Row breaks out on Twitter after police ‘blame’ injured cyclist for #NoHelmet

Northchurch Road. Photograph: Google Streetview

Accident: Northchurch Road. Photograph: Google Street View

Emergency services have been accused of jumping to conclusions and “victim blaming” for tweeting #NoHelmet after an elderly man was knocked off his bike by a van.

The cyclist, who is in his 70s, was injured in a collision on Northchurch Road and was taken to a major trauma centre in East London on Thursday 18 February.

The Joint Response Unit sparked outrage amongst cyclists when, shortly after attending the accident, it tweeted: “RTC- cyclist in collision with a van. Taken to a Major Trauma Centre as a priority @MPSHackney #NoHelmet #999family”

The original tweet, which appears to have been deleted, included the hashtag #NoHelmet which caused outrage amongst the cycling community.

Brenda Puech of Fume Free Streets and Hackney Cycling Campaign told the Hackney Citizen: “I think that was highly inappropriate. You haven’t had chance to investigate the accident, it’s instant judgment and the police shouldn’t jump to conclusions.”

“This is quite generally done [against] cyclists, I do think this is victim blaming.”

But Hackney police, tweeting from their account @MPSHackney came to the defence of their emergency service partners.

The spat has been raging for days with members of the public telling the police and ambulance services exactly what they think of their #NoHelmet stance.

Head injuries from cycling are less common than those received whilst driving. Puech, who believes we should be encouraging rather than preventing people from cycling in Hackney, added: “If cyclists are expected to go out wearing body armour, you are discouraging cyclists, you are discouraging a healthy activity.”

Puech and her co-campaigners believe the focus should be on restricting the motor traffic congestion to create a safer neighbourhood and not pointing the finger at cyclists.

The Citizen has been informed that the cyclist involved in the collision did not sustain any serious injuries.

13 Comments

  1. Jean Smith on Wednesday 24 February 2016 at 20:22

    l for one am a bit fed up with how many people cycle on the pavement,mostly adults of both sexes and old enough to no better.What with tables and chairs and shops fruit and veg,us walkers are getting well fed up.As for the no helmet cyclist yes they have to take some blame for not protecting themselves.



  2. Ben on Wednesday 24 February 2016 at 21:54

    He was hit by a driver not taking enough care. Where does the blame lie? Similarly, do you walk in the road? No. Why? Because it is too dangerous. So why should a person who happens to be on a bike be expected to share space with dangerous, heavy machinery?



  3. Steve on Wednesday 24 February 2016 at 22:49

    Because it’s the law for one, and because people being pedestrians have the right not to be run over on the pavement you pompous arse…where does that stop, motorbikes? small cars? Small vans, get them all on the pavement so they’re away from the buses and lorries….



  4. sigh on Thursday 25 February 2016 at 10:00

    pavement cycling is for fools. implying blame (for an incident where a driver hit a bike) on the operator of the bike, due to their not wearing a helmet, is for fools.



  5. CPM on Thursday 25 February 2016 at 16:13

    Simply put riding a bike close to 20mph in some cases is just as dangerous for pedestrians. Adults cycling on pavements has been outlawed for many years as it’s a hazard and irresponsible. If you feel like it’s too much hassle using the road just walk like the majority of us! Plus it’s just common sense to be wearing a helmet when cycling in a busy environment..



  6. Doug on Thursday 25 February 2016 at 16:41

    I’m not defending cycling on the pavement but where did this point come from? It bears no relevance to the article that I can see and just seems like a case of someone taking this opportunity to whinge about how they feel wronged by cyclists.

    I’m glad to see wearing a helmet’s common sense despite there being no conclusive research that demonstrates this (and not for want of investigation).



  7. Simon on Thursday 25 February 2016 at 17:39

    cycling on the pavement is illegal and nothing to do with this article about a man who was injured whilst cycling on the road

    wearing a helmet is optional in this country – it is not a legal requirement and we do not know what the cause of the accident was, it is a bit like blaming a gunshot victim for not wearing a bullet proof vest.

    Driving dangerously “without due care and attention” is illegal but sadly all too often treated with a blind eye or leniently when its consequence is death or injury

    Hackney Police should be ashamed of themselves



  8. Simon on Thursday 25 February 2016 at 17:41

    Lets hope a loose roof tile doesn’t fall on your head when you are walking without a helmet Jean – otherwise you will have to take some of the blame



  9. Doug on Thursday 25 February 2016 at 18:00

    Glad to see you’ve checked the statistics on pedestrian accidents involving cyclists. Even with the epidemic of cyclists riding on pavements, as a pedestrian you’re still far more likely to be killed or seriously injured by a motor vehicle when you’re on one.



  10. ERank on Saturday 27 February 2016 at 21:10

    This happened on my road and very near my house. The driver was reversing (his vehicle was too big to turn around as Northchurch Road is a blocked road) and his lorry was making that beeping noise when backing up. He had only begun to reverse so was not going at any speed. I can only think the cyclist did not notice the vehicle even though it was very big and he cycled into the back of the lorry. The man sustained a head injury and possibly wearing a helmet would have given him some protection. I very much hope the cyclist is recovering well. The driver remained on the scene for many hours.



  11. Tony mann on Friday 18 March 2016 at 22:13

    Cyclists don’t think the law applies them, helmets have protected many motor cyclists, a lot of cyclist don’t believe traffic lights apply to them and every one should give way to them, no insurance, so what if they cause an accident its not their fault, never will be. No test to see if they are competent



  12. common on Sunday 20 March 2016 at 11:28

    Most cyclists, like most pedestrians and most drivers – are considerate. A conspicuous few cyclists and motorists behave badly – but the impact of bad driving is far more dangerous for all. When a cyclist is injured the discussion often focuses on antisocial cycling instead of dangerous driving and poor road layout. This shifts blame to the cyclist which is dangerous for all road users. For the time being polluting motor vehicles are given priority in our streets – but this will surely change because pretty soon cars will be priced out as they already are for many. Roll on two wheels! Quiet, safe, healthy and clean.



  13. Lin on Sunday 5 February 2017 at 00:25

    no matter who or how an accident is caused isn’t it better to be protected. Cyclists are vulnerable to injury and head injuries can cause seizures that could affect them the rest of their lives. Wear a helmet.



Leave a Comment





This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.