Michael Bryant Accident Video

[james t kirk]

Ummm... the media (for the most part) tends to be leaning towards the "left" of centre in its reporting bias... Bryant was an AG and MPP for the Liberal Party... Coincidence? Perhaps...

My point is that someone "leaked" all this information to the media. My guess is that it wasn't the cops.

Hmmm, let's see, who might have leaked all this negative information about this guy the next day????

Whooooo????

Hmmm???

 

[Sammy the Bull]

Why on earth would Bryant throw his whole career (and possibly his freedom) away over some stupid traffic altercation??!!
Makes ZERO sense to me!

There's a rumor going around that he's on Paxil, some people have reported violent and suicidal tendencies when on that stuff.
See here: http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&a...hts=&as_occt=any&cr=&as_nlo=&as_nhi=&safe=off

 

[Anynym]

Shouldn't we be expecting a post from someone who has examined the photos of the bicycle and finds no sign of damage?

The witness statement that the third party was hanging onto the car for dear life would be consistent with the witness statement that the car was "going 90" (even if that rate was figurative, rather than literal).

The video is less than clear, but does show a few key details, including the car backing up a short distance to drive away from the initial collision, with no obvious signs of concern for the cyclist who by that time appeared to no longer be on the bike.

 

[flubadub]

There is too much missing here. What happened before this point? Did the cyclist do something BEFORE this was on screen? Did he throw something at the driver? Did he hit him, threaten him, etc?

I agree, BoringBob, these are important questions. If there was a previous altercation between the two it could have raised the stakes. I wonder if something had happened a block before this and both were already in some sort of fight. But if that is the case, does that mean that this could be upped into a roadrage charge. Could the man responsible for implementing the road rage law be charged with it?

What do you think, fuji?

 

[Cycleguy007]

I agree, BoringBob, these are important questions. If there was a previous altercation between the two it could have raised the stakes. I wonder if something had happened a block before this and both were already in some sort of fight. But if that is the case, does that mean that this could be upped into a roadrage charge. Could the man responsible for implementing the road rage law be charged with it?

What do you think, fuji?

OH... so what you're suggesting is this may be a case of justifiable homicide?

What could anyone "do" to justify getting run over and killed?? In this case the Saab became the weapon.

 

[Cinema Face]

Ted Kennedy would've been proud.

A liberal policitian kills someone with his car in a very irresponsible way.

Like Teddy, Bryant will probably beat the rap. There's probably enough reasonable doubt. It will be hard for the crown to prove intent.

 

[Cycleguy007]

Ted Kennedy would've been proud.

A liberal policitian kills someone with his car in a very irresponsible way.

Like Teddy, Bryant will probably beat the rap. There's probably enough reasonable doubt. It will be hard for the crown to prove intent.

Chappaquiddick

 

[beerlover1]

grabbing the wheel

if they have video that shows the cyclist grabbing the steering wheel of the car or even the drivers arms, at or near the point of impact along the mail boxes etc, this case wont go to trial.

 

[fuji]

Why on earth would Bryant throw his whole career (and possibly his freedom) away over some stupid traffic altercation??!!

Maybe behind the carefully managed public image there's just another selfish, overly-competitive, testosterone fueled lawyer with a chip on his shoulder and chronic case of road rage.

 

[fuji]

Quite seriously, I've nearly hit dozens of psycho cyclists who illegally violate the rules of the road by weaving past stopped cars at relatively high speeds instead of acting like any other road vehicle.

In this case the driver hit a cyclist who was STOPPED on the road in front of him, so I don't think anything you just wrote is relevant at all.

Well... unless Bryant has the exact same ill-informed biases that you do, and brought that attitude to the situation. Through that biased lens a cyclist who is STOPPED on the road might appear to be "asking for it".

Maybe you should pass along your ideas to the prosecution, it really might help them flesh out the "motive" part of their case!

There is absolutely nothing on either video that shows conclusively what was SAID, when it was said, and what the hell else was happening in context when all this went down.

That's true. If there is ANY evidence that Bryant was aware of the bicycle before the initial collision--say that he was shouting at him to get out of the way--that will put Bryant away for a long time. That would turn that initial "accident" into assault with a weapon, and totally blow away any claim of self-defenes by Bryant.

All this "bikers are saints" garbage is what set me off - if ANY driver pulled what bikes get away with in this town, it would make the news every night.

Practically every car driver I know *routinely* violates the rules of the road. Moreover the stats show that in 60-70% of car/bike accidents it is the car driver who is at fault.

Most infractions by car drivers, like most infractions by cyclists, are relatively minor affairs--rolling through a stop sign on a bike strikes me as safer than, say, speeding.

But don't give me any bull crap about how car drivers follow the rules of the road--I don't know ANY car drivers who routinely follow the rules. Not one.

I bet you don't follow the rules of the road either, I bet you are some hippocrite car driver who routinely speeds, fails to properly signal. You probably talk on your cell phone while driving. You probably pass cyclists without giving them a full meter's berth. You probably turn right on red without coming to a complete stop and drive backwards on one-way streets when you miss your turn.

Quit with the hypocrisy about how cyclists are the only ones who violate the rules of the road--when you follow the rules perfectly, every rule, THEN you can talk.

 

[atherton_wing]

Your attitude reveals latent prejudice....

All this "bikers are saints" garbage is what set me off - if ANY driver pulled what bikes get away with in this town, it would make the news every night.

As I stated in a previous thread, people need to make decisions about this case with respect to the "facts" not their inner hatred towards cyclists.

For those of you still defending Bryant, let's do an experiment. In psychology to determine people's biases you reverse situations and if people change their perceptions then there is a bias. For example, to reveal a gender bias, all you need to do is consider a sexy woman displayed over a car in an advertisement. Now, if that were a sexy guy over the car, many of the same people that enjoyed the sexy lady draped over the car would now change their perception and believe that it was distasteful - that changing of attitude, when situations are reversed, reveals a bias. In this case, it is a gender bias.

Now going with this idea of bias...

I believe that many people on this thread have a negative bias towards cyclists. To reveal this bias, let's reverse the situation from a driver/cyclist to a driver/driver.

How would you guys react if your car was stopped and someone intentionally hit you from behind. I will bet that you would be like WTF! In addition, when you got out of your car the person drove away - without even asking to see if the jolt from the hit may have hurt you.

If you would be angry in that situation in your car, then you should also be outraged that Mr. Sheppard was hit from behind on his bicycle - if not then you have a negative bias towards cyclists.

I truly believe that the animosity towards Mr. Sheppard stems from people's prejudice towards cyclists. That is just wrong.

 

[GotGusto]

You guys have great eyes....it's too blurry for me to make this out in such detail.

There must be other security videos.

One would think that hi def security cameras would be commonplace but it's always these blurry videos we get to see. I can't make anything out in these videos.

 

[lovelatinas]

Why on earth would Bryant throw his whole career (and possibly his freedom) away over some stupid traffic altercation??!!
Makes ZERO sense to me!

There's a rumor going around that he's on Paxil, some people have reported violent and suicidal tendencies when on that stuff.
See here: http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&a...hts=&as_occt=any&cr=&as_nlo=&as_nhi=&safe=off

So that's what Bryant will use in his defense? Paxil?

 

[lovelatinas]

There are cyclists and there are bike couriers. Yes there is a difference, A cyclist wears a helmet and obeys the rules of the road and stops well behind when the streetcar doors are open, unlike many drivers in Toronto. I am a cyclist as I ride to work sometimes and ride for physical fitness. Bike couriers are the ones who ride all over the city with reckless abandon and as I cyclist I dispise bike couriers but also hate motorist who are just as bad for not obaying the rules of the road. I see too many cars drive by open streetcar doors nearly running over passengers this happens at least 100 times a day in Toronto. Also cars making left hand turns at Yonge & Bloor and busy intersections when left turns are restricted during rush hour.

 

[needinit]

Cases like this never are, you're fooling yourself if anyone thinks this is a slam dunk for Sheppard or Bryant, watch the lawyers spin this to heights we never thought of.

Sheppard won't have fair representation...he's dead and can't tell his side of the story.

Bryant was the aggressor by having the bigger 'weapon' and he killed a guy!

 

[needinit]

Woman with Bryant

The woman in the video is not his 'wife' as the woman left prior to the arrest (about 2 hrs after the incident)

I also don't believe his wife was with him - the person was described as a blonde woman and his wife is not that - http://www.gowlings.com/professionals/professional.asp?profid=1235

but this will come out in court so not sure why that would be lied about immediately (although at the time Bryant didn't know the guy would die).

 

[Cycleguy007]

The woman in the video is not his 'wife' as the woman left prior to the arrest (about 2 hrs after the incident)

I also don't believe his wife was with him - the person was described as a blonde woman and his wife is not that - http://www.gowlings.com/professionals/professional.asp?profid=1235

but this will come out in court so not sure why that would be lied about immediately (although at the time Bryant didn't know the guy would die).

Interesting... according to CBC and other news sources Ms. Abramovitch IS his wife... or have they gotten their "facts" wrong?!

His wife, Susan Abramovitch, is also a lawyer. She was with him in the car during the incident.

 

[oldjones]

Geez after all the know-nothings posted all that crap about Poor Michael and the Vicious Cycle Drunk, you'd think people would have learned not to rush their unfounded suppositions out into public.

Wait for all the evidence guys; keep an eye on the authorities to make sure they stay honest, and concentrate on how we citizens can ensure that people use our roads safely and are dealt with properly when they don't.

The facts, and the judgement are for the court case, not for the half-informed.

 

[atherton_wing]

Terb is no different from the chitchat around the office water cooler....

Geez after all the know-nothings posted all that crap about Poor Michael and the Vicious Cycle Drunk, you'd think people would have learned not to rush their unfounded suppositions out into public.

Wait for all the evidence guys; keep an eye on the authorities to make sure they stay honest, and concentrate on how we citizens can ensure that people use our roads safely and are dealt with properly when they don't.

The facts, and the judgement are for the court case, not for the half-informed.

I agree that we are all acting like armchair judges; however, isn't that what the terb lounge is for - you know, "shooting the shit."

Terb is not an academic journal, so let's not act as though it is.

 

[BoringBob]

Ditto that.

The cyclist was in front of Bryant's car and of no threat to Bryant.

Bryant hit the gas, nailed the cyclist, cyclist landed on hood of car.

You can clearly see that in the video.

That is the problem, really - the video doesn't show what happened right before that, what happened at the previous corner. It doesn't capture what the cyclist may have said or done out of frame before we got here. It's a "Rodney King" video moment, where not everything relevant is on tape.

Further, there is the question of the cyclist's behavior after the initial impact. The initial impact was not fatal (obviously). Had the cyclists stepped back and called 911, he would be alive today. Coming in and attacking a driver in a moving car is a highly risky idea, and the results were fatal.

The most the driver is guilty of at this point is assault, and without knowing what happened before the video starts, there is no way to know the aggravating circumstances of the situation.