London Against Cyclists

Looking into two different cases involving cyclists in London, one can notice that the city is not only extremely unsafe for cycling, but, do not consider cyclists “worthy victims” ¹ either. Both Mr Hazeldean and Mr Dey were part of courts’ decisions that creates a bad precedent over cyclists.

Mr Hazeldean was commuting back home in central London when crashed into a Yoga teacher who was staring at the phone in a busy road in central London. In the judge’s words,  "Ms Brushett and Mr Hazeldean were equally culpable in this accident and Mr Hazeldean, for whatever reason, hasn't made a claim and so only Ms Brushett (the yoga teacher) is getting a payout,". However, the cyclist will have to pay a fine of 100,000£.

In addition, we have Mr Dey’s case. Which is much more serious. Mr Dey was the victim of a hit-and-run and was left for dead. The criminal Sean Fagan runs after crashing the cyclist violently. Moreover, Fagan was caught up because Mr Dey searched for CCTV system himself, otherwise Fagan, the criminal, could never face a minimal justice.

What makes things really hard to understand on comparing both cases are that Mr Dey had to search for Fagan himself, whilst the police did not do nothing. Furthermore, while Mr Hazeldean must pay 100,000£ in a case that even the judge says that both are culpable, Fagan is bonded to pay just 9,000£, and just because Mr Dey will have to re-take the fourth year of medical degree at University College London.

The level of injustice in those cases is impressive, however, that is not the worse thing to be considered. In the common law system, the system used in the UK, the jurisprudence is important and creates precedents on cases. Which may guide similar cases to similar ends. So, despite the injustice the British law is creating a dangerous precedent for cyclists.

Cycling as an option in London

London, where public transport is extremely expensive. A commuter can expend 50.50£ in a travel card (zone 1-4), weekly to go to work. If you are a tourist and have to pay a ticket at the machine. Prepare yourself, it costs and arm and a leg.

Facing an issue like this, however common in big cities like London, demands improvisations. Cycling is not just cheaper, where using the case above as an example, could cost you more than 200.00£ monthly, even more than 250.00£ in a month with five weeks. Cycling is better for the environment, cycling is better for the health.

Thus, I ask myself why the government is not helping cyclists? As show us the examples given. Treating cyclists as “unworthy victims” and not delivering them justice.

I prefer not to think that this has something to do with corporatism, where the government is helping big companies as TFL or National Rail Services to be even more profitable, despite what it costs to the normal commuter.

1 Term used for Edward S. Herman and Noam Chomsky on “Manufacturing Consent” p 37, vintage, 1994. A term used to explain victims that interest and the victims that does not interest to the government and main media.