After you read Jack Leonard's piece in the Los Angeles Times about the assault trial of a surgeon who is accused of using his red Infiniti as a weapon against a group of cycle enthusiasts, you might wonder if there is any hope for bridging the divide between cyclists and motorists.
The jury is deliberating on the case today, so Leonard was able to summarize the case nicely. I don't mind weighing in to say that the doctor acted like a jerk, and despite his denials that he braked hard in front of the cycling group, thus causing the accident, his call to 911 saying he braked and some cyclists slammed into him, and his statement to police at the scene saying that he stopped in front of them "to teach them a lesson," should be enough to convince the jury that he acted with malice and casual disregard for the safety of others.
What I don't get is why. The cyclists were doing the speed limit. He didn't have to pass them or crowd them. One of the cyclists may have flipped him the bird. Not very smart, but not life-threatening. The only reason he had to stop was to hurt someone. He's a doctor. Isn't the MD's credo to "do no harm?"
GUILTY on all counts is the outcome. See more at: http://www.velonews.com/article/99800/dr-thompson-is-found-guilty-of-all-counts-in-la-road-rage
Sentencing will come shortly.
...alan
Posted by: AlanM | November 04, 2009 at 02:13 PM