong-way, all-black, no-lights, cyclist who is running a red at speed. Should I be penalized? Even if they end up dead I fail to see how I am supposed to avoid such a collision.
But yeah, probably it’s a bogus defence.