CYCLINGFORUM.COM - Where Cyclists Talk Tech --- Return To Home

 

    Register FAQ'sSearchProfileLog In / Log Out

 

****

cyclingforum.com ****

HOMECLUBS | SPONSORS | FEATURESPHOTO GALLERYTTF DONORS | SHOP FOR GEAR

Return to CyclingForum Home Page CYCLING TECH TALK FORUM
          View posts since last visit

Groenewegen is in some deep sheit I'd say...
 Goto page Previous  1, 2

Author Thread Post new topic Reply to topic
greglepore
Joined: 10 Jan 2004
Posts: 1693
Location: SE Pa, USA

8/10/20 3:52 PM

"Reckless endangerment" was the crime in Pa. Most state have similar.

I agree stuff happens in the heat of the moment in sport. Maybe not a chargeable crime, but yeah, at least a year ban.

 Reply to topic     Send e-mail

lrzipris
Joined: 04 Mar 2004
Posts: 502
Location: Doylestown, PA

8/11/20 12:41 PM

"If there was no intent to brutally hurt him, and only consequential result was exactly that..."

In PA, recklessness would apply to the conduct, not necessarily to the consequences. "A person commits a misdemeanor ... if he recklessly engages in conduct which places or may place another person in danger of death or serious bodily injury."

Criminal law typically reflects evolving societal values, a parallel to Brian's "slippery slope." At what point does recklessness become extreme enough to justify criminal liability? In the first instance, it depends on the prosecutor (who decides whether to prosecute), then on a judge (who must decide if the evidence is sufficient to go to trial), and then, ultimately, a jury (acting as the conscience of the community).

It's odd to think about this stuff, being retired from public defendering for nine years.

 Reply to topic    

Brian Nystrom
Joined: 26 Jan 2004
Posts: 4703
Location: Nashua, NH

8/11/20 6:15 PM

I don't believe for a minute that Groenenwegen will be banned; I've seen equally or more egregious behavior many times before and none of the perpetrators received any kind of a ban. On the contrary, many riders and journalist seem to be saying that it wasn't entirely Groenenwegen's fault, citing that riders have been complaining about that finish for years. I don't agree - the crash clearly was his fault - but there is no evidence of intent to injure and the severity of Jakobsen's injuries could not have been foreseen. It seems that many in the pro cycling community have already moved on, while wishing Jakobsen well in his recovery.

 Reply to topic    

Sparky
Joined: 08 Dec 2003
Posts: 17920
Location: Portland, OR

8/11/20 6:30 PM

I wonder how many less teeth and busted bones/face he might have had at even 10kph max sprint velocity.

Seems he piled into the end of the barrier face first I'd guess.

Would it make an sense to tie the sections together in the sprint zone maybe?

Remember when Wout van Aert leaned in too tight in a right hander and caught his knee/leg on the hook for joining other the other barrier section. Seems that section shoulda been 180^ placed at a minimum.
Stage 13 TT last year??

 Reply to topic     Send e-mail

greglepore
Joined: 10 Jan 2004
Posts: 1693
Location: SE Pa, USA

8/11/20 6:32 PM

Intent isn't necessary-recklessness in the law as general principle means something more than negligence, ie an appreciation of the risk and a disregard. Negligence doesn't require an appreciation, and is almost never criminal, recklessness is but is less than intent.

This is angels on a pin to all but lawyers. However, having watched the tape, and having sprinted, the dude deserves something more than relegation. He didn't just lean in with his head, he hipchecked and caused carnage.

The known danger of the 80 kph sprint there only adds to the case against. The whole freaking peloton knew it was not a place to take those chances.

The only reason I don't think criminal prosecution is warranted is that in sport the red mist happens. But a year or two ban, yeah.

 Reply to topic     Send e-mail

Brian Nystrom
Joined: 26 Jan 2004
Posts: 4703
Location: Nashua, NH

8/12/20 6:15 AM

If this happened in the US, a lawsuit probably would have been filed by the time Jakobsen hit the ground.

Can anyone recall the UCI ever issuing a ban for anything that wasn't doping-related? Has anyone heard that they're considering anything beyond the relegation and disqualification that they've already issued? Is there any indication that the Polish authorities are investigating this as a crime? I'm pretty sure that the answer to all three questions is "no".

OTOH, the UCI may be going after the race organizers, at least to force them to change the finish in future races.

 Reply to topic    

dan emery
Joined: 11 Jan 2004
Posts: 6447
Location: Maine

8/12/20 12:11 PM

Lawsuit?

Who would file a lawsuit if it was in the US? If Jakobsen or his team want to file a suit, I expect they can find a way to do it.

We were talking about criminal prosecution, not a civil lawsuit. And about what we feel is deserved, not what will be done.

Brian, seems to me that if a distracted driver ran a cyclist into a guardrail, you’d call for the driver to be locked up and the key thrown away. No intent at all there. Is Groenewegen intentionally putting a rider into a barrier at 45 mph less culpable?

As to the red mist, first, this is their job and they sprint maybe 100 times in a year. And there is a rule about deviating the line which they obviously pay no attention to. And red mist exists in domestic violence and road rage, should we let those go?

 Reply to topic    

Brian Nystrom
Joined: 26 Jan 2004
Posts: 4703
Location: Nashua, NH

8/12/20 6:55 PM

My reference to a lawsuit was more a commentary on the state of things here than anything else.

A distracted driver may not have intent to do harm, but they're willfully negligent and engaging in behavior that they know is putting others at risk. A cyclist in that situation may well have no escape option due to the size of the vehicle. The cyclist has done nothing to contribute to the collision and is a completely unwilling victim. In that situation, no, I wouldn't say lock them up and throw away the key, but something more than simply calling it an "accident" and/or writing a reckless driving ticket is warranted, such as a lengthy loss of their license and hefty fines, payment of medical expense and perhaps compensation for lost wages. Assuming that the cyclist survives, that's sufficient for a first offense, "educational" penalty. However, I have no mercy for repeat offenders and they should definitely face substantial jail time and indefinite loss of their license.

While it's clear that Groenewegen intended to block Jakobsen from getting past him, there is no evidence that he intended to cause him to crash. It became obvious well before the crash that Jakobsen's path by him was going to be cut off and he could have backed off instead of trying to force his way though; the speed disparity between them was small enough. He shouldn't have had to make that choice, but he could have, and he apparently decided to take the risk. I'm not blaming him, just pointing he did have an option to protect himself and let the race referees make the call. In the heat of competition, that's much easier said than done, but I've seen it happen many times.

The bottom line is that no, I don't believe that Groenewegen committed a crime, any more than the myriad of other sprinters who've tangled with each other and caused crashes did. If you don't agree, that's fine.

My question is why haven't you - or anyone else - called for this before now, when there have clearly been equally egregious incidents over the years we've been here? What's different about this time?

 Reply to topic    

dan emery
Joined: 11 Jan 2004
Posts: 6447
Location: Maine

8/13/20 2:49 AM

Why haven’t called for this before?

I barely follow pro cycling and can’t remember thinking about this before. Other than this thread I wouldn’t have been aware of this incident. I commented here because you and others said criminal prosecution was way out of line, and after looking at the tape, I disagreed.

 Reply to topic    

Sparky
Joined: 08 Dec 2003
Posts: 17920
Location: Portland, OR

8/15/20 10:31 AM

Deceuninck - Quick-Step
Tour of Poland

Patrick Lefevere says he takes back his comments about putting Dylan Groenewegen in jail.


https://www.cyclingweekly.com/news/racing/patrick-lefevere-says-he-takes-back-his-comments-about-putting-dylan-groenewegen-in-jail-463036

 Reply to topic     Send e-mail

Brian Nystrom
Joined: 26 Jan 2004
Posts: 4703
Location: Nashua, NH

8/15/20 4:37 PM

I'm not surprised in the least. I'm curious about the referened "lawsuit" and what that entails. That could be as damaging to the sport as criminal charges.

 Reply to topic    

Anthony Smith
Joined: 12 Jan 2004
Posts: 848
Location: Ohio

8/25/20 9:30 AM

The real cause

Jakobsen (sp) ultimately made poor decisions which caused the crash and ultimately his own injuries.

He should not have attempted to enter the short side unless he was willing to and capable of defending his front wheel and physically driving the leadout to the left if necessary.

Ive raced on the road and track in North America, Europe and Australia at a high level (juniors, elite and masters) for 47 years and primarily made a living as a field sprinter and lead out man. Ive been pushed, pulled, grabbed, elbowed, punched, hooked and more. Ive had the door closed on me and closed the door on others. All of this happens routinely, sometimes you fall, sometimes you don't, but ultimately you are responsible for your own decisions and own safety.

 Reply to topic    

Sparky
Joined: 08 Dec 2003
Posts: 17920
Location: Portland, OR

8/25/20 9:55 AM

I agree a little, he decided to take the risk seeking the gain.

But I can't agree 'that caused the crash", the slammed door certainly seems more causal.

OTOH, that door was slammed shut as bad as I've seen. Of course that perceptually looks worse given the outcome.

Disclaimer, total armchair QBing on my part. ;)

 Reply to topic     Send e-mail

dddd
Joined: 11 Jan 2004
Posts: 3310
Location: NorCal

8/25/20 10:12 AM

I can recall GP motorcycle racers striking against, boycotting race venues where track/guardrail conditions were just too dangerous.

Obviously the same could happen to a cycling venue today if/when communication between riders and venue operators similarly went unanswered.

As for the "rider's actions" component to outcomes, the sprinters themselves, the "sprinter community" if you will, should perhaps be amidst the Judge and Jury, since they are the ones on the line and who have some mutual self-interest in matters involving a lack of safety heading for the line.
Hopefully the riders/teams will effectively weigh in here as decisions about rider conduct and venue conditions are being considered.

 Reply to topic    

Sparky
Joined: 08 Dec 2003
Posts: 17920
Location: Portland, OR

8/25/20 10:19 AM

Seems a little more contemporary barrier design in sprinting zones is in order. Something that can not separate without, I don't know, tools maybe...

Worker bees uprising? Who want to go first I wonder.

 Reply to topic     Send e-mail


Return to CyclingForum Home Page CYCLING TECH TALK FORUM
           View New Threads Since My Last Visit VIEW THREADS SINCE MY LAST VISIT
           Start a New Thread

 Display posts from previous:   


Goto page Previous  1, 2  
Last Thread | Next Thread  >  

  
  

 


If you enjoy this site, please consider pledging your support

cyclingforum.com - where cyclists talk tech
Cycling TTF Rides Throughout The World

Cyclingforum is powered by SYNCRONICITY.NET in Denver, Colorado -

Powered by phpBB: Copyright 2006 phpBB Group | Custom phpCF Template by Syncronicity