Astrid Anderson, director of the 'LeRace' cycling event over a challenging 100km winding hill course over two hill ranges between
Christchurch City and Akaroa was today found guilty of a 'criminal negligence' charge. The event catered for a wide range of cyclists, from 'semi-professional racing cyclists' right down to 'weekend wheelers'. The charge was laid followed the death of an inexperienced cyclist who had crossed over the centre line of the road, while starting to overtake two other cyclists on a downhill section. The cyclist collided with an oncoming car, with fatal results.

Competitors had signed a waver to the effect that they were competing at their own risk. However, while this waver can legally cover civil litigation, it cannot exhonerate the race director if the police decide to bring a criminal charge against him/her.

The charge was brought by the police because there was doubt that the literature of the event clearly indicated that a section of the course called the 'summit road', where the accident occurred, was not closed.

Both the pre-race literature, and briefing, made reference to a 'road closure' on the 'summit road' to weed out so called 'sneaky cyclists' who had not paid to enter the event. This 'road closure' was in fact a check point to stop support vehicles and unentered cyclists from following event cyclists over the road. The road was not closed to other traffic. Nevertheless 'road closure' was the legally correct term for this check point, according to local council regulations.

Equally importantly for the case there were two completely separate 'summit roads' (the legally correct name for both roads was the same), corresponding to each of the two hill ranges crossed. The accident occurred on the second 'summit road' where there was no check point.

The police alleged that the inclusion of the phrase 'road closure on the summit road' both in ther pre-race literature and the pre-race briefing was confusing. They further went on to say that the race director had identified 'competitors not getting the right information' as a hazard correctly identified in the health and safety plan for the event. This health and safety plan was written and signed off by the race director. Finally the police identified that 'there is a culture within bike racing of using all of the road' when a road is closed, and by not making the information of the road closure clear (there were no 'road open' signs placed along the route)
the event organizer had contributed to the death of the competitor.

The defence contended that the competitor had died as a result of their own carelessness or even recklessness by attempting a passing maneuvre where there was insufficient visibility. Furthermore the defence contended that the written pre-race information was not misleading when read in context. The phrase 'road closure' occurred only in the section of the pre race pamphlet under the sub header of 'sneaky cyclists'. The one sentence that used the words 'road closure', had an adjunct phrase linked by a dash that made this contextual meaning perfectly clear. Furthermore the defence produced evidence that the dead competitor had seen at least three vehicles (one of which was a logging truck) come out of the summit road before they entered it. The defence also produced evidence that the dead competitor would have passed a milk tanker and possibly two or three additional vehicles between the start of the summit road and the accident site. The contention here was that even if the competitor had misread the instructions and believed the road to be closed the presence of occasional vehicles on the road would have dispelled this myth. The defence also contended that other phrases used in the pre-race documentation ('read these instructions carefully', 'keep left' and 'obey the road rules at all times') should have meant that any reasonable competitor should not have placed their bicycle on the road in a position of risk. The defence furthermore contended that 'road open' signs were not required because 'the road is always open'.

Further details are available at these links

http://www.lerace.co.nz/

http://www.stuff.co.nz/stuff/0,2106,2622998a10,00.html

Comments anyone?