Who said anything about legally? She changed lanes when unsafe to do so and got hit. Why are people trying to pretend she was just rear ended out of the blue?
Don’t put words in my mouth. I addressed the scenario you posed which said nothing of legality or not. Generally a pedestrian has right of way so legal would be the default assumption.
To the point of your post, I don’t know if she was legal or not. I haven’t read the article but obviously I’ll have to. Did she hand signal? Do we have video of that or are we taking the driver’s word for that? An unsafe lane change would put her at fault.
Edit: absolutely nothing in the article to indicate she failed to signal.
You don’t know she was hit as a result of changing lanes, it’s equally possible the truck driver, due to their elevated seat, didn’t see the bike and simply ran her over.
If I legally step into the road and a truck strikes and kills me I can be both right and dead. That’s why wrongful death suits are a thing.
This is a very weak argument. I don’t even own a bike and that’s obvious to me.
Who said anything about legally? She changed lanes when unsafe to do so and got hit. Why are people trying to pretend she was just rear ended out of the blue?
Don’t put words in my mouth. I addressed the scenario you posed which said nothing of legality or not. Generally a pedestrian has right of way so legal would be the default assumption.
To the point of your post, I don’t know if she was legal or not. I haven’t read the article but obviously I’ll have to. Did she hand signal? Do we have video of that or are we taking the driver’s word for that? An unsafe lane change would put her at fault.
Edit: absolutely nothing in the article to indicate she failed to signal.
You don’t know she was hit as a result of changing lanes, it’s equally possible the truck driver, due to their elevated seat, didn’t see the bike and simply ran her over.