*controversy

Adding video to channels (Controversy) - requested by Mordhaus.

Exception to snuff?

Sad video for sure (the music was a bit much though).

Kind of a tough call - I do think the truck driver deserves the majority of the blame and should at the minimum be charged with a hit and run - and probably more - as he did pass the cyclist and clearly did not proceed with any due caution on that turn.

With that said, as an avid cyclist myself, I trust NO ONE while riding. Looking at the video, there seems to be a bike lane symbol in the middle lane, suggesting that cyclists proceeding through the intersection should be using that lane. Now I don't think that is enforced by law, but if that is what the symbol is there for, this would be a perfect illustration as to why. Also, if you look even closer, it appears the truck had his indicator on before she pulled up beside him; i.e. she should have seen his indicator. I hate to put any blame on that poor woman and - I really hate to say this - this video only goes to show that both parties were at fault.

While the watching the video I couldn't understand the "Controversy" tag until the last part....wtf....

I agree with Mass Bike that the truck driver was responsible. Not sure that he should be criminally charged, that's a really big hammer to use on someone that almost certainly did not intend any harm. But he wasn't even cited, although he left the scene. He called the Boston police many hours later, from New Jersey.

That said, I would advise any cyclists to avoid ever putting themselves in the position that Dr Kurmann found herself in. It is dangerous to ride beside large vehicles with limited visibility, as we see. Also good to note that semi trucks frequently swing left to set up a right turn -- I don't believe she realized the danger she was in until the truck was close to actually passing in front of her.

The symbol in the middle lane is a "sharrow", which really indicates that the middle lane is not a bike lane. The sharrow is supposed to indicate to motorists that bicycles may be expected in the lane, and to remind cyclists that they are allowed to use it. The Boston police report gets this wrong, irresponsibly making the driving public stupider. At the time of the crash the right lane was used as a turn lane, and there was a bus stop just before the crash site, making it likely that cyclists would use the middle lane.

It's fun to say that you never trust anyone, but that can't literally be true. For example, I trust thousands of drivers standing at red lights or stop signs not to charge out and run me over. It would be almost impossible to move in traffic without relying on most drivers to do the right thing most of the time.

According to the FAQ, snuff is defined as the depiction of loss of human life for the purposes of entertainment. Human fatalities alone do not define "snuff".

True, but that's not all it says....
The presence of human fatality is acceptable and not considered "snuff" if presented as a limited, incidental portion of a lengthy educational, informative news report or documentary that encompasses a much broader narrative. Our definition of "snuff" does include but is not exclusive to any short clip in which a human fatality occurs whether or not any victims are actually visible on camera.

As the fatal accident was the central point of the video and not incidental, and the video may or may not be considered lengthy and or news, I thought it a reasonable question to pose to the community.
To clarify, it was intended as a question not an accusation.

When I used to ride 30+ miles a day, I came damn close to being ended in the same type of accidents repeatedly. I learned quickly that trucks won't see bicyclists, even when they can see them, and so they demand your close attention. In this case, the truck had it's blinker on well before she passed it. She should have paid closer attention to traffic around her for her own safety.
That's not to say it's her fault, just that, as the one who will be injured or killed in an accident, it's prudent to be vigilant looking out for others driving unsafely.

All that said, since the driver knew he hit someone and drove away, only calling for police/ambulance later from another town, it should be manslaughter at a minimum, I can't fathom no charges being brought. WTF?!

As with other biases cops tend to place blame with the victim in this situations.

I reviewed the policy before posting, and concluded that this video does not qualify as snuff. Death is not presented as entertainment. Although the entire video is essentially about a single death and its causes and effects, the actual moment of Dr. Kurmann's demise is just one short but disturbing part.

Yes, the video is only about her death and it's causes, therefore there is an argument to be made that there is no "much broader narrative".
It's subjective. Again, I'm not accusing, just asking for people's opinion. The line/rule isn't clear to me, possibly intentionally.

I would certainly welcome other opinions.

Well I drive trucks and make this type of "button-hook" turn a lot. First of all if it were a car he would leave his trailer less than 4 feet from the curb in back so a car can't sneak by. They teach you this in truck school. He had his signal on and I drive through a college housing area all the time and make a turn like this with young people on my right a lot. She probably should have stopped and let him turn, him being in busy traffic he has to turn with the flow of traffic which might be slower than a bicycle. That said, of course he has to monitor the cyclist (I also ride bicycles in the big city) and stop immediately if she didn't yield or time his approach so she goes ahead of him. So ya, from truck driving school to my next work day (tomorrow) the driver is ALWAYS at fault if he hits anything on his right turning no matter who has the right a way. Sad case

I have commuted to work by bicycle for years - gotten "tagged" a couple of times by careless drivers with no major injuries...
But, I don't much care what the law says, if you have a large vehicle of any sort in your vicinity, it's up to you to know what the truck is doing and going to do and be ready to react accordingly. Any messaging that argues otherwise is just plain stupid. Maybe the driver sees you, and maybe not - maybe he's been driving too many hours with too little sleep. Maybe he's arguing with his boss or his girlfriend - doesn't make any difference what he's doing - if you want a long and reasonably painless bicycling career, it's up to you to judge the driving conditions and safety of your situation and placement at all times...

Speaking of trust; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CzKXNqBxPrc

Absolutely. The knowledge that you had the right of way does nothing to help get you out of your new wheelchair or coffin.

I was hesitant to vote on it but given the length and the fact that it did go into the fact that the driver was never charged, I decided to give it a pass on possibly being snuff.

I do think we need to redefine the snuff rule though. It is very subjective except for a really blatant case.

Perhaps my emphasis on the words "no one" was a bit much but while riding I'm much less trusting of driver behaviour than when I'm in my car because the outcome of a collision will greatly favour the driver. So yes, obviously you have to trust people to an extent but you have to keep aware of careless inattention, maliciousness, etc.

I've ridden for about 8 years now (for fitness/competition) and have seen and experienced some crazy shit where I ride (primarily rural roads, some small towns, etc). I will never forget the time an older gentleman waved me down for directions while I was riding. I cut my interval short, turned around, and helped point him in the right direction. As I resumed my ride, he blew by me without leaving me much room, startling me as I had let my guard down trusting that this guy was going to pass me safely. I was shocked.

So yeah, I'm very wary of all drivers when riding.