The Michael Bryant - Allan Sheppard Bicycle Incident: Update Charges Dropped 5/25/10

[starbright]

EDIT: and the term "dragging" conjures up images of the guy being stuck between the road and the axle or something, and the driver obliviously or intentionally continuing to drive, scraping the corpse like a cheeze grater. THAT IS NOT WHAT HAPPENED.

Correct. What actually happened was the driver sped up, drove across the road into the wrong lane, and repeatedly ran the cyclist into trees, signs and a mailbox.

Glad you cleared that up - goodness forbid we ruin the poor man's name by saying he dragged the cyclist.

[ji2o0k]

that he got out and peed on the guy too?

oh my gawwwwddd.....he also peed on the guy after he backed up and ran over him??!!?!? that is truly inhumane and uncalled for....

was the cyclist wearing a helmet? because if he wasn't...then he should have you know......riding a bike without a helmet is dangerous and definitely not a way to ahead in life!

[lorax1284]

Correct. What actually happened was the driver sped up, drove across the road into the wrong lane, and repeatedly ran the cyclist into trees, signs and a mailbox.

Glad you cleared that up - goodness forbid we ruin the poor man's name by saying he dragged the cyclist.

If you wanna be glib about something like this, fine, but remember, someone died. It doesn't do anyone any good to misrepresent the facts. Clearly there are people who don't like politicians, or people they perceive to be wealthy, or favour cyclists in all cases of cyclist / motorist interaction, or hate Liberal cabinet ministers, or despise Michael Bryant, and they're bringing that baggage to this discussion. Fine. But the victim wasn't "dragged".

My condolences to the families in this tragedy.

Despite of the sad news, I find it amusing on how quick and harsh people can come around to judge others: 1) without understanding the situation 2) based on their own experiences on the road of downtown Toronto.

I agree Takami, although I wouldn't say I find it "amusing", I find it kind of pathetic.

[gilboman]

He was one of main government officials who rallied hard against "bad" driving. Then he gets caught/charged for alledgedly killing someone while driving badly.

You don't see the irony in that?

no, cause the guy attacked him and his car and allegedly jumped and attacked him while in the car.

so where's the irony? or do you mean there are government officials who rally for bad driving?

[gilboman]

Tell me he doesn't look like an arrogant S.o.B?!




These guys in their luxury cars sometimes expect you to yield to them. I can just see this guy in his convertible all smug and arrogant.

yes, they should welcome with open arms when people bash their cars and attack them

[YLSF]

I just skimmed through the thread but anyone talking about the female witness in his car? At 9:45pm at night and they don't say it is his "wife".... Wouldn't be surprised if he was having an affair and was more concerned with covering that up vs. fear of this dude.

[onexeyed]

After reading all the news reports during my lunch break, it sounds like the cyclist was stupid enough to hang onto a moving car and threaten someone who cut him off. And if a psycho cyclist was threatening me and holding onto my car, I know most people would have try to drive away too whether people would like to admit it or not.

[gilboman]

I just skimmed through the thread but anyone talking about the female witness in his car? At 9:45pm at night and they don't say it is his "wife".... Wouldn't be surprised if he was having an affair and was more concerned with covering that up vs. fear of this dude.

so if you have a female at 9:45pm in your car on Bloor it's an Affair

[Jaytee]

.

[AirBosh]

Sounds like that movie Changing Lanes where two strangers cross pathed..
An arrogant attorney collides with a hot headed bike courier ...

[camber]

no, cause the guy attacked him and his car and allegedly jumped and attacked him while in the car.

No one has said that bicyclist attacked him in a manner that the appropriate defense was to kill him.

Also, the former Attorney General of Ontario Iinexplicably fled the scene of accident. It's not like he is ignorant of the law

To be honest we won't know what happen until credible witnesses come forward. From what little the police know they feel, they have enough evidence to criminally charge Bryant for the cyclists death.

so where's the irony? or do you mean there are government officials who rally for bad driving?
Sep 1st, 2009 03:23 PM

Ummm... Bryant spent a good chunk of his time as AG of Ontario tackling road safety issues. Then he ends up being criminally charged with killing someone with a car.

[Spray]

Pulling over and calling 911 isn't "fleeing the scene".

No one has said that bicyclist attacked him in a manner that the appropriate defense was to kill him.

Also, the former Attorney General of Ontario Iinexplicably fled the scene of accident. It's not like he is ignorant of the law

To be honest we won't know what happen until credible witnesses come forward. From what little the police know they feel, they have enough evidence to criminally charge Bryant for the cyclists death.





Ummm... Bryant spent a good chunk of his time as AG of Ontario tackling road safety issues. Then he ends up being criminally charged with killing someone with a car.

[WontonTiger]

Correct. What actually happened was the driver sped up, drove across the road into the wrong lane, and repeatedly ran the cyclist into trees, signs and a mailbox.

Glad you cleared that up - goodness forbid we ruin the poor man's name by saying he dragged the cyclist.

And the cyclist held on through the whole thing... Seems odd to me.

They are both responsible for his death. The cyclist is an idiot for doing what he did, and the former-AG over-reacted to the situation. He should have slowed down and tried to fling him off using his door. I don't think the former-AG wanted to kill him.

This is the same AG that came up with some nutty laws and regulations. McGuinty's gov't and cronies are falling apart now. They are cursed.

[pintobean]

I can see the irony in this situation clear as day...I can't understand how so many people are missing it???

Anyways, I am a Conservative through and through and my dislike for Liberal politicians is well known (at least to my family and friends). But I have to say that we're totally jumping the gun here by crucifying Bryant. There seems to be a pretty strong argument shaping up that his actions were done in self-defence and that he never intended for the guy to die.

Picture this... You're driving along in your convertible and suddenly get into a collision with a cyclist. The cyclist yells a few swear words at you, and you yell back. Before you know it the cyclist is battering your car with his backpack and then suddenly lunges at you while you're strapped in behind the wheel. The cyclist is attempting to grab your head or neck and you have no idea whether he has a weapon in his hands. The passenger beside you is screaming, the cyclist is screaming and everything has descended into chaos in a matter of seconds. What are you going to do?

Armed with the benefit of hindsight, the bystanders on RFD seem to think that Bryant should have casually gotten out of his car and tried to calm the cyclist down.

That's BS. In any situation like this, the instinctual reaction is "fight or flight", and most people as smart and educated as Bryant would choose "flight" instead of sticking around to "fight" and risk injury or death.

So Bryant hit the gas and fully expected that he'd be able to get away from the cyclist. Unfortunately, the cyclist managed to hang onto the car or the headrest or Bryant's head. At this point, Bryant was probably even more scared than before. Everyone seems to think that he should have stopped his car once he realized that the cyclist wasn't letting go, but that is BS again...would you stop your car if a psycho is refusing to do what 99.9% of the population would have done (let go of the car)? Of course not! You'd continue to drive and maybe even speed up.

The veering around the road and smashing into the mailbox and trees can easily be explained away by the fact that the cyclist was grabbing at Bryant's head and neck area and he was not in full control of the car while he was trying to get away from the crazy man who was grabbing at him.

This is what I think happened, and I would not be surprised if the charges against Bryant don't stick at all. I know that if he beats the charges everyone will claim that he got off because of his money, position and connections, but that's not fair. I think he will get off because he has a strong argument that this was self-defence.

[buddhababy]

why? ..did you want a pitbull?

I already have one.