Cyclist says truck ran him off I-205 bike path
Posted by Jonathan Maus (Editor-in-Chief) on May 16th, 2007 at 1:38 pm
Last Wednesday, 25 year-old Dustin Kent got on his bike after work and made his way home to Vancouver via the I-205 bridge bike path.
Photo: Carl Larson
He says he had just passed Government Island riding north on the bike path (which is in the middle of the freeway, see photo) when he noticed bright lights shining from behind him.
When he turned around, he was shocked to realize the lights belonged to a full-sized Nissan pickup truck.
According to Dustin, once the truck was about 100 feet away, the lights went out and it started “creeping up” on him. Once it got closer, Dustin claims the driver said, “Wanna’ ride?” and then continued to pull forward, forcing Dustin to hop over the railing (that separates the bike path from the freeway) to avoid being run over.
Photo: Dustin Kent
Watching in confusion from the freeway shoulder, Dustin says the truck drove over his bike and continued north on the bike path.
After gaining his composure, Dustin called 911. The Portland Police responded and filed a report.
Dustin says that because it was dark, he was not able to identify the driver, but he did get the license plate. He says the responding officer (Officer Morales) gave him the name and address of the person registered to the plate and he and a friend have spotted the truck parked in front of a house in Milwaukie.
The story made the KOIN 11 o’ clock news the night it happened. After it aired a viewer came forward and said he witnessed the truck on the path that night.
Dustin had just started bike commuting and was pretty shaken up by what happened. He told me he wants to pursue the case further, but so far the Police have said that they cannot move forward without a positive ID of the driver,
“It’s frustrating. I want to push this further, but I’m not sure how to do it. I want people to know that this happened… and I also want a new bike.”
Dustin also said that he has left several messages with Officer Morales and the Police Bureau over the past few days, but so far no one has returned his calls.
When I heard the story, I was surprised to learn that a full-sized pickup could so easily gain access to this bike path. I’m not sure who has jurisdiction over that bridge, but something needs to change to prevent unauthorized vehicles from doing this ever again.
If anyone has information about this incident, please contact Dustin Kent at dustinkent(at)yahoo(dot)com.
UPDATES:
–A commenter points out that back in March ‘06, the BTA wrote about their interest in changing the law so that vehicle owners would assume some responsibility for the actions of their vehicle, even if they could not be directly identified as being the operator.
–In the true spirit of Bike to Work Day, reader Tyler Robertson wants to help Dustin get a new bike. He plans to set up a fund at the bank by the end of the day. For now, go to Tyler’s blog and leave a comment with your contact info if you’d like to help out.
–I just got off the phone with PPB Public Information Officer Brian Schmautz. He says the case is in the system and that all hit-and-runs are dealt with based on priority. Since there are more cases than investigators, they look at a number of factors (including injury/damages and amount of evidence) to determine priority. He said when they have a license plate they will typically follow-up. I should have more information soon from Traffic Division.
–A friend of Dustin’s who was there minutes after the incident just left a comment and says this about access to the bridge:
“As far as the “poles” preventing vehicle access to the bridge are non-existent; I rode this route last night and looked. There are two poles up on the Vancouver side but there is still enough room for a truck to go around them. The path access from NE Holman St in Portland is completely wide open.”
Email This Post
Possibly related posts - Investigation, support underway in I-205 bike path incident
- Police investigation: Driver claims innocence in I-205 bike path incident
- Updated: Cyclist dies after collision with garbage truck
- Viriginia police say truck driver not at fault in death of Bonnie Tinker
- Jarolimek’s family files lawsuit against garbage truck driver
May 16th, 2007 13:47
The police don't seem to be very helpful in non injury accidents sometimes. One would hope that the officer would at least go talk to the owner. Ask them some questions like were you in possession of the truck at this time, did you loan it to someone, etc... Hopefully this a case of the officer not being on the last couple of days. I ride the 205 as part of my commute, and I am trying to think where on the south side a truck could get on the path. I would guess that they probably had to off road it a little because there are some poles in the path along with no motor vehicles allowed signs.
bjorn
May 16th, 2007 13:56
Unbelieveable! Can't the PPD go back to gain info. on who was driving the truck at or around a certain time? Receipts from gas stations, store surveillance and receipts,credit/debit card transactions. Would the cops give in that easy if it were a pedestrian who was on the bridge at the time? Scary stuff there.
May 16th, 2007 14:05
The laws are wrong about this sort of thing.
As an owner of a vehicle, you should be required to know who is operating it.
May 16th, 2007 14:08
Re: Bjorn's response above: I'm really bothered by the overuse of the word "accidents" to describe what happens when people negligently -- or with clear malicious intent as in this case -- injure other people with their cars. Just a few days ago I was reading the Oregonian and came across a follow up article about an "accident" in Clackamas in which a car going 60 mph in a 40 mph zone killed a jogger ON THE SIDEWALK when the car swerved to avoid a head-on collision with another careless driver. Don't worry, folks -- both drivers were "cited", which is fair punishment for criminally negligent homi ... er, I mean an "accident" ... right? See link below for more on that one.
http://blog.oregonlive.com/breakingnews/2007/05/two_drivers_cited_in_clackamas.html
Anyway, accident schmaccident. Anything like this should be classified as assault at the very least.
May 16th, 2007 14:18
!!ON THE BIKE PATH!!
This is not at all what I was expecting to read! This sounds like something from some crazy Filmed by Bike Horror Movie! That is enough to give any commuter nightmares!
All you attorney types out there... Isn't ther something he can do about this?
May 16th, 2007 14:18
I agree, Brian. If it was your vehicle, you are responsible for whosoever drives it. If not, then impound the vehicle in evidence of an attempted homicide. I don't see how this could construed as anything else...
May 16th, 2007 14:26
This is completely unacceptable!
Both from the knuckle dragging clown driving the truck and the PPB!
I fail to understand the total and complete apathy the PPB has toward motorist on cyclist interactions ,(Ok assault with a deadly weapon- A FREEKIN' TRUCK)
I had to read the story twice t make sure I was misreading it.
I don't even want to say on a public forum what I think should happen to this low-life piece of garbage.
tar and feather anyone?
May 16th, 2007 14:26
How about a mass ride to this guys house since the victim has the address.
May 16th, 2007 14:28
If it were me I'd try police in a different jurisdiction. Call both the Oregon and Washington State Police since this happened on an interstate highway.
I would also file a civil claim for, at a minimum, economic losses. Getting mental anguish out of it may require a lawyer, but the mere threat of such should get the owner's (ahem, if not the driver's) insurance co to open their wallet. Having a witness from the TV broadcast step forward gives one a decent chance to make a case without it being summarily dismissed as entirely made-up.
IANAL (thankfully).
May 16th, 2007 14:29
Agree with Brian,
The owner of the vehicle should be the default responsible party in such a case.
Can we say civil suit?
May 16th, 2007 14:42
As far as I know, state law is to blame for the requirement that there be a positive driver identification. Calling the police jerks is not productive if the law ties their hands.
The BTA wrote about the idea of changing the law to hold car owners liable for what happens in their cars, but I don't believe any action has been taken to move the idea forward.
May 16th, 2007 14:48
There are cameras on that bridge, PPB could have pulled the tapes and been able to at least verify the story, but now they have probably been overwritten so it is too late. Personally, that seems like common sense, if someone files a report, and there is video evidence, the police should pull the tapes and save them.
May 16th, 2007 14:51
matthew,
Dustin says he was told the tapes are only for live action, and do not actually record anything.
May 16th, 2007 15:00
Is there an ongoing, *active* investigation?
May 16th, 2007 15:01
I say, post the fool's address, right here.
May 16th, 2007 15:02
nick,
as of yesterday the police report was not in the system (someone at Traffic Division said they had no record of a "Dustin Kent" in the database)
I have left messages about the case and am awaiting a response from the PPB.
May 16th, 2007 15:13
I got to agree with Jessica,
Calling the cops jerks is inaccurate. I would choose the term lazy. Funny how a homeowner can get 8 cops in Ladds Circle plus a weekly lone publicly paid watchman where NO ONE was hurt. Yet nothing will come of this. Too bad we do not have a transportation activisms organization that can effectively deal with these issues. By this, I mean to change the PPB's policy of going after low hanging fruit and more after enforcing traffic conditions and behaviors that really hurt people.
jasun
May 16th, 2007 15:31
Let's take up a collection to get Dustin back on the road. I've got $20 to contribute. If you interested you can follow this [url=http://ride-me.blogspot.com/2007/05/get-dustin-new-bike.html]link[url] and leave name, email/phone contact,and the amount you can contribute.
Together we will get him back on 2 wheels!
May 16th, 2007 15:39
that is why i do not commute on my bike. this is even on a bike only lane.
May 16th, 2007 15:41
Jessica brings up a good point about state law tieing the hands of the PPB. It seems like the cops would make a natural ally to amend this law. It would give the cops more leverage if they could go after the owners of vehicles that are subject to these kind of reports.
May 16th, 2007 15:50
I agree that what happened here is wrong and the driver of the truck needs to be tracked down and criminally charged and should also be sued. You should all be mindful that the insurance on the vehicle will cover a permissive user of the vehicle. So as long as the user had permission, there will be coverage. Holding the owner legally liable for the actions of the driver is something entirely different. Oregon law does not hold an owner legally (civilly) liable for the negligent acts unless the owner had reason to know the driver was a bad driver or a habitually impaired driver. this is called negligent entrustment.
I agree an owner should know who is using the owner's vehicle. But I do not think we want to hold owners legally liable (separate from the coverage provided by the insurer for the vehicle) for the acts of a permissive driver. Would anyone here like to be held legally responsible for civil damages if your friend borrows your car and accidentally rear ends another car? Or taken further, borrows your bike and negligently hits a pedestrian causing serious injury? Just what is it that justifies liability in this situation?
In short, the insurance coverage on teh car should be available if the driver was permitted by the owner to drive the vehicle. The owner should be forced to identify the driver, and the driver should be nailed to the wall civilly and criminally. But absent more information I can't see any reason to holdthe owner responsible for this.
May 16th, 2007 15:50
Is this the only bike path on the planet that doesn't have a couple of poles up to keep cars and trucks from entering and using the path?
Publish the name and address of the truck driver and let nature take its course.
May 16th, 2007 16:31
I litigate personal injury claims often. Civil liability is clear based on the facts I have so far.
A small claim action for economic damages is the least he should do. The filing fee is less than $100 as I recall.
Auto insurance may not cover the loss because such policies typically exclude intentional conduct. Still, it would be fun to sue the jerk.
May 16th, 2007 16:57
wtf.. I'm all for prioritizing hit and runs, but I'd personally prioritize a hit and run where there is an indication that the driver *intentionally stalked* the victim prior to hitting him over one which was purely an accident.
An accident is tragic but is unlikely to recur. This driver however seems to represent an ongoing threat.
May 16th, 2007 17:16
Cars are able to get on the paths anytime they want. I saw one driving on the Esplanade last week.
As I understand it, they are open for access to maintenance vehicles, utility vehicles and the police.
In Eugene the police regularly patrol the paths in their cars. It is truly disgusting seeing them there..
It would seem as if there should be a way to block people that could be removed, though I can't imagfine we will ever get them to retrofit barricades. Hell, we can't even get them to hunt this guy down with two witnesses, a damaged bike and a license plate.
This story is just plain sickening.
May 16th, 2007 17:45
This is absolutely disgusting. This is the kind of behavior that desperately requires punishment. Especially because if it goes unpunished, it could spawn copies or repeat offenses. I'm sure this guy and his buddies are thinking that what they did was real funny. Well, they need to have their perception of this act severely re-framed, preferably with some jail bars. Since it appears unlikely that PPB will take enough action to see this through to a suitable result, it know falls to us as a community and Dustin in particular. Dustin: Please pursue any and all legal action in this matter. The future safety of your fellow cyclists is at stake. As for we as a community, I agree that we need to educate this criminal... oops, I mean, vehicle owner...
If we can come together and show the mayor of this city that a bicycle master plan needs funding, can't we just as easily stand up to those who would intentionally threaten our lives and livelyhoods? I, for one, would be very happy to join my fellow cyclists in a civil and legal demonstation (with the media invited, of course) directly in front of this guy's house.
May 16th, 2007 17:47
This is pretty close to attempted homicide, don't you think?
If somebody does a drive-by shooting resulting in property damage but no injuries or deaths to the occupants of the house, you can bet that the police will make the registered owner of the vehicle the prime suspect in their investigation, and not sit on their hands. This is the exact same situation.
May 16th, 2007 17:52
The cop gave out the registered address of the vehicle involved--maybe he is suggesting the cyclist and/or his friends to take matters into their own hands?---probably a bad idea--but it would be satisfying---just don't hurt anyone or get caught.
May 16th, 2007 18:24
The vigilante people should calm down and remember we only have one side of the story, which sounds bogus cause I can't see how a truck could get on and then off at the other end
May 16th, 2007 18:47
I was buzzed by a police car on the springwater corridor once (guesstimate 30mph). That part of the path has poles, but they are locked to the ground so they can be removed. I am not sure what they were doing out there, but obviously passing on the left like that left basically zero room for error.
This has nothing to do with this guys case, but someone else above mentioned seeing cop cars out there before...
May 16th, 2007 19:45
i seriously doubt there's a law preventing this investigation. if someone were to (for instance) go slash some truck tires, and someone got the slasher's license #, i bet the cops would investigate that.
if anyone knows what law all these amateur lawyers are citing that says cops aren't legally allowed to investigate crimes, i'd be very interested to read it.
May 16th, 2007 21:05
This is a perfect example as to why Portland should not get Platinum status until the laws change in a serious way! Keep up the good work PPB.
May 16th, 2007 21:36
Seems to me that Dustin Kent could sue the owner of the truck for damages. If the vehicle owners says he wasn't the driver, then who did he loan his vehicle to that day? What, his truck was "stolen" and he doesn't know who was driving at the time? Right.
Of course, it would probably have to be a "pro bono" lawsuit because the extent of proveable damages probably wouldn't amount to much, not anything, relaly, compared to the costs of preparing and bringing a lawsuit.
Also, Mr. Kent could send a letter to the vehicle's owner, stating very clearly how unnacceptable the driver's behavior was, and what his actions cost Mr. Kent, both in emotional terms and in terms of dollars and cents in bike repair/replacement. Make sure to cc: Portland Mayor Tom Potter and Police Commissioner Rosie Sizer.
Send the dude a clear message: "We know who you are. We know what you did. We know where you live. And the police know all about you and your inexcusable actions, too."
If nothing else, this gesture might make the jerk think twice before trying something like that again ...
May 16th, 2007 22:36
I don't understand how it's legal for a police officer to hand out the address of the car owner (or anyone else's information). Does that happen? What if the tag number was reported one digit wrong, and it turned out to be your number, and the cop gave out your address. Something doesn't sound right about that.
Maybe it's because we have 'the most curteous drivers in the nation,' and the officer thought they could get together for a courteous chat?
May 17th, 2007 00:48
.....Holy.... no, un-holy... I'm sorry, I can't seem to find propper words to describe how bad this is. A commuter's nightmare to be sure. How could anyone DO that? I'm sure I'll be really angry tomorrow when the shock wears off... but right now I'm just trying to wrap my mind around this.
May 17th, 2007 01:28
True: I agree about the police handing out peoples addresses...but on the other hand, I would imagine if any vigilante action were taken against the driver the police would all of a sudden be able to come up with some charges. Go figure.
May 17th, 2007 07:49
About 10 years ago I was mugged by a young man on SE Woodward. I gave the police a solid description of the him, the car he left in, and the license plate number. The investigation was dropped due to my not having the driver's description. Sucks. I wonder sometimes just what we pay these people to do anyway.
May 17th, 2007 08:31
#29 is right. After reading all the comments from beginning to end we need to step back and remember that we only have one side of the story. Including with that, is the fact that supposedly the cop gave out the drivers address to the "victim". Unheard of and unethical. If the person at the address was harrassed or injured in anyway in retalliation...the cop would have to know he/she is in for a big lawsuit...personal or otherwise. Something isn't being said as of yet. Not to say this didn't or couldn't have happened, but we need to hear more.
May 17th, 2007 09:04
I agree with felix, and others who feel like going to this A-Holes' house to pay him a visit. Nothing violent or confrontational, just simply a presence to get him to confess to PPD.
May 17th, 2007 09:12
folks,
at this point I just don't feel comfortable about releasing the guy's name and address.
I have some phone calls into the Police and I'd rather wait to hear more information from them.
i'm interested in arguments for and against revealing his identity. I should probably consult another journalist who has dealt with this type of decision before... but for now, I'm going on my gut... and it tells me that there's potentially negative consequences for exposing this guy's identity.
i've also been influenced in this decision by the comments I've chosen not to publish that have violent, vigilante undertones.
May 17th, 2007 09:27
I personally think it would be a really bad idea to release the name and address of the vehicle owner. There's just too much potential for things to turn ugly.
If that information were to be released, no one knows who would show up at the house (and what their intent would be)? Also, nobody knows anything about the owner of the vehicle, or if the owner was even driving the pickup when this incicdent occurred. Even if the owner of the vehicle was actually driving the vehicle at the time of said incident, they may react angrily. Perhaps they're a gun owner.
It has the potential to turn really ugly.
Please do not release the vehicle owner's name, or address.
May 17th, 2007 09:57
Tell you what, if you want the guy's name released without you having to do it yourself, make some calls to the local press. Even if all you gave them was what you know from the incident, the license plant number, they should be able to investigate and find out some facts about the vehicle's owner. The details of your story are sensational enough that the weeklies or even the O would run with it.
As far as recovering damages, a civil suit seems to be your best option. It's nice to think you could just send the guy a letter asking him politely to pay for the damage he did to your bike, but something tells me that a person willing to drive up the bike path on 205 is not going to just decide to do the right thing.
If only this driver had met with a similar redneck travelling the other direction in the bike lane with his lights off...
May 17th, 2007 10:06
For those who find it hard to believe and/or unethical that the officer gave the address. Anyone can go to DMV and for a small fee get the name and address of the owner of any license plate number in Oregon. A few years ago the database was going to be put up on the internet. They changed their mind about that and there was talk about changing the law to make the records harder to get, but I believe they are still public record.
I'm no lawyer, but this seems much worse than hit and run to me. Seems like at least assault. Seems the least that could be done is the police could talk to the owner and see if he is willing to confess or identify the driver.
May 17th, 2007 10:41
If you're frustrated with a lack of response from busy PPB traffic officers, go to the commander. Chances are, they will help you.
DMV info is public record and the police officer didn't break any laws by releasing that information.
Jonathan, I think your gut is right in not releasing this guy's address right now. Mr. Kent should be the one to release it if he wants.
May 17th, 2007 11:18
I am Dustin's friend and I arrived on the scene about 20 minutes after this happened. We almost rode back to Vancouver together but I left work later than he did and was going to try and catch up. I did not witness the truck on the path but I did see his pretzeled bike as pictured above. The Portland Police arrived shortly thereafter and took the report. There should have been an alert given out to Vancouver officers to be looking for this truck because that is where he ended up. To my knowledge this was not done.
As far as the "poles" preventing vehicle access to the bridge are non-existent; I rode this route last night and looked. There are two poles up on the Vancouver side but there is still enough room for a truck to go around them. The path access from NE Holman St in Portland is completly wide open.
I think this was an attempt by the driver to take Dustin's life. Any rational person would know that running over someone with a full-sized truck could easily result in death.
I like the idea of vigilante justice as done in some societies. Regardless, the owner of this truck needs to be held accountable.
May 17th, 2007 11:28
I think Jonathon should release the name/address. It sounds like Mr Kent shared that with him, correct?
I would like to see it released in a seperate post. A post calling for an organized, non-violent action at the home of said vehicle.
As for the people calling for vigilante style nonsense, I am sure they are just internet blowhards. Even if some whacko tried to cause a ruckus, that would be their choice and decision. Jonathon would in no way be responsible for someone elses stupidity.
Framing the release of the information in a civil and healthy manner would quickly diffuse the few who might rush to bad decisions. It would also allow those of us who are passionate about this to come together in solidarity. With out this needed information, we are powerless. The police appear to have shown they have no interest in helping at this point.
Imagine a hundred cyclists and a small herd of reporters convening at this individuals residence. That might spur some police action!
My .02
May 17th, 2007 11:35
Hmmmm....maybe if we sent a photo (to the Nissan owner's address) of a huge group of cyclists standing behind a banner that read "We Know What You Did"
May 17th, 2007 11:58
"Even if some whacko tried to cause a ruckus, that would be their choice and decision. Jonathon would in no way be responsible for someone elses stupidity."
You practicing law now, Steve?
May 17th, 2007 12:24
No need to practice law to discern the obvious. I have seen 1600 Pennsylvania avenue published in numerous locations.
If some whacko acts on that, will the Washington Post be responsible?
Intent is key, if Jonathon is calling for vigilante justice that is one thing. Calling for freedom of assembly is quite protected.
Heard of the Constitution or common sense, jj?
May 17th, 2007 12:28
I'd just as soon see Jonathan err on the side of caution. I love this blog and would hate to see it go away.
I'd hate even more to see something bad happen to this owner only to find out it was his son/cousin/friend driving the truck.
May 17th, 2007 12:33
Eric and Felix: count me in. This is absolutely unacceptable. Jon, why are you not releasing this info? Seriously, what is wrong with you? In one breath everyone says how terrible the PPD is doing, yet in the next you are holding out hope for a resolution you KNOW won't happen? This is not some random hit and run. Is there a phone # at least?
Honestly, think of what must be going on in someones head to creep up on a cyclist IN THE BIKE LANE, then run over their bike. Give us the address.
May 17th, 2007 13:08
So, in other words Steve, you are practicing law. If it's so obvious, please explain to us why Jonathan could not be convicted of criminal conspiracy under these facts. Oh, that's right, you have no idea what you're talking about. Good thing Jonathan is way smarter than you.
May 17th, 2007 13:26
Interesting anecdote about police response: I once caused a couple scratches to a truck parked half in the bike lane in front of The Benson, as I was trying to squeeze between it and some parked cars, with my left brake lever. I felt kinda bad, but also that the truck shouldn't have been there and so I kept riding. The Benson's valets called the PPD, I was followed and aggressively taken down. The police even cut my shoulder bag off of me instead of just moving the strap over my head to take it off, while I protested that they not damage it. I think I was surrounded by eight to ten cops. So, I really don't buy the lack of investigative resources argument. They have plenty of "resources" when it comes to intimidating peace protestors or the monthly Critical Mass, or chasing after a cyclist for a few little scratches. We're talking here about an attempt on a life and a MANGLED bike.
It makes me think that the primary function of the police is to protect property and interests of their preferred segments of the population.
May 17th, 2007 14:30
The comments above about the problem being 'lack of description' reminded me of something else.
Have you ever looked at the descriptions the police use to look for suspects?
Black male wearing jeans, between 175-250lbs, 5'10-6'3. In other words, 90% of all black males in the city.
I have a friend who was recently incarcerated on some various charges. When they were looking for him they had a description of "white, possibly asian of hispanic male wearing jeans and t-shirt with white or possibly grey tennis shoes. 185-250lbs, 5'10-6'0, etc etc."
I read this in his case file so this is not hearsay...my friend is 5'7 145 so he was upset about them picking him up when the description was so far off. His court appointed lawyer said it doesn't matter, descriptions are just untrained people (the victim) guessing so it's taken with a grain of salt.
All that to say, its funny how the description in this case seems to be such a huge sticking point, but in other cases its 'taken with a grain of salt'.
Remember the guy who got run down on Foster Road? Wasn't the description of the suspect something like "heavyset hispanic woman"? That doesn't exactly narrow it down does it.
Maybe the moral of the story here is when you are told your lack of description negates the fact that you had a license plate number+truck description you should just use a profile that gives you a 90% chance of success.
Male, possibly white or ethnic, 140-300lbs, 5'5-6'5. Possibly wearing a shirt.
Good enough for police, good enough for citizens.
May 17th, 2007 15:14
I was just told that ODOT Region 1 is looking into how the driver was able to access the path. I'm sorry, but I don't know exactly is working on it...I'd probably start with talking to Basil Christopher, ODOT Region 1 Bike/Ped Coordinator (503-731-3261).
May 17th, 2007 15:56
Commander Mark Kruger of the Traffic Division just called.
he said the report is in the system but that it has not gotten to Traffic Divsion yet.
He also said they have been in touch with ODOT about this case.
He urged everyone to remain calm until they've had a chance to investigate further.
he said he would get back in touch as soon as they've had a chance to investigate further (probably in the next day or so).
stay tuned.
May 17th, 2007 16:46
A law holding car owners responsible for actions taken by any operator of their vehicle could back-fire in cases were automobiles are stolen and could encourage destruction derby actions - it's a delicate issue, one most fresh public attorney’s could exploit in defense I would imagine.
I could see holding a peaceful bike-in near their property… Assuming the police get nothing from questioning, then have a street party, hold signs that say "this truck almost killed our friend" - flier the neighborhood with the story, basically plan creatively non-violent direct actions until "the powers that be" or the perpetrator act toward justice. Invite the media, write the truck up as the Rouge of the week… throw the weight of our organized, mobilized bike community into demanding action (didn’t our over 300 emails to our local government just make news?) – at least try that before furthering the bike community-vigilante image…
Who knows even the mention of such ideas may get fire under the right butts…
May 17th, 2007 21:42
Lets say that your car was used in a bank robbery, or had a bomb in it. Even without an ID of the driver, and even if you'd reported it stolen the week before, I'm almost positive the police would at least come talk to you.
If this was, say, 95.5, I'm fairly sure that they would publish the guy's address, but this isn't, (and if it was, I probably wouldn't read it.) And likewise, I'm fairly sure that a lynch mob wouldn't help the problems in general, (as much as I think the guy deserves it.)
May 17th, 2007 22:37
"Male, possibly white or ethnic, 140-300lbs, 5′5-6′5. Possibly wearing a shirt."
D, this made me laugh out loud, thanks!
Made me think of a Portland Mercury "I Saw You" from awhile back:
"You were in that truck, and I was in that car, you know, at that intersection? Anyway, coffee?"
I'm gonna go for the generic description in the future, rather than say I don't have one:
"Thick-necked dude, looks like a neanderthal, probably has beer on his breath."
May 18th, 2007 10:56
I appreciate the support I have received from the cycling community here in Portland, It is truly amazing. Now the police is another story. I have been leaving messages to the traffic division for a week now and have not heard a response, but it sounds as though this is typical police involvement(or lack there of) when the incident involves cycling.
What do you all think would be the best course of action for me to take against this shyster who murdered my bike?
May 18th, 2007 12:38
Probably your best bet for getting anything done is to post his address here;)
May 18th, 2007 14:37
Lawsuit. Please! Take hime to court and saturate every media outlet you can with the story. Make an example out of this incident, for all of our safety, please.
May 18th, 2007 16:40
I would find a sensationalist lcoal news outlet, and ask them to do one of their in your face news stories about the guy who mangled your bike. I think Channel 6's "I"team does this. They get to embarass some shmo, the police look lazy for their lack of action and maybe take stories like this more seriously in the future.
Spice it up and talk about how you think the guy is a child molester and was throwing bags of puppies off the bridge while wearing a klan hood. Who knows, if it is a slow news day the national press might pick it up. Think of it, Stone Phillips, America's most wanted, maybe even Oprah. Go boy.
May 18th, 2007 17:49
It's still not too late to contribute to Dustin's bike replacement. We're coordinating with Cyclepath to help get a bike under Dustin's bum and get him back on the road. I know the PDX bike community wants to help. Please follow the link in the UPDATE section to make a commitment to help out..
Thanks Y'all!
May 18th, 2007 19:04
dustin, an attorney named jason skelton posted further up the thread, and he seems knowledgeable about suing. you could see if he posts again, but a brief google search shows he's involved with the bus project (so he's probably not selfish or greedy), and his work phone number might be 503-223-4131, if this link can be believed:
http://osb-dc.org/Dir/Geo2.htm
good luck to you. no offense to tbird's laudable effort, but i feel funny posting all my info online. if dustin were to set up a paypal account, though, i think a lot of people would chip in to get you back on a bike.
May 18th, 2007 20:38
I like spencer's idea #63 and posting his name/address/license plate and any other info you can find here and other web sites---I also like some kind of vigilante action that does not involve personal injury or the threat of personal injury---good luck
May 18th, 2007 22:33
Good News! I finally got a hold of someone at the Portland Police traffic division and copied down the contact info of the witness who came forward after watching the Koin 6 news report. Apparently she witnessed the Red Nissan Titan driving down the bike lane. I'm going to try and contact this witness tomorrow. I'll keep everyone here updated.
PS... did anyone else happen to be driving on the I-205 bridge Wednesday May 9th at approximately 10:00-10:30 PM. The more witnesses the better
May 19th, 2007 05:48
Two thoughts:
1. Would contacting the mayor's office get the PPB to do something about this?
2. I would not necessarily expect the bike lane on a bridge to be built strongly enough to bear the weight of a truck. For a moment, I had a poetic justice fantasy of the bridge surface dropping out from underneath this jerk of a driver.
May 19th, 2007 21:33
I think the bridge may have been engineered to support a fire truck in the event of an emergency. This may also be the reason both ends are wide open to cars.
May 20th, 2007 01:29
The roadbed on the bridge is the same for the entire width. The bike lane is just separated by jersey barriers. The railings were added a couple of years after the bridge was opened. I rode my bike across early one Sunday morning while it was still under construction. The expansion joints were not installed yet so I had to carry the bike across a 3 foot opening. Traffic was not a problem.
May 21st, 2007 01:15
We are currently discussion the design of the future I-5 bridge path for bicyclists and pedestrians.
(Let your voice be heard about bike friendly bridge design.)
http://www.columbiarivercrossing.org
Check out their upcoming PedalPalooza event (9 June).
This case brings up an interesting point between the modern bridge (no bridge staff) and old fashioned bridge (bridge staff).
There must not be any active eyes on the I-205 Bridge...to let this type of dangerous and threatening activity go on for ~2 miles. And there are no 911 phones to call for assitance after it happens.
In the I-5 bridge they have incident response units there and staff who will announce things if you are doing things or a problem arises.
Perhaps the new Interstate Bridge should have additional security features...911 phones, video security with an attendant, weight sensors (triggered by cars at trail entry points).
What do you think?
Todd Boulanger
Senior Transportation Planner
City of Vancouver/ Transportation Services
CRC Bicyclist & Pedstrian Subcommittee member
todd.boulanger@ci.vancouver.wa.us
May 22nd, 2007 10:29
I also witnessed this truck driving on the bike path between the north and south lanes of the I 205 bridge. Since I was driving north bound, and the barriers are high enough, I could not see a license plate. If I had had a cell phone, I would have called it in. I knew that the truck would be gone by the time I got home and made a call.
If you need someone else to testify that there was a truck on the bike path...
May 23rd, 2007 00:32
Hi - kinda late to post here, I know, but I have some pretty solid info to add. . ..
I live rather close to said accident location and the bike path is actually visible from my home - both the part in the middle of the highway as well as the part that runs off of Sandy, past the DOT maintenance facility and over the Columbia Slough.
Sad to say, I see cars drive on the bike path rather frequently. .. .usually Police cars, but occasionaly a DOT vehicle or regular (non-DOT or Police) vehicle. Its also sad to say that I have seen the 'official' vehicles going at pretty good clips down these paths - disconcerting to say the least. For a while, there were even twin tire burn out marks at a point on the path nearest the street (where one can also easily hop the curb to drive onto the path)
To add to this, half the overhead lights up and down the path are non-functional. The obviously pried open access plates (if not missing all together) and pulled out wiring screams (tweaker) metal theft. The lights have been like this for MONTHS and the section running right past the DOT maintenance yard is mostly pitch black. Also making this area rather sketchy to bike is that there are NO poles blocking anyone to drive on up, at multiple points
I realize this is not the exact area the accident happened (but within 1/4 - 1/2 mile thereof), but it hints rather strongly at the lacking attention to this area's bike paths, in general. : (
May 23rd, 2007 02:06
Maybe calls to the Mayor or others would be warrented... though I feel like in this situation if the police do not act then going to any and all members of the press that have a second to listen and get this story covered would really force action far more than our "bike friendly" mayor is likely to.
May 23rd, 2007 08:57
Why is it possible for ANY vehicle (even emergency vehicles) to drive on this lane? I thought that's what the emergency lanes adjacent to the regular traffic lanes were for?