View Full Version : Trail rage incident
http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Marin-hiker-hospitalized-after-trail-rage-6112386.php
Tuckahoe
03-04-2015, 10:41
The cyclist may have been a douche but the mistake was that the hiker followed to take pictures or to confront the cyclist. Absolutely stupid, and as we know play stupid games, win stupid prizes.
Gray Bear
03-04-2015, 10:56
So this guy struck a 65 year old woman? Because she was taking his photo after he hit her while riding his mountain bike? Hopefully they will be able to locate this guy with the photos she took.
mrcoffeect
03-04-2015, 11:22
No the mistake was some punk assaulted a 65 year old woman. The story said they are talking with someone who was riding with the tough guy. They'll find the guy. He won't be that tough in lock up.
Speakeasy TN
03-04-2015, 12:19
Where in this article do you get that the cyclist was young? Pack your personal prejudices away. When you get one side of a story you feel sorry for the poor mom in Vegas that was killed in a random road rage incident.......... uh huh.....
Gray Bear
03-04-2015, 12:22
Where in this article do you get that the cyclist was young? Pack your personal prejudices away. When you get one side of a story you feel sorry for the poor mom in Vegas that was killed in a random road rage incident.......... uh huh.....
where do you get that someone said he was young?
Where in this article do you get that the cyclist was young? Pack your personal prejudices away. When you get one side of a story you feel sorry for the poor mom in Vegas that was killed in a random road rage incident.......... uh huh.....
Who cares how old the cyclist was.
Unless the cyclist was a 66 year old women than you don't strike a 65 year old women. I don't care what she was trying to snap a photo of.
Tuckahoe
03-04-2015, 12:30
Where in this article do you get that the cyclist was young? Pack your personal prejudices away. When you get one side of a story you feel sorry for the poor mom in Vegas that was killed in a random road rage incident.......... uh huh.....
+1 to this right there! Because what is funny is that if the facts as stated in the article remained the same, but 65 yo lady was the cyclist and the hiker was the "some punk tough guy" you'd be wanting to string up the hiker.
The problem remains is that she followed and she escalated the situation by doing so.
perdidochas
03-04-2015, 12:32
Everything I see on mountain biking sites says that bikes always yield to hikers. This guy thought he owned the trail, and didn't yield to the older lady. The article said that the confrontation was about who was supposed to yield.
Trillium
03-04-2015, 12:34
+1 to this right there! Because what is funny is that if the facts as stated in the article remained the same, but 65 yo lady was the cyclist and the hiker was the "some punk tough guy" you'd be wanting to string up the hiker.
The problem remains is that she followed and she escalated the situation by doing so.So, you're blaming the victim???
perdidochas
03-04-2015, 12:35
+1 to this right there! Because what is funny is that if the facts as stated in the article remained the same, but 65 yo lady was the cyclist and the hiker was the "some punk tough guy" you'd be wanting to string up the hiker.
The problem remains is that she followed and she escalated the situation by doing so.
If the situation was reversed, I'd still be on the hiker side. The hiker has right of way, for safety reasons. (that said, I usually yield right of way, regardless, I'm not in that much of a hurry)
The problem remains is that she followed and she escalated the situation by doing so.
Well, the next time someone doesn't drop something I'm just going to bang em in the mouth and tell the police it was their fault for not dropping the issue.
I'm pretty sure they'd be cool with that.
Speakeasy TN
03-04-2015, 12:47
Somebody chases me down because they "might have been almost hit" and I would not respond well. You think the bike should always yield, I assumed whoever was going uphill had right of way. Either way that part was over. Chasing me down is aggressive behavior that would be met likewise. I'm not going to wait to see if granny is packing a gun. Neutralize threat and leave area is pretty reasonable response.
mrcoffeect
03-04-2015, 12:50
I dont give a flying fig if she got in his face. a real man would keep his hands to himself.
Spirit Walker
03-04-2015, 12:55
Bikes rarely yield, even though they are always supposed to.
It's not always easy (or safe) for a biker to yield, but it's usually pretty easy for a hiker to step aside for a second. Common sense and simple courtesy on both sides.
Tuckahoe
03-04-2015, 13:05
So, you're blaming the victim???
At the point that the cyclist left the original incident and she followed she is not a victim, but is actively escalating the situation.
Old Grouse
03-04-2015, 13:06
Bikes rarely yield, even though they are always supposed to.
No, and they often don't follow road rules either, failing to stop for red lights and stop signs, passing stopped school buses, etc. But they complain loudly if you don't respect their right to the road.
yerbyray
03-04-2015, 13:10
Somebody chases me down because they "might have been almost hit" and I would not respond well. You think the bike should always yield, I assumed whoever was going uphill had right of way. Either way that part was over. Chasing me down is aggressive behavior that would be met likewise. I'm not going to wait to see if granny is packing a gun. Neutralize threat and leave area is pretty reasonable response.
This is comical. You want to "neutralize the threat and leave"...an older woman who followed you to either discuss the situation, ask for an apology, or get adequate information to report you to the authorities. Wow I bet you are fun to walk through a big city with. Very poor choice of words.
A reasonable response is to apologize and deescalate the situation and end on fair terms or to take the tongue lashing like a man for making an error.
I don't really know the proper and accepted trail etiquette for the mixed trails but I just tend to get out of everyone's way if I am hiking or mountain biking. Sure downhill has a right of way but it is hard to give up while going uphill on a bike and loose momentum. I see the points to both sides of this but if you follow the golden rule life would be much easier.
I just hope the person questioned was the mountain biker's girlfriend so she will see what sort of guy she has dated.
mrcoffeect
03-04-2015, 13:14
+1 to this right there! Because what is funny is that if the facts as stated in the article remained the same, but 65 yo lady was the cyclist and the hiker was the "some punk tough guy" you'd be wanting to string up the hiker.
The problem remains is that she followed and she escalated the situation by doing so.
now you get it. It's not about how they encountered each other. It is about a man who resorted to violence to deal with his anger toward her. he's a punk.
Somebody chases me down because they "might have been almost hit" and I would not respond well. You think the bike should always yield, I assumed whoever was going uphill had right of way. Either way that part was over. Chasing me down is aggressive behavior that would be met likewise. I'm not going to wait to see if granny is packing a gun. Neutralize threat and leave area is pretty reasonable response.
Totally man! Gotta make sure Grandma doesn't have a piece. Hell, for all we knew she could have had some dynamite strapped to her chest. Priority one must always be to neutralize the threat! I bet if he ignored her she would have put him to sleep for good, afterwards sitting down for her 10% discount at Denny's without another thought about it all. Can't take any chances with all the cold blooded Grandmothers we got running amok nowadays.
Red Foot
03-04-2015, 13:16
Not enough info in the article for us to judge here. We don't know, for example, if the woman put her hands on the biker first? As noted above - while technically, yes, the person on foot has the right of way - it's very common to let a MTB'er riding uphill have passage - especially in a park like this where both hiking and biking are permitted on shared trails. As an avid MTB'er and hiker I have seen my share of militant hikers and d-bag bikers but there's just not enough in that article to know which person (both?) was wrong in this instance.
yerbyray
03-04-2015, 13:16
At the point that the cyclist left the original incident and she followed she is not a victim, but is actively escalating the situation.
Wrong. She is still a victim and doing her best to get adequate information to report the incident to the authorities. It is the same as when someone follows another person in a road rage incident. Do it safely and do not be aggressive. She had every right to get adequate information.
It doesn't matter if the woman was in the wrong...you don't be rude to people.
Lone Wolf
03-04-2015, 13:21
Bikes rarely yield, even though they are always supposed to.
on the creeper trail bikes must yield to horses and pedestrians. i've had many run-ins with bikers while running on the creeper
Sarcasm the elf
03-04-2015, 13:26
So, you're blaming the victim???
The article is about a confrontation involving two people. Both of them helped escalate the situation and either of them could have diffused the situation by just apologizing and leaving. Reading and making judgements based on one side if the story is neither wise nor accurate.
Clearly nobody should be accosting a 65 year old woman period, but she was a willing participant in the argument until things got out of hand and nobody needs to be called out for victim blaming.
Like so many altercations it sounds like this is a cautionary tale about people letting their Egos get the best of them.
Tuckahoe
03-04-2015, 13:36
Wrong. She is still a victim and doing her best to get adequate information to report the incident to the authorities. It is the same as when someone follows another person in a road rage incident. Do it safely and do not be aggressive. She had every right to get adequate information.
It doesn't matter if the woman was in the wrong...you don't be rude to people.
You're absolutely right, she has every right to get adequate information. I cannot disagree with anything you've said.
The problem here is that the article is lacking a complete picture and has little information. All the article say is that she followed and a physical confrontation took place. If indeed all she did was follow enough to safely get information and the cyclist turned back to confront her, that changes things and changes my opinion
However, if she followed aggressively or in a threatening manner, then I will maintain my already stated opinions.
The article is about a confrontation involving two people. Both of them helped escalate the situation and either of them could have diffused the situation by just apologizing and leaving. Reading and making judgements based on one side if the story is neither wise nor accurate.
Clearly nobody should be accosting a 65 year old woman period, but she was a willing participant in the argument until things got out of hand and nobody needs to be called out for victim blaming.
Like so many altercations it sounds like this is a cautionary tale about people letting their Egos get the best of them.
Of course Elf once again states my thoughts better than I do.
Gray Bear
03-04-2015, 13:42
I had to go back and read the article again. Did we all read the same article? A 65 year old woman was take to the hospital with bruises on her arms legs and head? Yet some here think the man may have been justified in his actions? Whats wrong with people today?
It does seem a little strange.
In the end she's a 65 year old lady, there shouldn't be any buts, there's very few reasons why anyone would ever have to put their hands on a women eligible for social security benefits. All this talk about what her part was in it is stupid. This isn't a cautionary tale, it's a tale of a older women getting lumped up.
rgarling
03-04-2015, 13:56
... Whats wrong with people today?
They jump to conclusions?
Wülfgang
03-04-2015, 13:58
No, and they often don't follow road rules either, failing to stop for red lights and stop signs, passing stopped school buses, etc. But they complain loudly if you don't respect their right to the road.
^Couldn't agree more.
Gray Bear
03-04-2015, 14:05
Basically one of two things happened here. 1. this guy mowed her down on the trail banging her up enough so that she went to the hospital or 2. she followed him to the parking lot got in his face and he gave her a beating that led to her going to the hospital to get checked out. Possibly a combination of the two. That fact is shes a 65 year old woman. I don't care if shes bat sh*#@!$ crazy, you don't hit women. Its a very fundamental part of being a man.
Alligator
03-04-2015, 14:26
http://www.marinij.com/general-news/20150227/hiker-treated-for-injuries-after-confrontation-with-mountain-biker-in-terra-linda-open-space
https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=917369184974044&id=644982438879388
Walkintom
03-04-2015, 14:32
It's sad that anyone would assault another person over right of way on a trail.
The local authorities really need to follow up on this completely. From the info in the story it really does sound like the incident was entirely avoidable and I'd like to know what comes of this.
Wülfgang
03-04-2015, 14:32
I don't care if shes bat sh*#@!$ crazy, you don't hit women. Its a very fundamental part of being a man.
I've never hit a woman in my life, but I don't agree. They should not be exempt from aggression when it's called for; I'm talking self-defense of defense of others. But I cant really see a situation where a 65 year old lady would need to get roughed up.
Tuckahoe
03-04-2015, 14:51
http://www.marinij.com/general-news/20150227/hiker-treated-for-injuries-after-confrontation-with-mountain-biker-in-terra-linda-open-space
https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=917369184974044&id=644982438879388
And from the Facehook link --
"Yes, the article left out a lot of detail. This hiker is a resident of Terra Linda, an avid hiker of Marin trails who has never had any other encounter like this, and my sister-in-law. She had taken the day off to celebrate her 65th birthday by hiking one of her favorite trails. The most stunning bit of detail not included in the article is that she was attacked by a bicyclist who was about 30 years her junior. He dropped his bike and charged her full speed, picked her up, and flung her off the trail and down a hillside. Her phone is lost. She spent the afternoon and evening of her birthday at the hospital. She is badly bruised and cut and understandably traumatized. And she is out-of-town for a long weekend on a long-planned birthday celebration trip which was supposed to include hiking and other outdoor adventures and has now transitioned into a weekend of recuperation. Today she has dark purple bruises on her face, her entire thigh, and can barely move from rib pain. There is an active Sheriff's investigation (I hope).
Ummm Wow.
My conclusions were wrong.
Pedaling Fool
03-04-2015, 15:34
What's funny is that all the official trail etiquette signs I've seen has cyclist give way to hikers, but the practice is the complete opposite, see the triangle for yielding http://www.nps.gov/biso/planyourvisit/biketrailetiquette.htm
Shouldn't they just change that, so that the hiker is in the cyclist's position on the triangle? I know it's counter-intuitive, because on all roadways the cyclist must yield to pedestrians, but it's probably better than having official guidance that is completely off the mark of what happens in the real world.
BTW, the cyclist was totally at fault here, and I'm not talking about basic etiquette, that went out the window when he allegedly assaulted her, even if he just yelled at her, he's a douche.
perdidochas
03-04-2015, 15:58
Somebody chases me down because they "might have been almost hit" and I would not respond well. You think the bike should always yield, I assumed whoever was going uphill had right of way. Either way that part was over. Chasing me down is aggressive behavior that would be met likewise. I'm not going to wait to see if granny is packing a gun. Neutralize threat and leave area is pretty reasonable response.
I looked at 5 different mountain biking sites. They were unanimous in that bikes yield right of way to hikers and horses. Most also mentioned that hikers have to yield to
Regardless, it sounds like they both allowed their anger to get the best of them.
perdidochas
03-04-2015, 16:10
What's funny is that all the official trail etiquette signs I've seen has cyclist give way to hikers, but the practice is the complete opposite, see the triangle for yielding http://www.nps.gov/biso/planyourvisit/biketrailetiquette.htm
Shouldn't they just change that, so that the hiker is in the cyclist's position on the triangle? I know it's counter-intuitive, because on all roadways the cyclist must yield to pedestrians, but it's probably better than having official guidance that is completely off the mark of what happens in the real world.
BTW, the cyclist was totally at fault here, and I'm not talking about basic etiquette, that went out the window when he allegedly assaulted her, even if he just yelled at her, he's a douche.
That sign means that bikes yield to hikers and horses, and that hikers yield to horses. The arrow points to who you yield to.
30151
From the International Mountain Biking Association
https://www.imba.com/resources/risk-management/shared-trails
Emphasis added:
YIELD APPROPRIATELY: Do your utmost to let your fellow trail users know you’re coming - a friendly greeting is a good method. Anticipate other trail users as you ride around corners. Bicyclists should yield to other non-motorized trail users, unless the trail is clearly signed for bike-only travel. Bicyclists traveling downhill should yield to ones headed uphill, unless the trail is clearly signed for one-way or downhill-only traffic. In general, strive to make each pass a safe and courteous one.
rocketsocks
03-04-2015, 16:21
To say this fella needs his tires flattened would be an understatement, men should not hit women...PERIOD.
imscotty
03-04-2015, 16:40
The bikers behavior is inexcusable. Hope he is located and prosecuted.
Lightingguy59
03-04-2015, 17:16
. The article said that the confrontation was about who was supposed to yield.
The article said nothing about that.
You (and many others) are making assumptions on few actual facts.
I'm making an assumption that as the women followed the cyclist to take a photo, it's possible that she's the one being confrontational and made potentially false statements to the police about what happened. The cyclist might well be 85 for all I know and cant climb a hill for crap, which is why a 65 year old women was maybe able to walk him down ?. Maybe the cyclist reached out to block his photo being taken and the women slipped while thinking she was about to be struck. Oh My God, another assumption.
I actually have no clue as to what happened and the article tells us very little so I'll stop making assumptions.
The article said nothing about that.
You (and many others) are making assumptions on few actual facts.
I'm making an assumption that as the women followed the cyclist to take a photo, it's possible that she's the one being confrontational and made potentially false statements to the police about what happened. The cyclist might well be 85 for all I know and cant climb a hill for crap, which is why a 65 year old women was maybe able to walk him down ?. Maybe the cyclist reached out to block his photo being taken and the women slipped while thinking she was about to be struck. Oh My God, another assumption.
I actually have no clue as to what happened and the article tells us very little so I'll stop making assumptions.
The article didn't say that, you're right. The article stated that the reports they were getting was that the cyclist actually hit her. We've also heard from friends of hers reporting her injuries in detail, and from locals in the area who have also had nasty run-ins with the cyclist on this trail.
Deduction doesn't always provide the proof, but it does often provide the most likely cause. We're not basing our assumptions off of nothing.
One thing you can assume is that just because a person is out on the trail does not necessarily mean they are grounded with the same basic set of values as you are.
There are some bad people out there.
I give the old bird credit for standing up for herself, but hope the women in my own family exercise great caution in similar circumstances. They probably wouldn't, but Tuckahoe has a point.
Pedaling Fool
03-04-2015, 17:54
What's funny is that all the official trail etiquette signshttp://cdncache-a.akamaihd.net/items/it/img/arrow-10x10.png (http://www.whiteblaze.net/forum/) I've seen has cyclist give way to hikers, but the practice is the complete opposite, see the triangle for yielding http://www.nps.gov/biso/planyourvisit/biketrailetiquette.htm
Shouldn't they just change that, so that the hiker is in the cyclist's position on the triangle? I know it's counter-intuitive, because on all roadways the cyclist must yield to pedestrians, but it's probably better than having official guidance that is completely off the mark of what happens in the real world.
BTW, the cyclist was totally at fault here, and I'm not talking about basic etiquette, that went out the windowhttp://cdncache-a.akamaihd.net/items/it/img/arrow-10x10.png (http://www.whiteblaze.net/forum/) when he allegedly assaulted her, even if he just yelled at her, he's a douche.
That signhttp://cdncache-a.akamaihd.net/items/it/img/arrow-10x10.png (http://www.whiteblaze.net/forum/) means that bikes yield to hikers and horses, and that hikers yield to horses. The arrow points to who you yield to.
30151
From the International Mountain Biking Association
https://www.imba.com/resources/risk-management/shared-trails
Emphasis added:I know what it says/means, re-read my post.
What I was saying is that it seems from my perspective that it's almost universal that hikers step out of the way of cyclists (regardless of going up/down a hill or on a straight-a-way), so over time it will (if not already) become an expected behavior of a hiker to yield to a cyclist; a stark difference to official rules.
But, I'm just going off what I hear from others that hike on multi-use trails; personally, I stay away from them. Maybe it's not a big deal, because they are not used much, but from my experience on paved MUPs, such as in D.C. (I stay away from those as well) the cyclists expect everyone to get out of the way, but they are suppose to yield.
WingedMonkey
03-04-2015, 21:04
No, and they often don't follow road rules either, failing to stop for red lights and stop signs, passing stopped school buses, etc. But they complain loudly if you don't respect their right to the road.
Thanks for the chuckle.
A few years ago, while in the bike lane on a 6 lane road less than a mile from home, a school bus passed me (right tires on the solid white curb line and still moving) and was about 6 feet in front of me when it put out the stop-arm and stopping lights just before stopping.
While applying my brakes and trying to not lock up the front wheel or lay down the bike we both came to a stop at the same time.
I was face to face with her at the bus door, lucky for me she was moving when she opened the stop-arm or I'd have been smacked square in the face with it.
The look of horror on her face and the students yelling, was enough for me to do little more than remind her she was an idiot.
Usually I take my own camera out of the handle bar bag and snap tag pics of folks who almost run me over.
Another Kevin
03-04-2015, 22:47
The right of way belongs to the greater kinetic energy. That's the laws of physics, which tend to trump human-made rules.
Feral Bill
03-04-2015, 22:57
The right of way belongs to the greater kinetic energy. That's the laws of physics, which tend to trump human-made rules. In the boating world we call that "the tonnage rule".
Second Hand
03-04-2015, 23:13
I'm really surprised at how many people are justifying hitting a 65 year old women.
In all honesty, whether it was a 65 year old women or a 28 year old male adults aren't supposed to hit each other... If she was being aggressive in her photo taking, I'm willing to bet a person on a bike could outrun a 65 year old person on foot.
Look, i get frustrated with people too and lets face it, we've all wanted to punch out a biker, but you can't do it!
iAmKrzys
03-05-2015, 00:01
Without getting into the details of this incident I think the guy should consider himself lucky that he didn't encounter another Captain Ellen Jack ( http://actionmatrix.com/History/html/SubPageHtml/CaptainJack.htm ) Here is my favorite quote about her: “Of the numerous times she was arrested, Ellen was always justified in shooting the man or men who tried to steal, cheat or kill her.”
Sarcasm the elf
03-05-2015, 00:11
The right of way belongs to the greater kinetic energy. That's the laws of physics, which tend to trump human-made rules.
I'm quite pro-bicycle, but the fact that pedestrians have the right of way in our society is a settled issue. Cyclists are the ones generating that kinetic energy and it is their job to ensure that it does not put anyone else in danger, hence it is their duty to yield. Besides, half the time they ride up to you so quietly that you don't even notice them until they alert you.
The law of tonnage that Feral Bill mentions exists because the larger a ship is, the more difficult it is for it to be able to steer and stop. Because of this the smaller more nimble ships have the duty yield. Unlike ships, bikes have certain conveniences such as have brakes and responsive steering, which is why the tonnage rule is neither necessary or appropriate.
Now all that said, I generally yield to everyone I meet on the trail, it just seems like the polite thing to do.
I don't know if there are rules on the trail but on streets, pedestrians have the right of way over bikes and cars. Bikes come next and then cars. Common sense though dictates that the law of gross tonnage applies. I never heard of an uphill/downhill right of way. But there is one on rivers. Going down river you have the right of way because it is easier for someone going up to stop and maneuver. If the same logic was applied to a trail it would be the person going down hill having to yield.
I mentioned "gonzo" mountain bike bicyclists on another thread, here. It is a bicyclist's term: gonzo, meaning blasting downhill at top speed.
Riding a bicycle around a "blind turn" at any speed is a risk.
It's all about the thrill of the risk.
That is why there are trails marked for bicyclists and they are separate trails from hiking trails: why doesn't everyone know that? Bicyclists are not out for a liesurely ride along a lake shore and certainly not on hill or mountain descents.
Bicyclists have shared paved pathways with pedestrians in parks with disastrous results, elsewhere, as well.
Park pathways are not race courses.
I have one of those silly handlebar ding-a-ling bells on every bicycle I have owned, just to let walkers I am overtaking with the bicycle I am there. They look over their shoulder. Often they step aside, step off the path or simply make room.
No big deal, courtesy.
It's not always easy (or safe) for a biker to yield, but it's usually pretty easy for a hiker to step aside for a second. Common sense and simple courtesy on both sides.
Look mountain bikers are constantly destroying trails. I run into them all the time hiking. Almost always on trails where biking is not allowed. So if whoever was riding a hike trail with a mountain bike common courtesy goes out the window when they disrespect the law. I don't like mb and they should be collectively told to leave the trail.
Gray Bear
03-05-2015, 10:02
I'm really surprised at how many people are justifying hitting a 65 year old women.
In all honesty, whether it was a 65 year old women or a 28 year old male adults aren't supposed to hit each other... If she was being aggressive in her photo taking, I'm willing to bet a person on a bike could outrun a 65 year old person on foot.
Look, i get frustrated with people too and lets face it, we've all wanted to punch out a biker, but you can't do it!
I gotta say this thread really bummed me out. I really wanted to believe that all my fellow hikers were more compassionate than your average person and that we felt a kinship to each other. I wanted to think we were all in the woods to escape that darker side of humanity that seems to more and more prevalent these days. I wanted to believe at the very least we could agree that beating a 65 year old woman because she caused a 30 year old man to loose if forward momentum on a bike ride was wrong. But instead some of you chose to in someway or another to try and justify it and turn it into a discussion about who has the right of way. Its a sad day for the hiking community when we have folks with that mindset among us.
Sarcasm the elf
03-05-2015, 10:18
I gotta say this thread really bummed me out. I really wanted to believe that all my fellow hikers were more compassionate than your average person and that we felt a kinship to each other. I wanted to think we were all in the woods to escape that darker side of humanity that seems to more and more prevalent these days. I wanted to believe at the very least we could agree that beating a 65 year old woman because she caused a 30 year old man to loose if forward momentum on a bike ride was wrong. But instead some of you chose to in someway or another to try and justify it and turn it into a discussion about who has the right of way. Its a sad day for the hiking community when we have folks with that mindset among us.
I didn't read anywhere in this thread where anyone defended an attack in a 65 year old woman. Some of us did point out that there are two sides to every story and that the original article was both one sided and so seriously lacking important details about the incident that it didn't warrant a rush to judgement.
There are police investigating the incident and until they have sorted out what happened my only opinion is that I don't trust internet articles.
mrcoffeect
03-05-2015, 10:52
I rather be the guy who hastely jumped to defend and side with a 65 year old lady, than be the guy who wants to wait and see if maybe she some how is in the wrong.
Sarcasm the elf
03-05-2015, 11:11
I rather be the guy who hastely jumped to defend and side with a 65 year old lady, than be the guy who wants to wait and see if maybe she some how is in the wrong.
If we were directly involved with of affected by the incident then sure, we would have to act based on what was available. However we are just hikers on the internet discussing an article that we read about on the internet. We have the luxury of being able to wait for the the full story and that is the wise thing to do.
My opinion about this is not specific to this story, it is my MO when dealing with reports on the internet and I'm used to it making me unpopular.
squeezebox
03-05-2015, 12:50
Not too far from me in St. Louis is Forest Park. It's 1 mile by 2 miles with a 10 K paved bike path and a separate gravel foot path next to it. It's not uncommon for 6 suburban women out for lunch and a walk to take up the entire width of the trail, probably 8 ft. There's a white line down the center of the path. stay on your side. I have had to push them out of the way because they ignored my yelling "passing" There's also a pack of 30 or more runners who take up the whole trail plus 2 ft. on each side every morning, multiply the situation by at least 5-10. I have skinny 1" tires that don't do dirt. Again stay on your side of the white line. I have never seen a road cyclist on the wrong side of the white line, except to pass someone. There's no white line down the center of a path, but pretend there is. My guess is the hiker and the cyclist both had attitude problems. If you are a hiker listen to the noise a mountain bike makes and step aside, take the idiot ear buds out of your ears. You're out there to enjoy nature not to listen to a concert. If you are a mountain biker shout out your approach, if no response take appropriate action, stop if neccessary. You do not own the trail you share it. Didn't your grandma tell you to respect other people? What happened to your brain?? The same thing for out of control dogs, hanging stuff in shelters, walkman speakers, and a bunch of other stuff.
Hike your own hike, Do not interfere with mine, or I have a right to interfere with yours.
perdidochas
03-06-2015, 12:24
The article said nothing about that.
You (and many others) are making assumptions on few actual facts.
I'm making an assumption that as the women followed the cyclist to take a photo, it's possible that she's the one being confrontational and made potentially false statements to the police about what happened. The cyclist might well be 85 for all I know and cant climb a hill for crap, which is why a 65 year old women was maybe able to walk him down ?. Maybe the cyclist reached out to block his photo being taken and the women slipped while thinking she was about to be struck. Oh My God, another assumption.
I actually have no clue as to what happened and the article tells us very little so I'll stop making assumptions.
Yes, it did say that:
Linda Dahl (http://www.sfgate.com/search/?action=search&channel=bayarea&inlineLink=1&searchindex=gsa&query=%22Linda+Dahl%22), director of Marin County Parks, said she could provide only limited details of what happened because the situation remains under investigation. But she said the conflict was prompted by a disagreement over “yielding the trail.”
http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Marin-hiker-hospitalized-after-trail-rage-6112386.php
perdidochas
03-06-2015, 12:26
I know what it says/means, re-read my post.
What I was saying is that it seems from my perspective that it's almost universal that hikers step out of the way of cyclists (regardless of going up/down a hill or on a straight-a-way), so over time it will (if not already) become an expected behavior of a hiker to yield to a cyclist; a stark difference to official rules.
But, I'm just going off what I hear from others that hike on multi-use trails; personally, I stay away from them. Maybe it's not a big deal, because they are not used much, but from my experience on paved MUPs, such as in D.C. (I stay away from those as well) the cyclists expect everyone to get out of the way, but they are suppose to yield.
Oops, I reread your post, sorry.
That said, I agree, as a hiker, if I see a mountain biker coming uphill, I'm getting out of his way. Heck, I always step out of the way if at all possible, unless the other person has already stepped out of the way. I'm not in a rush, so I'll use any excuse for a break.
I lived in Marin County, for many years.
I still have property there.
Gonzo. I learned that term from mountain bike enthusiasts there.
The fact is, riding a mountain bike at high speed off Mt. Tam is a big deal "sport" around there.
In Marin County, drugs are still a very big deal all the intervening years since the 1960's: from kids in middle school to aging hippies.
I would say "investigation" is called for, but drugs doesn't have to be the answer.
Many of the mountain bikers that come in to ride in Marin County are inconsiderate total jerks.
Where I live there are mostly mixed use trails...horses, bikes, trail runners...these groups all show up to demand equal rights of use on trails but don't join trail clubs, do maintenance or help build trail. And these groups tear up trails more than hikers do by a longshot. They leave piles of horsecrap in the middle of the trail, leave ruts and wrappers from whatever those energy gels the runners carry. And they ALWAYS expect hikers to yield when they come flying down the trail and act like you're the one in the way. Be glad the AT is hiker only. Thankfully most of the trails I speak of don't get a lot of use except during certain times of year and for scheduled events.
It takes a real man to hit a woman!
Speakeasy TN
03-06-2015, 19:46
The secondhand account from the sister surely doesn't have any bias, I'm sure. She got bumped by either a pedal or handlebar. If it had been much of a collision the bike would have gone down too. The situation escalated AFTER the initial encounter. Do you really think this woman chased him down without screaming and yelling? Now trade places, you're out on a trail and somebody is P issed at you, rightly or wrongly and has chased you down. No violence? never hit a woman? Uh huh...... I've see lots of traumas sent to us by females . Both parties should accept responsibility and move on.
kayak karl
03-06-2015, 20:09
never hit a woman? NEVER hit a woman. That is what men do.
In the boating world we call that "the tonnage rule". Bogus. You might want to go and re read the Rules of the road.
Sarcasm the elf
03-06-2015, 20:41
Bogus. You might want to go and re read the Rules of the road.
If you're operating your boat on the road then that might be the issue. :D
And yes I too am appalled that a man would ever hit a woman. I can't believe some of your remarks. Is nt that what everyone got upset with when the football player hit a woman in an elevator and the race car driver choked his girlfriend. come on people
If you're operating your boat on the road then that might be the issue. :D I suppose the smiley face means you do know what the Rules of the Road publication is the standard by which marine navigation is conducted
mrcoffeect
03-07-2015, 09:40
It takes a real man to hit a woman!
I know. His mother and father should be SO proud of their boy for standing his ground. In a perfect world this guy would get slapped silly then get sterilized so that he does'nt pass his DNA on to anyone.
Traveler
03-07-2015, 11:01
Where I live there are mostly mixed use trails...horses, bikes, trail runners...these groups all show up to demand equal rights of use on trails but don't join trail clubs, do maintenance or help build trail. And these groups tear up trails more than hikers do by a longshot. They leave piles of horsecrap in the middle of the trail, leave ruts and wrappers from whatever those energy gels the runners carry. And they ALWAYS expect hikers to yield when they come flying down the trail and act like you're the one in the way. Be glad the AT is hiker only. Thankfully most of the trails I speak of don't get a lot of use except during certain times of year and for scheduled events.
Mixed use trails I have experienced are much as you describe here, some having a lot of blind curves that hikers have to approach very carefMixed use trails I have experienced are much as you describe here, some having a lot of blind curves that hikers have to approach very carefully lest they get run over. Though I understand the need for mixed use trails, especially in areas with limited space, it remains a poor mix in my view. As evidenced in this thread, some people fail to understand or do not want to play by common and posted yield rules (Bikes yield to hikers and horses, hikers yield to horses). Unfortunately, the more militant of the biker clan tend to break the rules in both access prohibition and yielding rules, which taints other bike users, even polite ones, as being the same.
The issue discussed here has few facts, but appears to involve a yielding circumstance, where the woman was in relation to where the biker wanted to go. Yielding of course helps this stuff work out, however I don't see a lot of bikes do this (perhaps 20% of the total I run across). I have yet to see anyone moving at 20 mph or higher downhill on a bike yield to anything. This is why I will stay out of the bike "ditch" and remain high on these trails on corners. I am visible and have a reasonable escape route if the bike does not yield, it forces their route into the "ditch", if they want to stay at speed its their risk.
The IMBA consistently pressures officials for unlimited use of trails by mountain bikes like the PCT, they and other bike groups periodically try to get more access to the AT as well. Fortunately the AT is defined by Congress as a "Footpath", so access is not likely to come anytime soon. The PCT may have a different fate in the areas not designated as Wilderness. Fortunately, the Wilderness designation prohibits mechanical vehicles, a category which includes bicycles. There has been little movement or interest to change this designation, or changing the designation of the AT as a Footpath in Congress.
The more militant of the biking community ignore access prohibitions where they exist. I am seeing tire tracks on the AT treadway in NY, CT, and MA where I never saw them before, though I have not actually seen the bikes. Though I am not against mountain biking as an activity, I have some issues with mixed use, given the problems I have seen with it. I also have considerable issue in allowing bikes on foot trails that took a number of decades to get built without much if any use of federal dollars. Bike enthusiasts can construct their own limited access trails for bikes only and have around the US, but it does not seem these groups want to engage in that kind of long term effort, preferring instead to go where others have established a path.
handlebar
03-07-2015, 15:00
If the information posted by the victim's sister on FB is accurate, and I suspect it is despite the obvious conflict of interest, "The most stunning bit of detail not included in the article is that she was attacked by a bicyclist who was about 30 years her junior. He dropped his bike and charged her full speed, picked her up, and flung her off the trail and down a hillside. Her phone is lost. She spent the afternoon and evening of her birthday at the hospital. She is badly bruised and cut and understandably traumatized.") then the 35-year old man should be charged with assault and battery. Often public park managers attempt to sweep incidents like this under the rug since they give bad publicity.
Hopefully, the authorities will follow up, catch the guy, give him a speedy trial and a maximum jail sentence and confiscate his bicycle(s), then follow up with a long period of probation after which he will be required to seek seek and personally pay for mental health counseling, and require as a condition of probation that he no longer ride any bicycle. Then the lady should hire a lawyer and sue the guy.
There is no verbal confrontation that warrants such behavior on the part of a 35-year old man toward any woman, let alone a 65 year old, no matter how obstreperous she might be.
Francis Sawyer
03-07-2015, 15:17
I'm sort of "on the fence" about this one. Bicyclists ARE really annoying but then so are some 65yr old women.
kayak karl
03-07-2015, 15:31
I'm sort of "on the fence" about this one. Bicyclists ARE really annoying but then so are some 65yr old women. so, some annoying 65yr old women deserve to get beat??
Francis Sawyer
03-07-2015, 18:01
Everyone takes a beating once in a while. Sometimes we deserve it sometimes we don't. We don't get to choose.
Everyone takes a beating once in a while. Sometimes we deserve it sometimes we don't. We don't get to choose.
Really? Do you also carry a club and drag your woman by the hair
If she was struck by the handlebar or the pedal, the bicycle doesn't have to go down for her to have been painfully hurt. If I were quick to speech, I would have words.
I saw a horse hit by the edge of the boot of a bicyclist. The horse went down. The veternarian was called. The horse was shot dead.
If you think it is no big deal for a senior citizen to be stuck painfully, compare that to the strong healthy horse.
The woman may have demanded ID. She did try to take his photo. Now, we find out he bodily picked her up and threw her down a hillside. I don't need to ask how much hillside: he should be charged with attempted murder.
There must be an artist to draw a likeness. The bicycle color and features could identify him. His bicycle jersey could identify him. Other bicyclists could find him.
In Marin County there are artists. In Marin County every fancy bicycle is distinctive in price, and, I would say, known and grown men in the San Francisco Bay Area frequently have fabulous custom-made bicycles.
kayak karl
03-07-2015, 20:34
Everyone takes a beating once in a while. Sometimes we deserve it sometimes we don't. We don't get to choose.
your right when your talking about the school yard. boys will be boys and you may get a well deserved beating, but boys grow up and become men and put childish things behind them. sad thing is, some never grow up.
There must be an artist to draw a likeness. The bicycle color and features could identify him. His bicycle jersey could identify him. Other bicyclists could find him.
One of the news reports said that the person who called 911 was riding with the mountain biker who was alleged to have assaulted the woman, and that the mountain biker had been identified to the authorities.
If that is true, it confuses me as to why the authorities have not yet arrested that mountain biker --especially given the detailed and accurate account provided by the victim's sister in her online comment to the newspaper article.
imscotty
03-07-2015, 23:35
Here is a more recent article. Still no arrest.
http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Conflict-on-Marin-County-trails-returns-to-6119944.php
Thank you, for the link.
Birthplace of the mountain bike?
Here is the story: Trek bicycle owner-guy road his bike "gonzo" downhill off Mt. Tam. Trek bicycle as we know it was born. That is the local story of the "birth" of the mountain bike. He even had a model called Mt. Tam.
Nowadays, the bicyclists have designated trails or run hikers and walkers off the trails, like Mt. Tam and like Bolinas Ridge for example. The rest is hype.
I have a silly old-fashioned bicycle bell on my TT handlebars on my one off custom-made road bike, or, on my super cool Schwinn cruiser, or, on my single speed, or, on my Rohloff bike because people do not know a bicycle is approaching or overtaking because bicycles are so silent.
He was leaving the scene. She tried to photograph him for identification. He attacked her.
I don't care if he is a "trust baby" or a rich man's son, or, a politician is his special sugar-daddy: what "passes" for law enforcement in Marin County needs to arrest him and let him spend his days at "The Pink Palace" until his trial.
No bail: flight risk.
Second Hand
03-08-2015, 00:15
I'm really shocked at some of the comments on this thread. I have to believe people are just trying get others riled up.. It would be comical, if we weren't talking about a 65 year old women getting hospitalized by a 30+ year old man.
There is a lot of competition for the dumbest comment on the thread, but I'm being swayed toward this one:
"Everyone takes a beating once in a while. Sometimes we deserve it sometimes we don't. We don't get to choose."
What Stallone movie do you live in where 65 year old women should expect to give and take beatings? Karl is 100% right, kids get into fights, then they grow up! Men don't hit women... Well, unless they are doing something as egregious as trying to take your picture of you after you almost killed them with a bike.. Then I guess sending them to the hospital is justified. <that is sarcasm in case anyone is struggling to follow>
squeezebox
03-08-2015, 01:34
I'm really frustrated that the folks on this thread are running out their personal issues with hikers/ cyclists instead of asking for for facts.As a cyclist I've been chased down by trucks, and I've chased down cars. We'll never know what really happened, I will gently push people out of the way if they are taking up 90% of the hike/bike path, and won't respond to my calls. Shared paths are a difficult issue. The big word here is share, drop the attitude.
Still no arrest.
Could it be possible -- just possible -- that the reason for that is the police don't assume the same set of fact most of us do?
Remember, the most egregious account was not written by a journalist nor apparently in the police report nor even on an identifiable Facebook page. Rather is was a single post by a single individual purporting to be the hiker's sister in law in the comments section to a newspaper article.
Well the way I see this issue has nothing to do with sharing the trail. That is a side issue. The real issue here imho is that some bicycle riding thug beat the %(*& out of a female senior citizen.
mrcoffeect
03-08-2015, 09:56
If this guy was worth the air that he breaths, when he first bumped into the lady he should have stopped to make sure she was ok. None of this would even be an issue if he had not been so self centered. Im sure if he had shown some genuine concern for the woman, the words that they exchanged would have been of a different tone.
vamelungeon
03-08-2015, 10:35
None of us have any right to TOUCH in any way another person without their permission. If you do, no matter how slight the touch, you have committed a battery against that person. Hitting anyone is legally and in my opinion morally wrong except to defend yourself or another. Don't push people, don't hit people. Simple.
vamelungeon
03-08-2015, 10:37
And let me add I have a hearing problem which means I might not hear someone approaching me, especially from behind. I'll get out of anyone's way without argument, but don't hit me or push me, because I will defend myself.
Offshore
03-08-2015, 13:01
None of us have any right to TOUCH in any way another person without their permission. If you do, no matter how slight the touch, you have committed a battery against that person. Hitting anyone is legally and in my opinion morally wrong except to defend yourself or another. Don't push people, don't hit people. Simple.
Exactly - people are getting caught up with the age and sex of the alleged assault victim. Does it make the alleged perpetrator a jerk - yes it does. But the real issue is that with the exception of some hate crime statutes, assault and battery is assault and battery regardless of the demographic of the victim.
Exactly - people are getting caught up with the age and sex of the alleged assault victim. Does it make the alleged perpetrator a jerk - yes it does. But the real issue is that with the exception of some hate crime statutes, assault and battery is assault and battery regardless of the demographic of the victim. I don't think that is the case. These things have been stated are stated to show how big a jerk this thug is. And to illustrate how big a man this guy is to slap around a female senior citizen,
Offshore
03-08-2015, 15:12
I don't think that is the case. These things have been stated are stated to show how big a jerk this thug is. And to illustrate how big a man this guy is to slap around a female senior citizen,
You need to separate what is stated here as opinion (and gut reaction) from the law. I'm commenting on the legal aspect, not the visceral reaction to the alleged assault. In the eyes of the law, a 20 year old has the same right to expect not to be the victim of trail rage violence as a senior citizen (IOW - everyone has this expectation). That said, I do have question the sensibility of actively seeking out and engaging the cyclist. As I get older, I find I'm less and less willing to put up with BS, but this was just poor judgement. I am not blaming the alleged victim for anything other than a lapse in common sense. The one thing that seems clear here is that a cell phone call to the police with a description of rider and bike rather than pursuit of the bicyclist could have avoided this escalation.
imscotty
03-08-2015, 15:48
Could it be possible -- just possible -- that the reason for that is the police don't assume the same set of fact most of us do?
Remember, the most egregious account was not written by a journalist nor apparently in the police report nor even on an identifiable Facebook page. Rather is was a single post by a single individual purporting to be the hiker's sister in law in the comments section to a newspaper article.
I recognize the possibility RickB, but at this point I tend to think they are just piecing the case together.
I understand that we have a minimum of information reported and that the sister-in-laws account maybe biased. But it does seem to be a fact that the woman required medical treatment and that the cyclist left the scene. I can tell you with certainty that if I came across an elderly woman with injuries requiring medical attention on a trail, I would stay with her until I knew she was safe and being cared for. If these injuries were caused by a collision with my bike, I would be morally responsible to stay to insure she received treatment and to make my identity known. The fact that this biker fled the scene and adds greatly to the credibility of those who claim this was an assault.
I agree that at this point I am just a know-nothing internet sleuth who may well be wrong about the facts of this case. But I am hopeful we can at least all agree on the following....
Real men to not hit women. Even if they are yelling at you. Even if they are taking a picture of you for 'identification.' To do so is criminally and morally wrong.
If you hit someone and injure them with your car, bike, or anything else for that matter, you are morally obligated to stay and get them help and identify yourself to them, even if it was a complete accident. Even if you think the other party caused the accident. To do otherwise is wrong.
Is there really anyone except for Francis Sawyer (who appears to be a Troll, so I will ignore him) who really disagrees with the following two points? I hope not.
I recognize the possibility RickB, but at this point I tend to think they are just piecing the case together.
You could well be right, but it is odd that the second bicyclist who called 911 and stuck around was said to have informed the police that the woman had attacked the man and then fell.
Very bizzare. As is this web page pointing to some of the backstory of the area.
http://www.marinij.com/general-news/20150307/hiker-biker-clash-reignites-tension-on-marin-trails
And this one:
https://www.facebook.com/pages/Hateful-Old-Hikers-Association/170238123165188?fref=nf
Migrating Bird
03-08-2015, 20:23
I have not read all the posts, but I find it difficult to blame either party as being 100% at fault.
If the hiker reach/grabbed the bikers handle bars as per her admission per this article http://www.marinij.com/general-news/...n-marin-trails (http://www.marinij.com/general-news/20150307/hiker-biker-clash-reignites-tension-on-marin-trails) then the hiker clearly escalated and complicated the situation.
I find it very difficult to comprehend that a hiker going downhill could not step aside and yield the way to someone on a bike pedaling uphill. Additionally, if the hiker refused to yield and grabbed the handle bars of the biker as stated in the above referenced article, it is possible the biker feared injury to himself or his property. Why didn't the hiker simply step aside and let the biker pass, only the hiker knows, but from the account, she challenged the biker verbally first, stood her ground, failed to yield, then assaulted the biker first by grabbing his handlebars. A simple side step on the part of the hiker and no problem, no altercation just a bruised ego on the part of the hiker and an exchange of words.
In my mind, a person on foot has much more freedom of movement in any direction than a person on a bike riding up hill. The hiker has a better field of view from a nearly stationary position as opposed to a biker pedaling moving up hill. Riding a bike up a grade, depending on steepness, is a balancing act, grabbing the handle bars, upsets that balance.
Each party appears to have possessed a "damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead" mentality. "Move get out of my way, no you move and get out of my way". Each has a right to be in that place just not at the same time. Common sense tells me that there are two sides to the story and so far there has been only one side represented. All hikers are not saints, nor are all bikers.
As usual, in a forum, it is easy to jump to conclusions, the biker is at fault, jerk, thug, disrespectful etc., the little old lady out for a hike on her birthday is the victim but until law enforcement and a court of law rule, then none of us can possibly know who is to blame and what percentage of blame should be applied to each.
squeezebox
03-08-2015, 20:54
Kinda sounds like just maybe the hiker started the assault, no reason to knock someone off their bicycle, if that's what happened. Still no reason to engage, best way to protect yourself is by getting the heck out of the situation ASAP. Arguments with strangers never end well.
The second bicyclist may not have seen the beginning of it. It is also possible the second rider was riding with the other, but not riding close together. The second bicyclist may not have seen the beginning of it.
But bodily picked her up and thrown down the slope, little slope or steep slope, bodily thrown down the slope.
That is completely "over-the-top" violence: that is a violent person who is a danger to others.
In a confrontation, the person who escalates the confrontation is at fault.
However, a crime victim (unprovoked injury) can be aggressive or try to run away, whatever means they might do to protect theirself.
But yelling is self-defense 101: it is for getting attention of others.
As for putting her hands on the handlebars to stop him proceeding straight at her, how wrong is that?
He cut off her path: assault.
He did not handle the situation.
I would also like to know: how agile was this 65 year old?
I know many 65 year olds that are not agile, who have stiff joints, who cannot side-step, who have balance problems, who have poor hearing, who keep their hearing aid turned down low because when they turn the hearing aid up the hearing aid makes loud feedback, etc. etc.
She was walking an out-and-back footpath near her home.
I am not hearing this 65 year old was a "hale and hearty" but older hiker.
Now, of course, a broken rib and bruising over her body is no small injury, certainly not for a senior citizen.
Internal bleeding? No one has said.
But the hospital kept her.
Her cognitive symptoms are a concern: nothing good about that.
SawnieRobertson
03-28-2015, 14:18
They just don't know who they are dealing with.