I feel sorry for both tbh - both made stupid errors be it poor observation or reckless speed (I am far from angelic but try my best to pick the right time/place) and unfortunately one paid with his life, the other with a relatively small punishment but a lifetime knowing he is partly to blame for the death of another.
I’ve been riding a bike for 8 years and I can honestly say I’ve never ever ridden like that. That riding is suicidal and just plain ignorant of everybody else using the roads.
Passed my bike test 20 years ago.
Had all sorts. Supermoto’s, Super sports etc.
There is a time and a place for “spirited riding”. That time of day with that level of traffic is not one of them.
My CBT instructor said “treat all car drivers like they’re trying to kill you”.
I did. Never had an accident. Some incredibly close shaves though.
Sold up 3 years ago as the amount of cars and stupidity on the UK roads is just increasing exponentially.
Sad the guy lost his life but when you ride like that, you have to be aware that death can be milliseconds away. And often totally beyond your control.
kjw21:
I feel sorry for both tbh - both made stupid errors be it poor observation or reckless speed (I am far from angelic but try my best to pick the right time/place) and unfortunately one paid with his life, the other with a relatively small punishment but a lifetime knowing he is partly to blame for the death of another.
There is nothing wrong with enjoying speed. Speed is not dangerous. 97mph is not in the least bit dangerous in appropriate circumstances.
Inappropriate use of speed is another matter altogether. Here the speed was more than double an appropriate speed for the conditions prevailing.
Two reasons. One, because at a much slower speed, he would have had a better chance to stop/take avoiding action and the driver would have had a better chance of seeing him. And two, had the accident still occurred, at a slower speed he may have had a better chance of avoiding serious injury or death.
Car drivers are generally poor at observation. It’s up to bikers to make allowances for this, especially at junctions. Riding at 97mph in these circumstances is giving everyone concerned little chance to make the correct decisions.
Very sad indeed.
Truckulent:
kjw21:
I feel sorry for both tbh - both made stupid errors be it poor observation or reckless speed (I am far from angelic but try my best to pick the right time/place) and unfortunately one paid with his life, the other with a relatively small punishment but a lifetime knowing he is partly to blame for the death of another.There is nothing wrong with enjoying speed. Speed is not dangerous. 97mph is not in the least bit dangerous in appropriate circumstances.
Inappropriate use of speed is another matter altogether. Here the speed was more than double an appropriate speed for the conditions prevailing.
Two reasons. One, because at a much slower speed, he would have had a better chance to stop/take avoiding action and the driver would have had a better chance of seeing him. And two, had the accident still occurred, at a slower speed he may have had a better chance of avoiding serious injury or death.
Car drivers are generally poor at observation. It’s up to bikers to make allowances for this, especially at junctions. Riding at 97mph in these circumstances is giving everyone concerned little chance to make the correct decisions.
Very sad indeed.
How any biker can disagree with that is beyond me!
I also agree with the fact that car drivers generally have ■■■■ poor observation and that’s more the reason to drive or ride defensively and anticipate the worst. I also noticed that in the video I couldn’t see an indicator flashing on the car, maybe no big deal to some but to me that’s another warning sign that its yet another car driver that generally drives around all day with their head up up their arse in cloud cuckoo land and it seems to be getting worse!
Also, just how many look but they don’t see?
the maoster:
Boris1971:
What’s the speed limit on that road?Didn’t notice any signs to the contrary so I’d assume NSL, or 60mph in this case.
There’s a possibility it could also have been 50.(for the very reason that was in the video) The repeaters for 50 could have been out of shot.
Speed limit for that section of the A47 is 60mph.
The collison happened at the Wood Lane junction, approx 1 mile before the Honingham roundabout to the East.
He had left Kings Lynn, approx 30 miles away.
Whoever said “if he had been going slower he’d still be here today” has it spot on. I would say he would have still been on the Dereham bypass when the car turned right had he been at or near the speed limits and therefore still with us.
reckon they only prosecuted the car driver because the biker was a very upright clean cut citizen type. if he had had lank greasey hair itd never have gone far
Looks like he started to move to the left as the car started turning, but did not ease of throttle or start to brakes. I think he was trying to get through the diminishing gap. RIP but unfortunately was riding too fast through the junction.
97 mph. Case closed. Totally irresponsible. And before anyone says it,I AM an ex biker who spent most of my riding life with the needle in the blood zone.How I am still here today is a mystery as I also rode like a tool.
No disrespect to the biker, but you can hear he had time to yell out, and see he tried to swerve around the car. Regardless of the car drivers actions, if the biker had been doing 60mph or less he would have had time to brake or swerve or the car driver would have had time to see him and stop. Obviously I can’t prove that 100%, but the bikers speed had more to do with his death than the car divers lack of observation.
I apologize to the family of the biker if you are reading this. I mean no disrespect. I suspect this kind of discussion is exactly what you wanted when you took the tough decision to release the video. Made me realise it could happen to any of us in any vehicle.
Again, not defending the car driver, but in a lorry if you dont move your head about at a junction or roundabout, you can fail to see a whole artic because your wing mirror is blocking your view. Maybe the car diver was texting or just not looking, but the fact the biker was doing nearly 100mph on a stretch of road where you wouldn’t expect it places the biker at fault in my eyes.
Mr Physick:
97 mph. Case closed. Totally irresponsible. And before anyone says it,I AM an ex biker who spent most of my riding life with the needle in the blood zone.How I am still here today is a mystery as I also rode like a tool.
What on a plag 90?
It’s easy to sit behind one’s computer looking at the speed posted in the article getting all frothy with “own fault, no sympathy, going too fast” finger wagging, but it should not matter whether one is doing 10mph or 110mph, it does not in any way excuse another vehicle from turning right across your path when they have to stop/give way to oncoming traffic. The argument posted that if he’d been doing the speed limit or less it wouldn’t have happened is weak to non-existent simply by the fact that the car driver admitted to not even being able to see the car following him so he’d have still turned across him regardless. Even at 50mph a direct impact like that is going to have very little likelihood of being survivable.
The biker of course should have anticipated the possibility of the car turning and adjusted his speed such that he’d have given himself time to react - which he did not - so some of the blame rests with himself, but an 18 month driving ban and 12 month CSO is frankly disgusting “justice” for the car driver. Imho he should’ve got absolute minimum of 1 year inside and banned from driving for life.
But yet again there is a huge inconsistency with sentencing for such cases. The bin truck driver that did a U-turn on the A419 back in 2011 which resulted in a van on the d/c crashing into it killing the driver got 3 years inside for it, yet the van driver was travelling well in excess of the speed limit there as well. At least in that case the trucker admitted to having actually seen the van but misjudged his speed, but in the biker case the car driver said he didn’t even see the biker nor the car following it and he gets away with a CSO! 
Ridiculous.
GasGas:
This has appeared on some motorcycle forums…as you’d expect.Pretty much everyone accepts he is going too fast for that stretch of road.
I ride headlamps on all the time…and most modern bikes now have no headlamp on/off switch.
The light does make you easier to see…but I suspect more difficult to judge speed/distance because the headlamp is all you can see.
I suspect the real villain of the piece here is the trend for cars to have ever-thicker pillars …I changed my Volvo V40 for a Ford Focus…and the Focus has terrible blind spots in comparison
I believe the pillar issue often stems from the rake of the windscreen being designed to minimise injuries to pedestrians in a collision. I do wonder if, as is appearing with pedal cycles, some sort of flashing amber laser projected on to the road ahead might help it would be too disconcerting all the time but when riding you could activate it with a thumb switch in circumstances where you worry a driver has not seen you.
This video is a bit like a hazard perception bit of a theory test where the guy did just not react to the developing hazard. I do think it is right the car driver was prosecuted though.
I’m sorry for the lads death but if you play with the devil your going to get burnt.
Left hand down!:
It’s easy to sit behind one’s computer looking at the speed posted in the article getting all frothy with “own fault, no sympathy, going too fast” finger wagging, but it should not matter whether one is doing 10mph or 110mph, it does not in any way excuse another vehicle from turning right across your path when they have to stop/give way to oncoming traffic. The argument posted that if he’d been doing the speed limit or less it wouldn’t have happened is weak to non-existent simply by the fact that the car driver admitted to not even being able to see the car following him so he’d have still turned across him regardless. Even at 50mph a direct impact like that is going to have very little likelihood of being survivable.The biker of course should have anticipated the possibility of the car turning and adjusted his speed such that he’d have given himself time to react - which he did not - so some of the blame rests with himself, but an 18 month driving ban and 12 month CSO is frankly disgusting “justice” for the car driver. Imho he should’ve got absolute minimum of 1 year inside and banned from driving for life.
But yet again there is a huge inconsistency with sentencing for such cases. The bin truck driver that did a U-turn on the A419 back in 2011 which resulted in a van on the d/c crashing into it killing the driver got 3 years inside for it, yet the van driver was travelling well in excess of the speed limit there as well. At least in that case the trucker admitted to having actually seen the van but misjudged his speed, but in the biker case the car driver said he didn’t even see the biker nor the car following it and he gets away with a CSO!
Yes it is easy to post from far away and make judgements without being there. I’m going to do it right now. Lets turn this scenario on its head. Suppose a lorry was over speeding doing 60mph plus down that hill and the car had pulled out because it had assumed the truck was doing the legal 40mph? In this hypothetical case the lorry would probably have bulldozed through the car killing the occupants. Who’s fault would that have been? I realise there will be a few people on here that will always support the trucker and always blame the “lesser trained” car driver, but the simple fact is that when you are on a main road approaching a junction … you SLOW DOWN and anticipate other road users taking risks or not being fully observant.
Left hand down!:
The argument posted that if he’d been doing the speed limit or less it wouldn’t have happened is weak to non-existent simply by the fact that the car driver admitted to not even being able to see the car following him so he’d have still turned across him regardless.
With respect, that’s bull. The excessive speed is entirely relevant, if he’d been doing nearer 60, he wouldn’t have even been there at the same time as the dozy prick in the car!
Left hand down!:
Even at 50mph a direct impact like that is going to have very little likelihood of being survivable.
He’d have had a dam sight better chance at 50 or 60 than nigh-on a ton for Christ sakes!
I reckon he had about a tenth of a second to react which left him no chance of taking avoiding action. If he’d have been going slower, he’d have had more time to react- obviously.
Left hand down!:
The biker of course should have anticipated the possibility of the car turning and adjusted his speed such that he’d have given himself time to react - which he did not - so some of the blame rests with himself.
And now you’ve just totally contradicted your self from your statement in your first para.
NewLad:
Mr Physick:
97 mph. Case closed. Totally irresponsible. And before anyone says it,I AM an ex biker who spent most of my riding life with the needle in the blood zone.How I am still here today is a mystery as I also rode like a tool.What on a plag 90?
No a 250 ■■■■■■■■■.
Ched:
Left hand down!:
It’s easy to sit behind one’s computer looking at the speed posted in the article getting all frothy with “own fault, no sympathy, going too fast” finger wagging, but it should not matter whether one is doing 10mph or 110mph, it does not in any way excuse another vehicle from turning right across your path when they have to stop/give way to oncoming traffic. The argument posted that if he’d been doing the speed limit or less it wouldn’t have happened is weak to non-existent simply by the fact that the car driver admitted to not even being able to see the car following him so he’d have still turned across him regardless. Even at 50mph a direct impact like that is going to have very little likelihood of being survivable.The biker of course should have anticipated the possibility of the car turning and adjusted his speed such that he’d have given himself time to react - which he did not - so some of the blame rests with himself, but an 18 month driving ban and 12 month CSO is frankly disgusting “justice” for the car driver. Imho he should’ve got absolute minimum of 1 year inside and banned from driving for life.
But yet again there is a huge inconsistency with sentencing for such cases. The bin truck driver that did a U-turn on the A419 back in 2011 which resulted in a van on the d/c crashing into it killing the driver got 3 years inside for it, yet the van driver was travelling well in excess of the speed limit there as well. At least in that case the trucker admitted to having actually seen the van but misjudged his speed, but in the biker case the car driver said he didn’t even see the biker nor the car following it and he gets away with a CSO!
Yes it is easy to post from far away and make judgements without being there. I’m going to do it right now. Lets turn this scenario on its head. Suppose a lorry was over speeding doing 60mph plus down that hill and the car had pulled out because it had assumed the truck was doing the legal 40mph? In this hypothetical case the lorry would probably have bulldozed through the car killing the occupants. Who’s fault would that have been? I realise there will be a few people on here that will always support the trucker and always blame the “lesser trained” car driver, but the simple fact is that when you are on a main road approaching a junction … you SLOW DOWN and anticipate other road users taking risks or not being fully observant.
Slowing down when approaching junctions can actually encourage vehicles waiting to make risky pull outs though.