Range Rover Runs Over Bikers

[fhm555]

While it is always assumed that the instinct is to protect one's offspring in a dangerous situation, and that would be true to a degree, except if the parent is in a panic. There is ample documentation of parents abandoning their children when they panic and the way SUV guy drove that thing looks more like blind panic than a calculated attempt to remove his family from harm.

Please don't get me wrong here, I'm on SUV guys side all the way but given the mess this already is, and given that there will always be some unprincipled member of the bar who will see an angle that could lead to personal enrichment, I'd look for SUV guy to be dragged through several legal flusterclucks in an attempt to lighten his insurers fiscal burden of holding too many dollars in their corporate accounts before this is all said and done. Panic will be the lynchpin of the sharks argument and said shark will most likely prevail.

 

[Relic]

Well what I'm saying is that this guy has "several layers of protection" here in regards to why he did what he did.
-panic as you say, but even if it's said that he kept his cool, there's still the urge to protect one's family that you just can't dispute.
I would be highly surprised if he's charged with anything.

 

[Chainsaw Willie]

I believe in the existance of the Panick Monkey. The Panic Monkey emerges from your back like something from Alien, ripping right through your flesh. He pulls out strands of your spinal cord and yanks them like reigns of a horse. He turns you into a puppet and makes you do stuff that you would never imagine, and later you cannot defend.

While sitting comfortably in a chair disscussing current events, it is easy to say "I would do this..." "He should have done that..."

But ya really don't know WHAT you would do until you have actually been in the situation and spazzed-out and done something weird.

 

[aborgman]

Kudos to Gloria Allred who is championing the family of the the biker who was deliberately run over by the SUV driver.

You mean this paragon of virtue?

Edwin Mieses, 32, never got a driver’s license in the Bay State, the Registry of Motor Vehicles said, but he was frequently nabbed behind the wheel, and even sentenced to jail for driving without a license, court records show. Mieses has a pending case out of Lawrence District Court for driving suspended, subsequent offense, said Carrie Kimball Monihan, spokeswoman for the Essex County District Attorney’s Office.

Mieses also has 15 guilty findings for criminal offenses including distribution of cocaine, possession of a firearm without a permit, knowingly receiving stolen property, resisting arrest and several motor vehicle violations, court records show.

Mieses was sentenced to jail in 2004 for distribution of cocaine, in 2001 for operating without a license, in 2000 for possession of a firearm, and in 1999 for possession of marijuana, receiving stolen property, destruction of property and attaching plates, according to court records.

 

[96tbird]

Panick monkey. Love it.

To date three are arrested. The man in the SUV doesn't seem to be in question by the authorities. Since it's after the fact, if the DA wanted to proceed he would have had an warrant issued by now, no? And this example would be political suicide for a DA, no?

 

[aborgman]

FWIW, I've been riding motorcycles for over 30 years - and I'm not siding with these asshats on two wheels - I don't blame the driver for protecting his family, when THEY put him in that situation...

Bingo.

I've ridden motorcycles since I was 8 years old, plus my dad and stepdad are both regular daily motorcycle commuters.

These guys deserve what they got for their behavior.

 

[Indiana Mike]

Panick monkey. Love it.

To date three are arrested. The man in the SUV doesn't seem to be in question by the authorities. Since it's after the fact, if the DA wanted to proceed he would have had an warrant issued by now, no? And this example would be political suicide for a DA, no?

I'm not so sure .

The DA could file later.

A guy here chased down some guys that invaded his home, his daughter had hid in the house and he panicked thinking they had kidnapped her.

There was a accident ,the HO rammed the car ,and one of the invaders died and one or two others were injured.

The HO was arrested and charged about a month after the incident. He's awaiting trial.

 

[Phil Smith]

You're trying to establish malicious intent on the part of the driver. So where are your facts? Where are there clear statements on the part of the driver or his wife? Eventually, the 911 calls that the wife made will be made public, and that will probably help establish some sort of state of mind on the part of the Rover driver.

You seem to think that the driver had some kind of intent to kill. It seems far more likely that his intent was to extricate himself and his family from a dangerous situation. In the process the one biker got hurt. But had that biker not been taking part in a ride that had been flagrantly breaking countless traffic laws while menacing other motorists, he would not have put himself in this situation where he got injured.

For the most part we have a narrative that the bike "brake checks" the Range Rover. I don't see brake lights engaged on the bike that the Range Rover hits. Why is it that the Range Rover is following so close and doesn't seem to regulate it's speed, things that drivers do every day. Why does the driver get a pass for not being in control of his vehicle during the first "accident"?

When did being afraid become a viable defense for following too closely, speeding and leaving the scene of an accident?

 

[macaroni tony]

For the most part we have a narrative that the bike "brake checks" the Range Rover. I don't see brake lights engaged on the bike that the Range Rover hits. Why is it that the Range Rover is following so close and doesn't seem to regulate it's speed, things that drivers do every day. Why does the driver get a pass for not being in control of his vehicle during the first "accident"?

When did being afraid become a viable defense for following too closely, speeding and leaving the scene of an accident?

In the video the guy on the bike pulls up alongside the range rover, stares in the guys window, then gets directly in front of him and continues to stare at him as he slows way down clear as day. According to reports this is the second time this happens; the first time is on the freeway when one of the bikers try and brake check him, and he changes lanes and clips the tire which ignites the mob mentality

 

[Ziltoid]

It's definitely true. But it's also true that if they did not decide to get on their bikes and behave in a manner that instigated this to begin with none of this would have ever happened.
Don't forget that before this happened, the local police had about 200 calls to them from people complaining about these bikers...

Yeah, I'm not trying to shift blame or anything. I'm just pointing out it could of easily been avoided. Often when dealing with jerks the easy way out is to be the better man.

 

[Phil Smith]

In the video the guy on the bike pulls up alongside the range rover, stares in the guys window, then gets directly in front of him and continues to stare at him as he slows way down clear as day. According to reports this is the second time this happens; the first time is on the freeway when one of the bikers try and brake check him, and he changes lanes and clips the tire which ignites the mob mentality

So when cars slow down in front of you, you run into the back of them. How many accidents have you had this year?

 

[macaroni tony]

I'm still not getting the "why did he leave the scene of the crime" thing. It's plain as day the guy was getting the **** out of dodge because he was surrounded by a bunch of idiot thugs on bikes who were attacking him. If he runs one over in the process of fleeing do you really think he should stop and get out of the car so he can get beaten to death????

 

[macaroni tony]

So when cars slow down in front of you, you run into the back of them. How many accidents have you had this year?

Yes that's exactly what I do. I've had 112. Still waiting for the big one.

You're intentionally shutting your eyes to the obvious for some reason...I don't know. I've made the mistake of engaging with people who do that enough times to know not to do it again

 

[ShoeManiac]

For the most part we have a narrative that the bike "brake checks" the Range Rover. I don't see brake lights engaged on the bike that the Range Rover hits. Why is it that the Range Rover is following so close and doesn't seem to regulate it's speed, things that drivers do every day. Why does the driver get a pass for not being in control of his vehicle during the first "accident"?

When did being afraid become a viable defense for following too closely, speeding and leaving the scene of an accident?

The video clearly shows that the bike aggressively came along side of the Rover, and then pulled in front of it in an equally aggressive fashion. The bike did so without regard to leaving a safe distance between his ride and the Rover. And THEN the bike did the brake check. Clearly, the bike was engaged in far more reckless driving than the Rover at that point in time.

 

[Phil Smith]

I'm still not getting the "why did he leave the scene of the crime" thing. It's plain as day the guy was getting the **** out of dodge because he was surrounded by a bunch of idiot thugs on bikes who were attacking him. If he runs one over in the process of fleeing do you really think he should stop and get out of the car so he can get beaten to death????

Does this also mean that if you hit a pedestrian and a crowd forms and they seem to be angry you're supposed to run away? Many hit and runs occur because people are afraid.

 

[bassinplace]

I don't know how many little decisions/ mistakes in judgement lead up to the point where the guy on the bike decided to confront the driver of the Rover. As a biker, track day enjoying 50+ year old, and parent, I feel for the guy who got run over. That said, I would have run them all over if I saw a threat to my family and thought that was my only escape. Sorry, but the whole lot of them f'd up.

When I ride, I'm very selective about with whom. I firmly believe that's a primary reason why I'm still able to do it after several decades. Choose your companions wisely.

Or better yet just ride solo, lol. I'm a new rider only a little over 3 months, but I've got over 3000 miles so I've been doing a fair share of riding in a short period of time. Ridden canyons, freeways, in the rain, heat, and all the various stages of traffic.

Also tried group riding too and I wasn't all that impressed with it. I guess I just don't get it. I find it more enjoyable when I can dictate the pace of my ride and when and where I want to take a break and not have to ride with the pack. These guys seem to have the complete opposite of that mentality. Their mentality seeming to be that of there's terror in numbers.

 

[96tbird]

Why some of you fail to see that the bikers are the ones that are initially and consistently breaking laws AND intimidating many motorists as a pastime are somehow innocent in any manner is beyond the limits.

IMO driver showed restraint and kept carnage to a minimum. He could have been bashing riders around like billiard balls if he wanted to.

As for the brake check, it is plainly evident that he was already in motion at reduced speed. The was surrounded and the bikers were in control of the rate of travel. It isn't difficult to imagine that he saw the guy in front, checked his mirror to see if he should slow and then it was too late. These guys were touching his vehicle. His eyes were likely going every which way looking for an out.

At any time the driver could have bolted forward and smashed through multiple bikes and killed many. But he didn't. Its obvious at the length of time this event took place that he WAS concerned about not hurting someone. It took time for the "F U" emotion to build. When they had him at a stop he obviously lost it and got the hell outta there. What is so difficult for some to see here?

 

[Phil Smith]

The video clearly shows that the bike aggressively came along side of the Rover, and then pulled in front of it in an equally aggressive fashion. The bike did so without regard to leaving a safe distance between his ride and the Rover. And THEN the bike did the brake check. Clearly, the bike was engaged in far more reckless driving than the Rover at that point in time.

I'm just trying to figure out how you, and not you specifically, are not responsible for not being in control of your vehicle to the point that you run into the back of another. Why isn't anyone addressing this?

Why is it that everyone here that drives acts like people don't speed up in an attempt to not allow you to get in front of them?

Why do defensive driving practices get thrown out of the window here?

 

[macaroni tony]

Does this also mean that if you hit a pedestrian and a crowd forms and they seem to be angry you're supposed to run away? Many hit and runs occur because people are afraid.

If I am surrounded by a mob of people intent on causing me harm, and I am in my car, I am taking off in my car. If I hit one of them in the process, I am not stopping

 

[macaroni tony]

I'm just trying to figure out how you, and not you specifically, are not responsible for not being in control of your vehicle to the point that you run into the back of another. Why isn't anyone addressing this?

Range Rover driver should not have clipped the rear tire of the first guy who tried to brake check him. It is true that you are supposed to keep enough space between yourself and the car in front of you, even if they are trying to get you to stop in the middle of the highway so that they can close it down. That's the law, at least in CA.

No one is addressing this because the far more egregious errors were committed by the bike crew