The Chainlink

Passenger of SUV blocking bike lane throws liquid on cyclists

Contributor Submitted:

"I stopped in front of the vehicle to take a picture of the lady blocking the bike lane. I noticed afterwards that the that I caught the attacker in the picture. He is to the right of the car in the blue jacket. This was right out of OTC on Clinton, about 200 ft from the station. He got in my face about taking pictures of his girl's car. I told her that she was in the bike lane. He continued to escalate, and here are some pictures of him.After a few choice words, they drove out of the bike lane and proceeded down the road. The light at madison was red and as I got to that light, this guy was waiting there and threw what I hope was orange juice all over me. At this point, I ran after him and he ran back into this car. I stood in front of the car to try and hold them there until someone could come on the scene, and the woman started driving, trying to run me over. I got hit by their car and went rolling, and had some road rash on my knee and I tore my jacket. Here is the video of the fluid being thrown on me. The video was taken by another rider, who told me that she has a helmet cam because she had been chased down the road previously. I made a police report and a detective reached out to me about 2 weeks later. I gave him all of this and they still do not know who this was or who the woman was. "

Link to Video:

Link to Thread with more images:

Views: 1566

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

I called "troll." And it was directed towards you, Coop. At least that's how you read when you jumped in. As for being an attorney, your contributions here so far are underwhelmingly cogent. And what's your real agenda, er, motive here? Truth, clarity, understanding or throwing some stink bombs?

I'm sorry that you feel my legal skills are subpar, and I'd encourage you not to hire me (though I admit, my day job isn't "message board policeman").

Since you asked and assuming it wasn't rhetorical, here's my thinking - I think that this group suffers from the "echo-chamber"-type mentality that a lot of groups do.  It's useful in some regards to be single-minded and focused, to the (often obnoxious) exclusion of other issues - it helps clarify issues by those best able to clarify.  However, the longer it goes on, the more pervasive it is, and the more it extends to peripheral areas, it can become dangerous and hamper development.  Kim Kardashian is really good at, for example, makeup and Prada shoes.  She's not so good at politics, but (a) she thinks she is; and (b) her 5 million instagram followers agree, such that they'd probably vote for whomever she told them to.  Hence, she's proudly posting pix of being summoned to the Oval Office and her followers love it, notwithstanding it was done so by literally a garbage human being who is a disgrace to everything decent.  No matter.  Her followers love it so, in turn, she eats it up and it fuels her beliefs about herself.

I sense that this develops here.  I like the diligence that people show, and the expertise and information they share to make the city better for cycling.  People here are far better at that than I, and so I seldom comment.  

But this echo-chamber also leads to sanctimony, and the sense that we're always right about anything, since the singlemindedness of unity for cycling issues has bled into other areas.  Notice how I was dismissed out-of-hand as a troll for bringing this up.  I submit that's primarily because I dared challenge two frequent contributors who are cycling experts - but not on a matter of cycling.  

So, I think it's dangerous to do that, first off.  And just as importantly, I think what they said is racist (I think Mike is unabashed about this), and I'd be freaking mindful about being racist when we're in a group that is already often treated as second-class.  Others ganging up on to say it's not doesn't change what it is, no matter how many do it, for the reasons above.  Is that a stinkbomb?  Maybe.  Sorry.  That's all.  I'll leave the group if this view isn't welcome.

That was FAR more eloquent, and I DO agree with much of your thrust here, although I don't necessarily read a racist subtext in the original comments. But hey, I'm no messageboard cop. The pays bad and the hours are lousy.

Er, pay is bad. My bad.

Nicely done Cooper.  I like your 'echo chamber' analogy.  Even tho I don't follow social media groups (other than ChainLink) or know much about Kim Kardashian or 'garbage human beings.'

As another poster who's been branded a 'troll' numerous times here for taking opposing views, I hope you'll stick around.  I welcome your views; they're refreshing!

No, clp, you have not been tagged a "troll" because you take opposing views but because your behavior has been trolly. STOP THE INSANITY!

I hear you Cooper. This isn't the most populous and active message board, but I have sensed a lack of diversity here and the echo chamber you speak of and a certain tone deafness regarding issues that affect minorities.

Let's look at the story as presented:

a cyclist stopped in front of a car in the bike lane and snapped a photo of it. The passenger got out and "got in (the) face (of)" and exchanged heated words with the cyclist before getting back into the car.

At the next light, the passenger threw a "fluid" at the rider, who chased the passenger back into the car. The rider then stood in front of the car, and was nearly run down by the driver.

One commenter asked why the police could not identify the driver & the car, given the pictures. A valid question IMHO.

i commented that the rider was lucky the people in the car weren't armed (i used the slang term "packing heat.")

For those comments, we have been accused of racism.

i assert that i would have made those same comments absent any photos of the persons involved. Unfortunately for myself and the other commenter, as it turns out there were posted photos and the persons in the photos are apparently not "white."

To put another perspective on this, i'll add that perhaps the people in the car were lucky that the rider was not armed.

An anecdote:

Many years ago, i was driving on Chicago avenue when the guy in the car behind me decided i was driving too slow and swung over the centre line, cutting me off closely and brake-checking me.

As  i began to chase him down the street. my girlfriend in the seat next to me touched my arm and said,"You don't know what he has under his seat!"

 i backed off and never forgot that admonitinon.

In today's society, with today's concealed carry laws, minor disputes can quickly escalate and become terminal. People get maimed or killed for next-to-no reason every day.

     ( Actually, a homicidal driver doesn't really need a firearm to kill us. All they need to do is to run us over and tell any cop that they  "didn't see us" or we "came out of nowhere." At most, they'll get a slap on the wrist.)

    Now, i do not know the "race" of the cyclist; nor the other commenter; nor you, Mr Hofstad, nor do i particularly care. You seem to have made assumptions as to my "race" and motives. You also appear to have a burr under your saddle about "coded language" -i cannot help you with any of that. i do understand about coded language as anyone with half a brain can detect in the first five minutes of any speech by the POTUS. i wasn't using code, i was using plain direct simple English. My fault lies in not making it more clear that all the parties concerned in the above confrontation were lucky that no one was armed.

Beyond your somewhat off-point perseverations regarding the Kardashians, social media,etc, and your list of offensive terms (all validly offensive terms i'll grant), you have basically called me a "troll," implied that i am playing "sanctimonious and dumb" and stated that i am an "unabashed" "racist." Well, thank you for that, because now i have a better idea of whom and what i'm dealing with here. Your assumptions about my character are breathtakingly wrong.


     The whole point of my comment about the OP's post was that people sometimes die in pointless confrontations. i will grant that it wasn't as articulate as it might have been, but i stand by it. Sorry you missed it.

End of message. Peace. Out.

To recap: There are two individuals (the driver and the guy wearing the blue coat) in fairly clear picture and another picture with the A63xxxx plate while, the police haven't determined their identities and/or resolved the matter to our knowledge here.  We also have pictures of a similar situation on Canal near Taylor Street. 

As we lament the apparent police inaction, battery cases can still be pursued as civil matters.  So if this happens to one of us, we could complain about it and the pace of the police work, and in a separate thread who will or won't help all of this out after running for mayor, but for originally posted matter (battery) a civil attorney can help if the police haven't.  This isn't the place to highlight how they go about filing what in what order, but a civil attorney acting on behalf of a client can walk someone through the appropriate steps and that approach may be the best pathway.  


© 2008-2016   The Chainlink Community, L.L.C.   Powered by

Disclaimer  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service