Tri-Met Faces Lawsuit from Assaulted Bicyclist
The big story on all the Portland bicycling blogs this week is about the lawsuit filed by bike activist (and city employee) Randy Albright against Tri-Met. In short, here's the story, from the Oregonian:
After a close call with a bus approaching the Hawthorne Bridge, bicyclist Randy Albright said he wanted to get the attention of the driver. So when the bus stopped for traffic, Albright pulled in front of it so the driver couldn't avoid him. ... The driver opened the door and allowed a rider to "alight from the bus at an unapproved stop on the bridge, assault and batter plaintiff, and then re-board the bus," Albright charges in lawsuit filed recently in Multnomah County Circuit Court.
Over at the BikePortland blog, they broke the story four days ahead of the Oregonian and had this comment:
Regardless of Randy’s outburst, there’s simply no justification for a TriMet driver allowing a passenger to beat someone up and then leave them without any more respect than roadkill. And what’s up with this psycho passenger? That guy needs to relax and stop assaulting people he doesn’t even know. Too bad no one knows who he is because I’d love to hear his side of the story.
Meanwhile, over at the brand-new BTA Blog (from the advocacy group Bicycle Transportation Alliance), Evan Manvel points out the seemingly-obvious:
...if the driver helped someone who has just assaulted a cyclist leave the scene, instead of calling the police, it’s completely unacceptable. That said, TriMet has had an open door to hear the needs of the cycling community, and I think they are making a good faith effort to be good partners.
Check out the photos, BlueOregon readers. Anybody know John Doe? For a better view, check out the four-camera video of the incident - posted by the Oregonian on their website. (!)
Discuss.
|
January 20, 2006 |
open discussion
| Share on Facebook |
Sponsored Advertising
Comments
Posted by: Steve | Jan 20, 2006 9:28:16 AM
The bike rider is an idiot if he cannot stay in the bike lane without a very good reason. If my car crosses the bike lane line with no one around, that is a ticket (rightly so) for me.
I think the bike rider was spoiling for a fight. Maybe he should lobby for wider bike lanes.
Posted by: Jeff Alworth | Jan 20, 2006 9:33:55 AM
I don't wish to weigh in on this incident, but as a regular bike commuter, I have a few general thoughts. (Some of which I've often considered putting into a post.)
First off, Portland's a great place to ride a bike. Not only are there bike lanes all over the place, but for the most part, motorists have really started to incorporate cyclists into their normal habits. Ten years ago, there weren't bike lanes, and cars alternately ignored or were dangerously deferential to bikes.
Second, road rage goes both ways, and I've lately seen more infuriated cyclists than motorists. Almost every bicyclist is also a motorist sometime--or rides with friends or family in cars. Cars are not evil. They're a necessary part of transportation. If motorists have gotten better about cyclists, I think sometimes cyclists have gotten angrier about cars.
Finally, it is true that cyclists are far more vulnerable. When it's pouring rain, we get buffeted around by the weather, the roads are more dangerous, and cars have worse visability. Even if a cyclist is a self-satisfied rage-head (while driving my car, I've encountered a few of these folks myself), you'd still hate to hit him.
We share a city. Rage is just generally a bad thing.
Posted by: marco | Jan 20, 2006 9:43:58 AM
I think Jeff makes a good point. The winner of the battle of the tools isn't right, they're both just tools.
Still, my heart is with Buzz Lateforwork, mover of obstacles.
Posted by: Chris Smith | Jan 20, 2006 9:49:11 AM
The cyclist left the bike lane because it was full of gravel from the recent storm. He is allowed to do this by law when the lane is unsafe.
He might have been better off if he had taken the full auto lane, as he is also allowed to do by law. Then the bus would not have been able to execute the tight squeeze maneuver.
Posted by: Kari Chisholm | Jan 20, 2006 10:00:38 AM
I don't think I particularly care whether the cyclist was wrong or right.
I want to know why a Tri-Met bus driver stopped his bus, let a rider get off the bus, watched that rider punch a citizen, let that rider back on the bus, and then drove off.
Doesn't Tri-Met teach its drivers to report crimes they witness to the police?
Posted by: Jonathan Maus | Jan 20, 2006 10:07:20 AM
Chris is right, Randy should have taken the full lane. Marco, the cyclist got punched and required several stitches in his lip and a visit to the ER.
And Jeff's comments are the real key in this whole thing (especially now since the O published what I think is a bad article on today's front page)...we all share the road and we need to work together to figure out how best to do this.
We all make a choice on how we get from A to B, but that doesn't mean we suddenly choose a side and become "anti" in any way. If we get beyond individual incidents (like Randy's) and anecdotes about "this crazy cyclist" or "this crazy driver" then we can move forward and figure out how to peacefully co-exist.
It's time to take the "scare" out of share.
Posted by: doretta | Jan 20, 2006 10:19:46 AM
Since we aren't likely ever to put an end to boys tussling over whose is bigger or more important, my first impulse was to dismiss this incident.
I've had second thoughts and now I have some questions. It seems the bicyclist was in the auto traffic lane because the bike lane had gravel on it and the bicyclist felt it was unsafe.
1. Do we need to give more timely attention to cleaning the bridges? We do dump gravel on them periodically during the winter due to ice or concerns about ice and sometimes that stuff sits there for a long, long time. Unlike on some other streets there's not much of anywhere else to go for either the car/truck/bus traffic or the bicyclist if there's a problem on a busy bridge. Shouldn't conditions affecting safety get top priority in our street cleaning protocols?
2. Should we be encouraging bicyclists to start thinking differently about bike commuting? Bicycle commuters in other countries are mostly not riding skinny tire road/racing bikes. They ride fat tire bikes that require more effort but are much better at dealing with road surface hazards like gravel.
3. How do we develop shared protocols for dealing with situations that are less than optimal? Existing statutes don't seem sufficient or don't have sufficient buy-in from all parties. Where did Mr. Albright think the bus should have gone given that he was riding in the roadway and not in the bike lane? Is there any chance the average bus, truck or car driver would agree with him?
Posted by: pdxdem | Jan 20, 2006 10:59:47 AM
I my self have seen bicyclist's pay no attention to traffic and expect cars to stop for them and vice versa. I personally do not think that bicycles should share the road for safty reasons. Bicycles should be confined to bike paths or side walks. I say this not because I hate bicyclists I say this because I do not want to see any more people get hurt. Riding a bicycle in traffic lanes with auto traffic traveling at speeds up to 4 to 5 times the speed a bicycle travels in reckless and irresponsible. We as a community need to figure out a viable solution.
I know bicycle riders are going to hate me.
Posted by: Nick | Jan 20, 2006 11:16:44 AM
If TriMet DOES teach drivers to report crimes, I wonder if the bus driver ever reported the biker (who hit the bus with his hand, then stopped it illegally)? Road rage isn't a term that should simply be used for motorists.
Posted by: Jeff Bull | Jan 20, 2006 11:16:55 AM
Until a move to the 'burbs made it unfeasible, I rode my bike to work everyday (or pretty near) regardless of season. I've also ridden in cities across the country with very different cycling cultures. Based on that, here are a few observations (trying to be brief):
1) The "gravel" excuse: I ride a road-bike and I've never seen a gravel build-up - even after the worst of winter storms two winters back created deep build-ups - that couldn't be navigated. As such, I'm not sympathetic here. I'm guessing this guy was protecting his tires, not totally invalid, but a behavior no motorist understands, which brings me to the semi-related....
2) As a friend of mine pointed out, this guy chose confrontation - and of a very aggressive variety (i.e. halting traffic) - rather than trying to report the incident. He chose this path and he'd do well to live with the consequences of that decision rather than seek redress through the courts. In all my years and across five major cities and with all the yelling and fighting I've done, I've never done anything so presumptious as Albright.
3) But Kari made a great point here as well: what the hell is the Tri-Met driver thinking? Whether or not Albright led with his chin, a public employee can't just ignore witnessing an assault. (Side NOTE: I really, REALLY don't like Tri-Met drivers; by my observation, they're the worst offenders in the city.) Put it this way: I'm not happy about how this came about, but the driver's behavior justifies Tri-Met's spot on the hook for all this.
Compared with other cities in which I've ridden (Seattle, Raleigh NC, Washington DC, Boston), Portland has a very weird bike culture. I agree with Jeff that most drivers do accommodate cyclists, but the ones that don't hate them like nowhere else I've been; a sample of that sentiment appears in The O's write-up in this morning's paper and it seems Albright's assailant came from this group. It also doesn't help that a lot of local cyclists ride as if, out of gratitude for saving the planet, God blesses their every action.
Jeff Alworth insights are really good here. Cyclists get highly skittish because they're more vulnerable. I'd add to that by noting that they're also more visible and less anonymous. When a cyclist yells, flips off a motorist, or pulls an asshole manuever (Lord knows plenty of them/us do), the motorist hears or sees it pretty clearly; most motorist complaints take place inside the car and goes unheard, or it takes the less personal form of a car's horn.
As someone who does a lousy job containing his temper while cycling, I know I've been less than ideal ambassador. At the same time, I usually only lose it when provoked (but then I really lose it, at least verbally). I'd like to think I make up for this by avoiding situations where I provoke drivers, mainly by yielding the right of way when I should, obeying traffic signals and so on. And when I know I'm wrong, I make some sort of gesture to let the driver know that I know I blew it. It's mainly about respect - and you don't make people respect you when you hold up their commute or up people's chances of running you over.
Posted by: Ross Williams | Jan 20, 2006 1:11:22 PM
If this were a auto driver who had been cut off and then stopped on the bridge to berate the bus driver would anybody have cared enough for it to make the newspaper? Would we be talking about whether auto's can share the street with buses?
1) I have ridden on the Hawhthorne Bridge on a mountain bike with mountain bike tires when there was gravel in the bike lane. It is not a safe or pleasant experience with heavy traffic. I can imagine it would be much less so with normal street bike and/or tires. The decision whether it is safe is up to the bicyclist and his decision to ride in the lane is both legal and understandable.
2) He was clearly staying to the right hand side of the lane. Under those circumstances it is the responsibility of the bus driver to pass the bicyclist at a safe distance. The presence of a bike lane is irrelevant.
3) The bicyclist is an idiot and jerk. He held up an entire busload of people because he was mad at the driver. Moreover its not clear why other than to express his anger. Completely narcisstic.
4) The guy who got out and pushed him off the road was clearly committing an assault. The bus driver should have reported it and he shouldn't have let the guy get back on the bus. Its one thing to let someone off when they demand it, its quite another to let them back on again.
For every bicyclist I see violate a traffic law, I see 50 motorists doing it. Try traveling any street at the legal speed limit. Most of the other traffic will be going faster than you are. Drivers take their own violations so much for granted that they don't even register they are breaking the law.
To be blunt, I would have to run every red light and stop sign I saw as a bicyclist to equal the number of times I have been over the speed limit as a driver. It annoys me when I see a cyclist blow through red lights and stop signs. I think they make it more dangerous for all of us, whether on a bike or driving our car, by making bike behavior unpredictable. But spare me the self-righteous autoist lectures about cyclists who slow down and role through a stop sign when they see it is safe.
Posted by: GawD | Jan 20, 2006 2:14:18 PM
I commuted by bike from close in SE to downtown on a hyrbid for 7 years (I work from home so my commute is down a flight of stairs now). My bike was a hybrid and I absolutely hated riding through the gravel they put down after a storm. I totally understand why the biker was avoiding it. It's not a matter of thin or thick tires, it's a saftety issue.
As a biker you can't win when there is no separate bike lane. Ride out in traffic and you risk angering motorists who think you are in their way. Ride off to the side and you risk the kind of thing that happened to this biker. More than a few drivers don't think it's any big deal to pass within inches of you.
I had this very experience with a Tri-met bus. I reported the driver, but who knows what happened to him. My guess? Nothing but a reprimand in his file.
Posted by: Todd | Jan 20, 2006 2:35:24 PM
All three principals in this case, Tri Met driver, bicyclist, and passenger need to be flogged. There simply is no excuse for this behavior and Jeff Alworth's post is right on target. Any lawsuit in this matter should be thrown out as frivolous.
Posted by: Jeff Bull | Jan 20, 2006 3:08:06 PM
I have to second Ross Williams on the "predictability factor." With damn near cyclist employing a different set of rules when they ride, the state of confusion among motorists is very high. It makes for an annoying commute for cyclists and pissed off motorists as well.
It also appears he shares my approach to stop signs. That's two of us. Kick ass...
Posted by: iggir | Jan 20, 2006 3:14:37 PM
i think Kari is right on as well...
if it had been a hot babe on the sidewalk, would the driver have let a guy off to rape her, then, presumably, let him back on for a lift home?
assault is assault, no matter how you look at it. if Buzzcut had just screamed at the biker for awhile, then it would have been less tangible, but this is blatent criminal activity.
bikers do, however, tend to piss me off. they rarely follow basic traffic laws and then complain when they get creamed by a car. have a little common sense and you won't get mashed.
Posted by: truffula | Jan 20, 2006 3:31:05 PM
FWIW, I'm a year-round bike commuter and I cross the Hawthorne Bridge every day. Cyclists have to navigate all sorts of debris that makes its way to the "edge of the road," aka the bike lane. For example, branches from some tree pruning on 26th just south of Powell have been making that intersection unsafe for northbound cyclists for several weeks now.
I don't have the impression that the City of Portland is very aware of small-scale issues like this. High profile items, like painting sharrows, sure that gets done but the day-to-day maintenance lags behind. I always assume that this is a result of supply and demand. If there are not enough funds to hire enough employees to keep the roads safe for all users, the roads will not be safe for all users. In that kind of world, it will always be the most vulnerable who suffer first and the most. In this case, the vulnerable are cyclists.
I was nearly clipped by a motorist this morning. Thanks to my many years of experience and quick reaction, nothing bad happened. I was in a bike lane, doing exactly what I was supposed to be doing. This happens all the time. It's scary. But I ride my bike anyway because I think it is better for the planet than my driving a car (I don't even own a driver's license), better for Portland to have fewer cars on the busy roads, and better for me than sitting that extra hour+ per day.
As to the idea of cyclists on sidewalks, that's far more dangerous than bikes on roads, imo. Pedestrian trajectories are very difficult to predict and in my observation, pedestrians are far less likely to obey the ruls of the road than either cyclists or drivers.
I think that all three people involved in this incident made seriously bad decisions. Violence escalates.
Posted by: Chris Smith | Jan 20, 2006 4:04:27 PM
A cross post of comment I just sent to the Bike Portland blog:
I was in the Lloyd District a couple of days ago and watched a (auto) driver pull over and (illegally) block the bike lane and the #8 bus for almost a minute while discharging a passenger.
No one on the bus seemed to be motivated to violence.
Posted by: Steve | Jan 20, 2006 4:34:21 PM
The bike rider still instigated all of this with his behavior. What gives him the right to stop a bus full of people who had nothing to do with his treatment? Why not just report the bus instead of acting like a selfish person who doesnt care about others? Should he be able to ride his bike anywhere he wants? I guess maybe, but shouldn't he exercise some caution?
Was the guy on the bus wrong to assault the bike rider - Yes. Was the bus wrong to be so close, probably, but what if avoiding this guy would have pushed another car across the divider and caused an accident? I don't think the bike rider would have ever taken any blame.
Sorry, I am getting very frustrated of bike riders cutting in front of cars and blowing thru stop signs which is wrong whether you are on a bike or in a car.
As far as the lanes being filled with stuff, I ride my bike and in the middle of summer, I can make that excuse. I am less convinced by gravel 1 month after it was laid down if it was for the ice storm.
Posted by: Garlynn | Jan 20, 2006 5:10:20 PM
I've seen bike riders get flats while riding through the gravel on the Hawthorne Bridge specifically. One of them exclaimed, "Oh sh%t, not again, this happened yesterday, too!" So, I have every sympathy for the bicyclist who goes outside of the bike lane, at their discretion and as allowed by law, to avoid a safety hazard. The bus driver had two lanes of traffic into which to merge to the left in order to pass the bicyclist, but chose to make an unsafe pass that was within reaching distance of the bicyclist's arm. Immediately, the bus driver placed themselves in the wrong. But then allowing a passenger off the bus on the bridge -- that's a second wrong. Allowing the passenger back on after the committed an assault -- that'd a third wrong. Not reporting the assault -- could be a felony, fourth wrong. Allowing the passenger to escape the bus before police officers could arrive to arrest/detain them for questioning -- FIFTH wrong. Five strikes, this bus driver deserves to be fired and barred from ever driving again. Furthermore, Tri-Met needs to have mandatory bicycle sensitivity training for all of its drivers, if any of them think that this sort of behavior is appropriate.
I don't find fault with any of the bicyclist's behavior. He was confronting the bus driver over the driver's possibly illegal handling of an over-loaded and extremely heavy, and thus dangerous, vehicle, operating at high speeds within arm's reach of the bicyclist under poor weather conditions. More power to him.
As for skinny tires? That's also the bicyclist's discretion, and nobody else's. Nobody tells you to put dunlops instead of goodyears on your honda or your ford.
Posted by: Jessica Roberts | Jan 20, 2006 6:05:33 PM
Dear pdxdem,
I think it's cute that you think that "bicycles should be confined to bike paths or side walks." Uh, I don't own a car. I need to get from anywhere in the city to anywhere else. Unfortunately for me, my home, work, doctor, dentist, friends, family, favorite cafe, supermarket, etc. don't happen to be connected by dedicated bike paths.
Off-street paths also may feel safer than the road, but actually they are much more dangerous at intersections. On a path corridor with few intersections (like the Springwater Corridor or the Esplanade), this isn't a problem, but in the middle of a dense street network there would be too many crossings. Bike paths are also extremely expensive and difficult to build, while our roadway network already is built and connects all destinations in the city.
As for the sidewalk, it has been thoroughly proven that encouraging bicyclists to ride on the sidewalk is a bad idea. Riding on the sidewalk results in greatly decreased visibility between cyclists and drivers, possibly dangerous conflicts with pedestrians, and increased and unexpected bike-car conflict points at driveways and intersections.
As just a few data points demonstrating this, the Oregon Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan explicitly identifies sidewalk bikeways as a “practice to avoid” (See page 71 of the plan, which can be downloaded here) and clearly states that “cyclists are safer when they are allowed to function as roadway vehicle operators, rather than as pedestrians.”
Additionally, the FHWA (Federal Highway Administration) Course on Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation says that designating sidewalks as appropriate for bicycle use “increases the likelihood of tort settlement even years later,” because sidewalk bicycling is so well-known to be dangerous. Finally, the Oregon Bicyclist’s Manual says, “in general, you shouldn’t ride a bicycle on sidewalks. Many crashes between bikes and cars occur on sidewalks.”
Statistically, bicycling is not a dangerous activity, especially if you learn some common-sense skills and precautions (such as riding with traffic, staying off sidewalks, using lights at night, and using hand signals). In fact, walking is a much more “dangerous” activity than bicycling, yet I doubt you would contend that pedestrians should stay home instead of risk leaving the house. And let’s not forget that if you choose to drive because you think you'll be safer, your safety comes at the cost of endangering our fellow citizens: over 40,000 Americans die from car crashes each year (compared to only 700 cyclists).
It’s easy to lose sight of the fact that the bicyclist in front of you is just a person. It’s your neighbor, your co-worker, your best friend, your son or daughter. We're all just trying to get around. All it takes is some patience and empathy to make things a lot easier and safer for everyone.
Posted by: Bob R. | Jan 20, 2006 10:02:25 PM
"The bus driver had two lanes of traffic into which to merge to the left in order to pass the bicyclist, but chose to make an unsafe pass that was within reaching distance of the bicyclist's arm."
Look at the four-camera video on the Oregonian web site. Regardless of who is at fault here, the bus driver could not have merged left because you can clearly see cars passing the bus from the left in the front-view camera.
- Bob R.
Posted by: Gil Johnson | Jan 20, 2006 11:35:20 PM
The Tri-Met brass may buy into accomodating bikes, but that message doesn't get down to all its drivers. Some of my closest calls as a bike commuter have come from hurtling Tri-Met buses. I used to commute on Sandy Blvd., which has no bike lines but fairly wide lanes, and it seemed some of the No. 12 drivers were trying to see how close they could come to me (I always stayed as far to the right as possible). I've also been on buses and heard drivers make snide comments whenever a bicyclist put his bike on the rack. These guys get behind a little and they don't want anyone slowing them down, no matter what it takes.
That said, I find most of Portland's drivers to be civil, courteous and very concientious about sharing the road with bikes. Sure, there are some cranks on both sides. It's pretty easy to get upset as a bicyclist when a huge fast machine is endangering your life.
You can tell it's a slow news cycle when the papers or the tv stations bring out the old "bikes vs. cars" manufactured controversy.
Posted by: Jenni Simonis | Jan 21, 2006 2:04:34 AM
Bob R.--
Just because you can't merge over to another lane does not give you the right to pass too close to a bike rider. You staye behind them, turn your signal on to move to the other lane, and do so as soon as it is safe. If you can't get over, then you continue to follow behind the bike rider until you can safely pass. Simple as that.
For those who talk about punishing the driver-- he's dead.
Posted by: km | Jan 21, 2006 6:46:11 AM
Quick note: iggir - As a woman who has been hit and also sexually assaulted, I assure you that although all assaults are horrible, a sexual assault is an entirely different ballgame and I find your example offensive.
Now, to the issue of bikes -
I'm a driver. I like cyclists, a lot. They generally make it easier for me to be a driver in that they don't take up the space a car does on the road and they don't use up valuable parking spaces, not to mention that they are better for the environment (which I enjoy quite a bit).
When I drive, I try to be overly considerate of bikes. Not just for them but for me. I don't want to live with knowing I've injured someone and I don't want to deal with the higher insurance costs in the aftermath of an accident. It benefits both cyclist & driver to be considerate in my book.
The cyclist was wrong in this instance. I know he was angry and perhaps justifiably so but he should not have blocked the bus like he did. It was a show of aggression that was unnecessary and proved to be dangerous. I've reported Tri-Met drivers for dangerous behavior so I know there are alternative ways to deal with a bad bus driver. Perhaps if more people reported bad bus drivers they might be more accountable.
The bus driver was probably wrong (driving). I say probably because I don't know how close he was to the cyclist when he drove by. Based on another poster's comments, there was traffic in the other lane. While I generally slow way down to a crawl when I can't get around a bike, there are times when it is greatly inconvenient and to be frank, when you feel the cyclist is trying to make a point by entering in your lane, it's hard to be sympathetic towards the cyclist. The gravel may not have been apparent to the bus driver. It reminds me of the time the woman berated my mother for parking in a handicap spot (she has a card) because she APPEARS healthy (walking is painful and difficult). If the driver didn't realize the bike lane was dangerous, he may have felt the cyclist was trying to prove a point that he was more important than a busload (also environmental if full and affordable) of people.
As far as the assault goes, the driver should not have let the passenger off the bus. Assuming he did not realize the passenger was headed for the cyclist, I think he was correct in letting the passenger back on but not in driving off the way he did. The guy proved himself psycho, the last thing the cyclist needed was to be left alone with him. The driver should have radioed for help the minute he realized the passenger was a danger. There may not be a law requiring bystanders to help in this state but there should be.
And what of the other passengers? Why didn't any one of them call 911 on their cell phones? They were negligent.
The passenger was wrong on every level. If I beat up someone every time they inconvienced my ride on a bus, there'd be a lot of injuries. He clearly needs anger management therapy and should be arrested. His picture has been on numerous websites, on tv & in the newspaper. Why hasn't someone come forward and identified him? That makes the public (those who know him) negligent -- or are they waiting for a reward to be offered in order to do the right thing?
Every person from the cyclist to the passengers and those who recognize the assailant have behaved poorly in this situation. It's time for everyone to examine how we treat others in difficult situations and ask ourselve if we are part of the problem or part of the solution.
Posted by: FossilFuelPhil | Jan 21, 2006 8:34:31 AM
I am surprised that no one has mentioned Critical Mass. If you want to see a glaring example of cycle activists behaving poorly and annoying the crap out of everyone, this would be it. No wonder people hate them. Let's face it - the actions of a few can ruin it for everyone else. How many people have been stuck in downtown on a Friday night trying to get home to their family while these whiny protesters block traffic and try to force them to accept their mode of transport? It's like kicking someone's ass until they agree you are a nice person. The assault was wrong - no exceptions. However, I do understand why the greater public has not exactly condemned this guy. They are too busy cheering. Almost every motorist has wanted to kick the crap outta a cyclist.
Posted by: W. Bruce Anderholt II | Jan 21, 2006 10:26:10 AM
If you intentionally block a bus, you deserve to be politely asked to move aside. Once.
If you continue to block the bus, you are inciting riot, and you deserve what you get. If the Tri-Met driver had kicked his ass, he might have a legitimate claim against Tri-Met. Perhaps the driver expected the passenger who deboarded to seek a peaceful resolution of the stand-off. What alternative did the driver have: call 911 and say there is an angry bicyclist blocking my bus, please arrest him?
Just because the cyclist felt dissed by a Tri-Met bus doesn't mean he can block the public right of way until the driver says he's sorry. Take down the bus number, and call/write a complaint to Tri-Met. If you live by the sword, you die by the sword.
Critical Mass has done more to inflame anti-cyclist sentiments than any single organization.
Posted by: jami | Jan 21, 2006 12:09:41 PM
so no one else makes the mistake i did of bashing on the dead: the trimet driver apparently died in a boating accident. so he doesn't need to be fired any more. the worst thing the driver did, in my opinion, was driving toward the biker after the poor guy had been assaulted.
however. if the biker had been riding courteously when this happened, this incident would show everyone the ugliness of the burbling bike-hatred brewing in portland. unfortunately, by riding in a way that almost no other biker ever would (just outside the bike lane) the biker seemed to be itching for a fight.
i do hope that crewcut guy spends some time in prison. i ride (both the bus and a bike) over that bridge all the time. i'll keep my cell phone ready in case i see that jack-a**.
Posted by: Bob R. | Jan 21, 2006 12:56:51 PM
Bob R.--
Just because you can't merge over to another lane does not give you the right to pass too close to a bike rider. You staye behind them, turn your signal on to move to the other lane, and do so as soon as it is safe. If you can't get over, then you continue to follow behind the bike rider until you can safely pass. Simple as that.
Jenni -
I did not claim the bus driver was right or wrong. My comment included the phrase "regardless of who is at fault". I was addressing the very specific point of whether the bus driver could have merged left, as was asserted in another comment. Don't scold me for something I didn't write about.
Posted by: wondering | Jan 21, 2006 5:21:16 PM
If no one is on the sidewalk why not use it and stay out of traffic?
Posted by: JohnnyRedman | Jan 21, 2006 7:44:32 PM
The fool that got his @ss kicked deserved it, in my opinion. He's lucky the bus driver didn't just decide to run him over.
Posted by: Kari Chisholm | Jan 21, 2006 8:20:26 PM
Hey "wondering"... No more comments from you until you read the linked material. It's not there just to make the text pretty and blue.
Posted by: Gil Johnson | Jan 21, 2006 11:53:24 PM
It's disturbing how many people posting here have no qualms about condoning violence, particuarly over a very small act of protest.
Posted by: Sarah | Jan 22, 2006 12:57:08 AM
As far as getting around goes - I've got the choices of walking, which is fine between home and the local mini-mart but not so great when going much farther than that; taking the bus/MAX, which is all good and well if I'm not broke at the time, but generally speaking, hard to justify the expense; or cycling, which gets me most anywhere that I care going and doesn't cost me anything except for the time it takes to get there.
So, I can understand the cyclist being pissed off about nearly getting clipped by a Tri-Met bus. Quite frequently, when I go out on my bike, I end up having my share of close calls, mostly caused by drivers not paying attention to the road in front of them. On the other hand - you've got to be mad (in the insane sense) to stop in front of a vehicle that takes 150 feet to stop when empty, let alone full.
Would I be expecting to be injured if I stopped in front of a bus like that? Probably - but not by being assaulted, but because I just stepped in front of a large vehicle that has no chance of stopping quickly. So on one hand, he's lucky that he didn't get hit. That doesn't make it right for any of the passenger getting off the bus and attacking the cyclist, nor should the driver have let said passenger back on the bus - all of the suggestions regarding the driver getting an ambulance and police on the scene immediately would have been more prudent.
It could be said that the cyclist incited the violence by getting in front of the bus in the first place, putting the cyclist in the wrong; but about the only charges applicable to him as far as the law go that I'm aware of are jaywalking. On the other hand, I personally think that the driver and passenger who committed the assault are more in the wrong - my opinion may be skewed a bit by being a cyclist, though that doesn't really change the fact that all of the parties involved were wrong.
Johnny: The cyclist may have been asking for something to happen to him by stepping in front of the bus. That doesn't mean he had it coming to him, nor would the driver likely have had a choice in the matter of running him over had the driver not seem the cyclist while he still had time to stop. Yes, I'll agree that the cyclist was lucky that he didn't get hit, but that's got nothing to do with whether the driver would have had any choice in the matter - if the driver didn't have any choice in the matter, then it would have been considered vehicular manslaughter, potentially with depraved indifference thrown in. Wonderful way to lose your job as a bus driver, and a wonderful way to land yourself in prison for a while as a result of having killed someone when you had the option of not killing them but not caring enough to not do so.
wondering: Read the rest of the comments. Specifically the ones that make note that riding on the sidewalk is even more dangerous than riding in the street with the rest of traffic, because on the sidewalk you're hidden from people coming out of driveways, people coming around corners, and people who happen to be walking down the sidewalk in question. Generally speaking, not a good idea. The only time I do such things is when there's not room at all for me to bike in the road, and even then I try to avoid it and more often than not end up walking the bike instead of riding it on the sidewalk.
W.: Actually, yes. The driver did have the option of calling 911 and getting police on the scene. In fact, after witnessing the assault, that's the first thing he should have done. But he didn't. Does the cyclist deserve what they got? Maybe, but I'm not going to argue that point.
Posted by: W. Bruce Anderholt II | Jan 22, 2006 3:19:22 AM
"very small act of protest" = blocking a city bus? C'mon.
I would call that a very egotistical form of protest: to hell with all those passengers, let them wait. I'm having a 1st grade moment here, and I'm going to protest whether you like it or not.
Live, die, sword. He's lucky he didn't wind up with a sidewalk induced brain injury.
Posted by: Gil Johnson | Jan 22, 2006 1:32:08 PM
So, Mr. Anderholt II, are you the guy in the Beemer or SUV who gets pissed off and yells at me as I ride my bike because for a few seconds I had to move out into the road to get around something in the bike lane?
Are you the guy who immediately honks at the person in the car in front of you because the driver didn't speed off the moment the light turns green?
Are you one of those people who think it's okay to zoom through the intersection just at the light turns red?
If so, there is a state south of here much more to your liking.
Do you really think it's okay to beat up someone for blocking a bus for a few minutes? What if he falls, hits his head on the pavement and has permanent brain damage? How would you feel about that?
Sure, the cyclist was an idiot. But you can't defuse the situation by also acting like an idiot.
Posted by: Gil Johnson | Jan 22, 2006 1:48:16 PM
One more thing: though Portland ranks at the top of major cities in the number of people who commute by bike, and though that number is growing, the actual percentage of bike commuters is about 2%, maybe double that in the central core of town.
One of the main reasons people don't bike to work or for shopping is that they don't perceive it as being safe. Actually, biking around town is very safe, particuarly if you wear a helmet, have bike lights and pay attention. The news media, however, love to play up conflicts between motorists and bicyclists, just as the media devotes disproportional time and space to covering violent crime even as such crime is decreasing.
Posted by: W. Bruce Anderholt II | Jan 22, 2006 4:07:47 PM
Gil: don't get your spandex all tied up in knots. My wife was a fair weather bike commuter, and I've participated in 4 or 5 bridge pedals. You don't know me, or my driving habits, so lay off the personal attacks.
I believe Randy Albright behaved like a 1st grader when he decided to block the bus in protest. If Mr. Albright took it upon himself to stand in front of a bus to prevent it from moving, he assumed the risk that one of the bus passengers might retaliate in kind. They did. I am not endorsing the guy who gave him the beating, merely pointing out that he instigated the beating. Nobody "deserves" a beating any more than anybody "deserves" drug addiction. But I feel similarly detached if an addict dies of an overdose: they brought it upon themselves.
I am very deferential to bike riders, no matter how irresponsible their riding/protest habits. At the age of 8, I watched a car hit an older kid at the beach, a visual image which is forever etched into my memory. I would feel awful if I were involved in a similar accident. Never mind the potential legal liability.
Posted by: Gil Johnson | Jan 22, 2006 10:14:09 PM
Bruce--After making that post, I started regretting it. I don't like making personal attacks--an occasional needle now and then, yeah, but I went over the line. Though there ARE people who do these things and make life miserable for bikers, pedestrians and other drivers. And there were several posts, including yours, that seemed to justify the beating.
I don't wear spandex, by the way. Just too dorky.
Posted by: Gil Johnson | Jan 22, 2006 10:16:17 PM
Bruce--After making that post, I started regretting it. I don't like making personal attacks--an occasional needle now and then, yeah, but I went over the line. Though there ARE people who do these things and make life miserable for bikers, pedestrians and other drivers. And there were several posts, including yours, that seemed to justify the beating.
I don't wear spandex, by the way. Just too dorky.
Posted by: W. Bruce Anderholt II | Jan 22, 2006 10:51:48 PM
Thank you for your consideration, Gil. I'm with you on Spandex, with the notable exception of padded bike shorts: wouldn't do bridge pedal without them!
I imagine many weekend bikers don't ride to work because of the rain/clothing dilemma: not many of us can work in our bike clothes.
Have a great week.
Posted by: Ross Williams | Jan 24, 2006 6:27:51 AM
Anyone who has played leap-frog with a bus has to understand that bicyclists are going to be annoying for the bus driver, the bus certainly is annoying to the bicyclist. The fact is we share the right hand lane, the bike moves slower than the bus when it is moving (or at least I do) and the bus zooms past and then stops a half block later, we zoom by on our bike and the bus has to pass us again. What seems safe to the bus driver who passes bicyclists all day while trying to keep on schedule is probably often not going to feel safe to us on our bicycle.
I think every bike rider must hate buses and I would expect most bus drivers hate bicycles. We are just constantly getting in one anothers way.
As Chris points out above, cars block buses. No one feels empowered to jump off the bus and assault them. Autos get cut off by buses and drivers jump out and yell at the driver (I have seen this happen) And no one on the bus is looking to get off and get in the middle of the argument. And the media doesn't even report it.
Posted by: W. Bruce Anderholt II | Jan 24, 2006 7:47:54 AM
Ross et al: yesterday I saw a 60 something man who (based on his appearance and actions) seemed mentally unstable. He was taunting a man half his age who (based on his clothing and hard hat) seemed to be a construction worker.
Their verbal confrontation went on for about 45 seconds (at the corner of SW 6th and Main), and the construction worker threw a punch, and missed. A four minute fight/wrestling match ensued, which spilled onto the bus mall. Keep in mind this occured one block from the Multnomah County Courthouse (with Sheriff Deputies in visual range), while Tri-Met buses were driving around the fight.
I called 911 within one minute of the first blow, and after waiting on hold for about 30 seconds, I informed the 911 Operator there was a fight occuring between two white men on the corner of SW 6th and Main, that I had an excellent view of the fight (I was on the 6th floor AMPCO parking structure across the street), and that I would be happy to stay on the line to help the Police Officer identify the participants (as the instigator was hurrying away at this point).
The 911 operator responded that they could only take a complaint from the victim (translation: why are you getting involved?), and if they needed an eye witness they would call me back. I watched for another two minutes before driving away, and noticed the construction worker sitting on the opposite side of the street being consoled by a security guard from the Congress Center.
In summary, I don't believe the 911 operators are willing to dispatch a police officer to every incident involving a wild man shouting at a bus, or on the sidewalk. In this example, they seemed unwilling to respond even AFTER the shouting match had esalated to a physical assault.
My point: we live in a world full of unpredictable people. If you are the wild man shouting out your anger as you walk/ride down the street, and you annoy the wrong person, you may be assaulted. The Tri-Met bus driver is not empowered to break up fights, the 911 operators don't seem to care, and staffing levels and jail overcrowding are not conducive to a "fairy-godmother" sense of societal peace and fair play.
Live, die, sword.
Posted by: Garlynn | Jan 24, 2006 6:38:46 PM
re: "wondering: Read the rest of the comments. Specifically the ones that make note that riding on the sidewalk is even more dangerous than riding in the street with the rest of traffic, because on the sidewalk you're hidden from people coming out of driveways, people coming around corners, and people who happen to be walking down the sidewalk in question. Generally speaking, not a good idea. The only time I do such things is when there's not room at all for me to bike in the road, and even then I try to avoid it and more often than not end up walking the bike instead of riding it on the sidewalk."
Actually, in this particular situation, at the west end of the Hawthorne Bridge... there is a very real, physical reason, why the bicylist was in the roadway: the City of Portland built it that way.
You see, the bike path runs on the sidewalk as it cross the bridge. Then, at the west end of the bridge, the westbound bicyclist has a choise of either making a right turn down to Waterfront Park to head southbound, or exiting the sidewalk and merging into traffic to the left via a curb cut. The sidewalk peters out and would dump the ciclist either into a concrete wall or onto the grass after that. So, the cyclist was in the street because the bicylist facility on the sidewalk led to the street at that point.
It's always been a sort of pet peeve of mine, that there is not a smoother transition from the bridge to a bike lane at that location. Doesn't seem like it would take much to set up, and it could have prevented this whole incident by physically seperating the bicyclist from the bus at this point.
*shrug*
cheers,
~Garlynn
Posted by: Keith Lofstrom | Jan 25, 2006 12:09:46 PM
Okay, so everybody involved was a jerk. What are some non-jerk responses?
1) When you are on a bicycle and encounter a hazard you cannot safely ride over or around, GET OFF YOUR BIKE and WALK IT. Lift the bike over broken glass, etc. If you encounter such problems frequently on your chosen route, get a fat tire bike suitable for it. There are lots of places thin tires don't work, and gravel-strewn streets are one of them.
2) We are adults. We make the world we live in. If you don't like gravel in the streets you ride on, take the time to ask somebody whose job it is to sweep it up. Randy Albright works for the city, and should know better than most ordinary citizens who to call to get a street sweeper out there.
3) Those of us fortunate enough to have two working arms and legs have a responsibility to others less fortunate. If nobody official is willing to clean the gravel up, it would probably take less than an hour for any ordinary citizen with a pushbroom to take all the gravel off a bike lane the
entire length of the Hawthorne Bridge. I can do it. Mr. Albright can do it. How about a person in a wheelchair?
It pisses me off that a city employee feels himself entitled to punish and thwart his fellow citizens, block traffic, and then to sue when his stupid antics result in a punch in the nose. The city would be better off without
self-important, thoughtless, problem-causing twits like that on the payroll - if Portland wants to be the "City that Works", they need to hire public servants that are part of the solution, not part of the problem. If Mr. Albright wants to serve the cyclists of Portland, he should learn to drive a street sweeper, not block traffic.
Posted by: Alice | Jan 25, 2006 2:04:07 PM
Keith:
He works for the City of Portland? Please tell me he's in the transportation department! The only thing that would make the irony any richer would be if he's out on stress disability from all the publicity surrounding his "lawsuit". I just watched the "four screen" video and realized how out of control this jerk was: I'm surprised the whole standing room only crowd in the bus aisle didn't pound him.
They ought to fire him for vandalizing City of Portland property.
Posted by: freddy | Jan 25, 2006 3:55:42 PM
"2) We are adults. We make the world we live in. If you don't like gravel in the streets you ride on, take the time to ask somebody whose job it is to sweep it up. Randy Albright works for the city, and should know better than most ordinary citizens who to call to get a street sweeper out there."
For the record, apparently Randy had been calling exactly the people whose "job it is to sweep it up" daily for the few days before this event occurred. They just didn't get around to doing that job.
Posted by: Alice | Jan 25, 2006 9:03:46 PM
I would guess if the choice was between pushing a broom handle for two hours, or being deposed by a lawyer eager to sue Tri-Met (on behalf of maligned bikers everywhere), Citizen Randy would spare the handle and spoil the esquire.
Posted by: Nan | Jan 25, 2006 10:39:11 PM
Chris Smith, Ross Williams and others: How can there be gravel on the Hawthorne Bridge when it's grate surface has 1" spacing? The city doesn't sand the Hawthorne Bridge. We ride the Hawthorne all the time and having sand, gravel, etc. on the bike lane area which is over a 16" curb above the grate surface usually never happens. And why would a biker want to ride down a defined vehicle surface versus the bike lane?
Posted by: Jenni Simonis | Jan 26, 2006 12:46:42 AM
Nan--
The info about gravel comes from news reports and stories on the incident.
The Oregonian states that it was apparently not on the bridge, but happened as the bus approached Albright on a viaduct east of the Hawthorne Bridge.
Note: The presence of any individual above does not imply an endorsement by BlueOregon. The selection of faces shown is done by Facebook. Visit BlueOregon on Facebook.
Posted by: marco | Jan 20, 2006 9:16:47 AM
The bus driver stays a couple of feet outside the bike lane. The bicyclist is clearly outside of it. And he's all pissed off?
Did the dude get punched, or just shoved out of the way?