Mom

Fri, Oct 9, 2009 : 3:02 p.m.

I like the last comment, "it is not an impossible standard to expect drivers to avoid killing someone with their automobile." I have been very silent for sometime, yes, trying to deal with our loss. We in all finality want something positive to come out of this nightmare. We want more safety awareness, more thought in trying to eliminate most of our careless actions on the road, knowing we assume a huge responsibility behind the wheel. We want this young man who by accident brought an end to our son's life to contribute to society in a positive way. mom

Phillip Farber

Wed, Sep 16, 2009 : 10:31 p.m.

I am of the firm belief that it is not an impossible standard to expect drivers to avoid killing someone with their automobile.

Engineer

Wed, Sep 16, 2009 : 8:21 p.m.

Some of the comments on here are very harsh. A little forgiveness is in order. Who has not taken their eyes off the road to: check on a child or baby, adjust the temperature, read a sign that you are almost past, look at a map or GPS, adjust your seat, take a call, make a call, get a piece of gum or other food off of the seat, check your planner for a time or address, look at an interesting house or building or person, etc. We could ban all people off of the driven roads unless in or on a motorized vehicle. Want to bike go to a bike trail. Want to walk be on the sidewalk or up in the yards. There is no way to eliminate all risk in life. What happened here is very very tragic for all but not criminal. It is time for healing and looking for solutions not throwing stones.

Briggs

Wed, Sep 16, 2009 : 7:44 p.m.

Good drivers, nonnegligent drivers, drivers who drive according to the established bust practices do not keep their eyes on the road. Never checking your mirrors, never checking to see what is around you, never checking the preformance of your vehicle by checking the speedometer and other instruments would be negligent. Additionally, it is not possible, physically, to "never take your eyes off the road"--even if it could be agreed what this phrase means. So many people here want to hang this young man for causing a death--well the whole issue is whether in fact he did cause it. The notion of negligence includes the component that something could have and should have been done differently, and that because it was not done differently, it resulted in some harm. Here, the government has not explained what the accused person did that was wrong other than to say he took his eyes off the road for a second. This should send chills down the spine of every American. Many people here immediately empathisize with the bicyclist, perhaps because it is easier to imagine yourself on a bicycle than to imagine yourself in handcuffs. But those here who imagine sitting around the dinner table imagining that getting his by a car could happen to anyone in their family, try for a moment to imagine yoor child or loved one being accused of a crime, and having his or her life thrown into upheaval and their financial resources depleted, because they took their eyes off the road for a moment, and that moment happened to be when someone else was there on a bike (or on foot). I don't think that the people here who sympathisize with the driver are therefore hostile to cyclists. I think that's an unwarranted conclusion. I think the people here who sympathize with the driver are terrified that the government is claiming the right to hold everyone to impossible standards.

Believe

Wed, Sep 16, 2009 : 4:21 p.m.

I am responing to what writer "thinking" wrote several days ago.. about justice, and mercy. I am hoping for mercy.... As you sit at your dinner table tonight with your children, or watch your sons and daughters at soccer practice, or help them with their homework... As you look into their faces, you must realize that this easily could have been one of our children as the driver in this accident. I have known Nick for over 13 years. I know about his character, and his faith. Whatever the outcome of this, whatever his sentence will be... Know this, he WILL do it, and will do it well, with all his heart. This was a terrible, horrible accident for BOTH families involved. One must ponder what is the value of the justice we are seeking. I am hoping that as our community is searching for justice, that our community will also think about empathy, forgiveness, mercy, and retain hope for the future of all our children.

thinking

Wed, Sep 16, 2009 : 2:52 p.m.

Something happened yesterday mid-morning and I'm wondering what you would have me to think of it: I'm driving on Maple Road yesterday when I see a bicyclist. Dressed in dark clothes. Riding against traffic. Without a helmet. Listening to his i-pod. On Maple Road, less than a quarter-mile from the ghost bike memorial. (I only wish I were making this up.) In my head, I'm just screaming at the guy - and none of it nice. Yet, in my heart, I'm thinking of Tim. And Nick. And all of you...

debling

Tue, Sep 15, 2009 : 10:41 p.m.

jlkddd, you are confusing intent with negligence. If the driver intended to hit Tim he would have been charged with first or second degree murder = life in prison. He wasn't. The DA alleges he caused the death by negligence. That means he was the cause of the death. It doesn't matter if the driver was or was not of good character. You take a life, you pay the price. I support the efforts to raise the penalties for this crime to 15 years in prison. I firmly support any move to permanently deny this young driver any driving privileges in the state of Michigan over the duration of his natural life. Furthermore, I hope at the end the financial penalties (civil and/or criminal) imposed on him are both a)lifelong (i.e. permanent wage garnishee)and b) substantial (such that they reflect the lifetime financial losses this death has caused the Pincikowski family) and c) punitive to reflect the drivers negligence.

jlkddd

Tue, Sep 15, 2009 : 11:40 a.m.

I'm glad that a friend of the driver has come forward and said something about who he was so that everyone can realize that he wasn't this aweful person who murdered someone

goodfriend

Tue, Sep 15, 2009 : 11:21 a.m.

Lorie, I'm not suggesting Nick get a pass based on the content of his character. Not at all. I simply want people to know: we're not dealing with extremes. Everybody has their worst case story to tell: the angry motorist who runs cyclists off the road, the reckless cyclist just defying someone to hit him. But there are so many more motorists happy to share the road, and there are wonderful cyclists who are incredibly diligent to be safe and seen. We're talking about two basically good people, a very tragic accident, a life lost and another changed - and a condition of community safety that obviously (and urgently) needs to be addressed. Soon - before this kind of thing happens again. Cyclochemist: Thanks for equipping us to do just that.

pseudo

Tue, Sep 15, 2009 : 6:17 a.m.

I think its important for all of us not get confused. We can't confuse our justice system with a retribution system and yet I hope Tim's family gets everything they can. I believe this was more than just "whoops I looked at the radio for a second". I drive that road and know the sight-lines... I want him to be properly charged and properly sentenced for one whopping and deadly screw up. He doesn't need to be made an example of - just properly disposed. I don't think all the stereotypical "he's a church-going man" gets him any kind of pass. And yet, its hard for me to imagine that locking him up on my/our dime benefits anyone. What is clear to me from the comments on all of these articles is that the driving public seems to think its their right to harass bicyclists, to injure them, to swerve at them, to hit them, to throw things at them. I am one of them and I have experienced this first hand. My favorite being the open vodka glass bottle that bounced off my helmut. Somehow the mere fact that you are riding a bicycle makes you a scofflaw in their eyes and they have the large dangerous machine on their side. That has to change. I think that will be hard to accomplish because I believe the driving skill level and decision making is very low in this area. I drive here too. I ride in major cities and country areas around the country. Its crazy here. I don't believe we have the law enforcement attitude and critical mass to enforce traffic laws (speeding being the norm) and I don't believe that our drivers really know how big their vehicles are and aren't willing to learn. So, does anyone have any ideas - we're injuring and killing too many cyclists to ignore it. For my part, I let my state reps know that I strongly support the bills before them. Please see @Cyclochemist near the 90th comment for more informtion on those bills. What else can we do?

goodfriend

Mon, Sep 14, 2009 : 5:15 p.m.

Thanks for your words, heavyheart. I know the driver, too. We worship together at the same church. Like many of his friends, I've been closely following this story, and yet I've been reluctant to write anything on his behalf. In part to allow Tim's family to have the support of the community in this time of terrible grief - but I've hesitated, too, because of the strong opinion against him. Which is all the more reason to write something now. Everything that could be said of Tim could be said of Nick. Beyond this accident, it seems they have a lot in common. Like Tim, he's the hardworking son of parents who love him very much. As with his entire family, he's been active in our church. Now a college student, he's active in his school's campus ministry, earning excellent grades, and looking at a career in the medical field where he can help people. Neither man is perfect but, like Tim, Nick is a guy who looks for the best in people and wants the best for people. He's exactly the kind of kid you don't expect to be in this situation - not in a hundred years. Not in a million years. He's concerned for his future, yes, but deeply concerned, too, for Tim's family and friends. Cynics will say its because he fears the consequences, but he knows: no one's life is the same because of this accident. Two mothers are heartbroken. Two families are changed - forever. As our church gathered to pray for Nick and his family (and we did, just a few days after the accident), Tim's family and friends were in those prayers, too. They have remained in our prayers over the last seven weeks, as they will be for the coming months, seeking for them the same things Nick and his family need so much right now: strength, peace, grace and hope.

jlkddd

Mon, Sep 14, 2009 : 10:39 a.m.

You should look to what the victim would have done in this situation. If he was the man that everyone keeps saying he is I don't think he would want the 20 year old boy who accidently hit him to ruin his life forever. Personally if something like this happened with one of my family members I would look at all of the facts and (which I don't know in this case) and if it truly was an accident consider community service to teach others about proper driving skills, not jail time. I also would request that none of this stay on this young mans personal record. I don't know anything about this young man, but he could have a very promising future ahead of him that will be wiped out entirely with a record like this. Remember, two wrongs do not make it right.

BikeProf

Sun, Sep 13, 2009 : 12:15 p.m.

Like many others commenting here I am dismayed but not surprised at the anger toward cyclists who are simply riding on the roads around Ann Arbor, within the law. I ride 150-200 miles a week and experience road rage several times a week, like everyone else who chooses to ride a bicycle around here. I was hit by a car a few years ago; the driver was at fault; the driver received only a ticket for failure to yield (and presumably an increase in his insurance premium); I had to go to the hospital and my bike was totaled. Yesterday I was out for a ride with two other cyclists and we moved into the middle of the right hand lane to turn left. There were no cars immediately behind us but there were a couple of cars a ways back. This is the safest way to turn left on a relatively busy road, and the car behind had plenty of time to see us. We were all three using hand signals. As we were just about to turn, a man driving an SUV accelerated and passed us in the left lane, while yelling at us and gesturing angrily. He wasnt looking ahead, where there was a rise in the road, and he could easily have hit an oncoming car. He could have hit us, except that we heard him coming because of the loud roar as he redlined his engine, so we all three thankfully didnt make the turn. He could easily have hit a car turning right from the road we were about to turn left onto. All this because our completely legal and safe actions would have made him hit his brakes and waste about 5, maybe even 10, seconds of his day. As others have mentioned, its been educational reading all of the comments on these multiple stories about the most recent tragedy on our roads, because of the clear statements from a subset of motorists that they will not drive courteously and do not think that they should be at fault, legally or ethically, even if they run over and kill a cyclist. But if you do maim or kill a cyclist, by negligence or deliberately, you should at least hope that the family cant connect you to your blog postings when they file a civil suit against you.

CycloChemist

Sun, Sep 13, 2009 : 10:40 a.m.

I am a bicylist and I share in the grief of Tim's death. There are plenty of points brought up in this forum worthy of debate, however, I'd like to suggest another way to use your energy. Let's work together to not let this tragedy be repeated! Like Mom says, "keep your eyes on the road," but you can also do more than that. Write to your state legislators to support a number of bicycle safety bills pending in our state legislature. "Give Michigan Road Cyclists a Brake" Senate bills 529, 530; House bills 4958, 4959, 4960 These bills would increase the penalties for killing or injuring a bicylist to 15 years/$7500 - same as if a motor vehicle driver hits a farm worker on a tractor or a highway worker. "Driver training bicycle safety component" Senate Bill 531; House bill 4960 Require bicycle law as a component of driver education. Knowledge of the law would aid in clearing up the fuddled minds of commenters like "Briggs." What a doofus! Driver Cell Phone/Txting Ban House bills 4362, 4369, and 4394 These bills call for "secondary action" like the way seatbelt laws were introduced. It's a start. We got used to the belts; in time we'll be able to get the unneeded additional distraction of cell phone/txting out of the driver's seat. Please write to Pam Byrnes especially if she's your state house rep. She's the chair of the state house transportation committee and very influential. And... GET ACTIVE! GET INVOLVED! E-mailing your legislators is way more effective than getting involved in silly debates with doofuses like "Briggs" who don't know the law, don't have a clue. Let's improve our state laws. Work together to make Maple and other roads safer for bicylists (better signage, lower speed limits, rumble strips on fog lines). I also agree with the comment posted previously that we still don't know the gritty details of this case. Court testimony will, maybe, reveal the details. Finally, my first response to hearing about this tragedy was "What could I, as a cyclist, do to keep this from happening to me?" I'm a staunch supporter of bicyclists rights to the road; its an unalienable right. But from what I know of this case right now I'd say that Tim might have been safer if he could have chosen a different time to be on Maple - SEMCOG and our county road commission provide access to traffic count data that should factor into our route planning. I always ride with a helmet, not so much to protect my head in the event of a high speed crash, but because the helmet is visible and place to put color, lights, reflective tape, etc. My yellow helmet contributes to my conspicuity (is that a word?), as does a cheap safety vest in blaze orange or yellow-green. How about attatching a flag on a fiberglass pole to your bike? Finally, I think the charge of negligence based on looking down for a few seconds is pretty weak. Drivers not only need to keep eyes on the road, but need to provide "due care" to more vulnerable road users. This perp should have slowed down as if he were approaching an emergency vehicle. Surely he must have seen Tim well before coming close enough to strike him. The info I've learned here suggest the DA is allowing the perp to cop a plea bargain. My hope is that the sentence will be to do community service by speaking to driver ed classes, high schools, etc. about his experience and life as a person who killed another person. Maybe he can get just one other person to put down that cell phone and pay attention. I hope Tim's family has hired a good lawyer and will go after civil damages in a tort; it will take time, but the perp's insurer has deep pockets and Tim's children and wife deserve some financial restitution.

Mom

Sun, Sep 13, 2009 : 9:52 a.m.

The question remains, did this young man irresponsibly have both tires over the fog line??? It would be the same as driving on the sidewalk or anywhere else that a car shouldn't be. If this is so at the very least, his driving career should be over.

heavy heart

Sat, Sep 12, 2009 : 10:06 p.m.

To both families I am deeply saddened by the effects of this accident. I did not know the victim or his family but as a mother and wife I can imagine the pain you're feeling and the emptiness you now face in your daily lives. I'm sure the driver and his family are also feeling a sense of loss and extreme pain for this accident. Yes - it was a tragic accident but having this young man dragged through the mud is unproductive. As I'm sure the victim was a good person, so is the driver. He is a straight arrow, a christian, a great role model for youngpeople everywhere. Unfortunately he was in the wrong place at the wrong time, just as the victim was. May we put our petty differences aside and pray for the healing of both families and wisdom for those involved in the legal proceedings of this case.

Mom

Sat, Sep 12, 2009 : 2:31 p.m.

"A pillar of the community." That is indeed a complement. That description of Tim had never occured to me I but he guess he was. We were always proud of him. He was the kind of guy that was bigger than life. He always lived life to the fullest. He had a boisterous all encompasing laugh. We always knew that whatever he chose to do in life, he would be good at it. His dad and I thought the world of him. He was our first child. He grew up to be a hard working man. He studied and worked for everything he got from life. He was a very honorable man. He took the high road and gave people the benefit of a doubt. He loved people. He loved his family. He also gave of himself generously. He had a generous heart. Tim was a "good son." (That statement doesn't even do justice to what he really was to us. Thank you all for your condolences and generous thoughts. We take great comfort in them. I does help to express our feelings and our whole family is in a state of shock. We do want an outcome that is fair and just. We don't want Tim and this tragic accident to be forgotten. Thank you Sally for your testimony. We are sorry you endured this horrible tragedy. Remember all of you, KEEP YOUR EYES ON THE ROAD and be safe.

Sally

Sat, Sep 12, 2009 : 9:44 a.m.

Engineer. I can't tell whether you're admiring my eyesight or questioning it. Yes, it all happened very, very quickly. I was traveling at 50 mph and I believe the drivers in the other lane were also traveling at about 50 mph. Add it up; we were approaching each other at 100 mph. There was just enough time for my mind to register the off-center position of the van, behind the slower-traveling bike...what was about to happen...and for my jaw to drop. Then the van hit Tim's bike just outide my driver's side window. Van vs. bike made for a quiet crash. I never even heard the squeal of brakes. It was perfectly horrifying.

Peregrine

Fri, Sep 11, 2009 : 11:25 p.m.

The idea that it's the bicyclist's fault is absolutely ludicrous. He had every right to be there and be safe while he was there. It's not just about looking down for a moment. You should be looking ahead. If you're approaching a bicyclist you should start paying extra attention. If you pass you should provide him/her with a wide berth. If it's unsafe to pass when you would naturally overtake the rider, then you slow down to the rider's speed, without tailgating, and wait for your opportunity to pass. This is all pretty simple and obvious. Anyone who does not do so is negligent. BTW, driving with a cell phone, whether it's hands-free or handheld, is dangerous. Here is a fact sheet by the National Safety Council. Here's one fact: Drivers who use cell phones are four times more likely to be in a crash while using a cell phone. Mom, I am so sorry for your loss.

KJMClark

Fri, Sep 11, 2009 : 11:01 p.m.

"I repeat, KEEP YOUR EYES ON THE ROAD." And that message, spread as far and wide as we can manage, would be the only and best possible good to come from all of this. I do sympathize with people who think it would be a waste to put this young man behind bars, and I also want enough justice to have it not happen again. I really hope this turns into one of those stories we occasionally read about, where justice is done, a young man's life is not ruined, and the young man both talks to his peers and tells his story so that we learn, and goes on to live a good life that honors the life that was taken.

Engineer

Fri, Sep 11, 2009 : 10:48 p.m.

Salley, How fast were you driving? How fast was the van traveling? At 45 MPH in opposite directions this creates a 90 MPH difference and means that in 5 seconds you had created 500 feet of difference in relative position. You must have very good eyesight.

Sally

Fri, Sep 11, 2009 : 6:38 p.m.

Mrs. Pincikowski -- Mom -- please know that I DID contact the police to tell them what I saw and heard both before and during the collision. I also provided them with graphics that demonstrated the position of my car (first car in the opposite lane), Tim, the van, and the cars that followed the van. In fact, it was the odd positioning of the van verus the line of cars following it that first made me take notice during those last 4 or 5 seconds before the crash. May God bless you and your family, keep Tim alive in your memories, and ease the pain in your heart.

Mom

Fri, Sep 11, 2009 : 4:08 p.m.

Tim wasn't wearing a helmet. The accident that caused his death was so horrendous that a helmet wouldn't have helped him. When he was riding,the weather was clear unlike the picture shown in the paper the road was wide. It rained later. Someone wrote, what if your son was driving? Anyone of us....it was just plain carelessness. I don't care if everyone takes their eyes off of the road, I pray it doesn't cost them like it did us. I repeat, KEEP YOUR EYES ON THE ROAD.

jlkddd

Fri, Sep 11, 2009 : 1:58 p.m.

I would like to send my prayers to the family that has lost there son, father, husband, brother etc. However I can find myself constantly thinking that this could have happened to me or to any one of you. You could have been driving down maple road one day/night and just looked down to check you speed, the time, the radio station, the song that was playing anything, and don't lie, we ALL do it. No one ever stares straight at the road the entire time that they are driving. I don't know all the details to the story but from what it sounds this 20 year old boy did nothing wrong, nothing that any of us don't do on a regular basis. It is my understanding that the speed limit on that road where the person was killed is 55. In my opinon if someone is going to be riding their bike on a road that cars are whizzing by them at 55 mph they should a. be wearing a helmet b. be much farther over then on the white line, as someone in an earlier article notied that the shoulder is quite large there, or c. ride on another road that is not so busy, or that the speed limit is slower. I feel awful for this person, but I feel awful for the driver of the vehicle as well. He will have this on her permanent record for ever, not to mention living with yourself after everyone is telling you that you "murdered" someone.

thinking

Fri, Sep 11, 2009 : 1:32 p.m.

I am all for free speech, Joseph. Freedom of expression, freedom from restraint, spontaneity of thought, the capacity to share unpopular opinions - I get it. My comments aren't grounded in my innocence of the blogosphere. Just my distaste for meanness and ignorance. I love that this forum has educated, informed, and sparked debate. We've had fantastic conversations regarding safety on the road and increased awareness for bicyclists. I appreciated knowing about the bike ride in Tim's memory and I would never have known about it were it not for the information shared in this forum. And I would never have had the chance to hear from members of Tim's family nor could they reach out to us were it not for this forum. And its with them and this kid and his family in mind that I express my concern. The chance to be snarky and anonymous is one thing. Doing it in the midst of these families' worst nightmare is cruel - as a family grieves for a man who won't be coming home, and a young man wrestles with a burden he will carry the rest of his life. You keep championing your right to be base, Joseph. I'll continue to want better things.

Sonya O.

Fri, Sep 11, 2009 : 1 p.m.

I am at a loss for words. I am not here to judge anyone. This whole situation is nothing but tragic. I sit here and see my sister mourn and my 4 year old darling little niece cry for her daddy at night. The loss to our family has been absolutely devastating. Lisa is heartbroken to see that this young man will have to live with this for the rest of his life. Tim was a one in a million guy! We (the family) are all terribly broken about all of this.

thinking

Fri, Sep 11, 2009 : 12:17 p.m.

Mom, I just read your post. I am so sorry for your loss and I can't begin to understand your pain. For the sake of your own peace and that of your family, please check in with the prosecutors office for evidence and eyewitness reports and the facts of case. Please don't formulate your opinion on what you are reading here. Annarbor.com may think this is a great public service being performed here, offering people the chance to comment on the concerns of our community. But in reality, anybody can say anything here and it remains both anonymous and unverified. Seek the truth, Mom, but guard your heart...

Mom

Fri, Sep 11, 2009 : 12:08 p.m.

Two wheels over the fog line. If this is what is true, it is a criminal act.

Mom

Fri, Sep 11, 2009 : 12:02 p.m.

Sally, if you were an eye witness, I hope you have told what you know to the police or whoever will listen. If you haven't, please come forward. Thank you. Ruth Pincikowski

thinking

Fri, Sep 11, 2009 : 12:02 p.m.

Wow... I'm stunned. We are acting like Romans at the Coliseum, watching the lions tear someone apart and cheering as they do it. Angry opinion as sport. Ugly. All the speculation, all the conjecture, all the anger. With no access to the evidence, with conflicting eye witness reports, with nothing more than a few news reports and our own biases and angry opinions, we are ready to throw a kid in jail for 15 years. Tim left behind an 18 year old son. What if that young man had been behind the wheel? Think Tim would have supported his kid in the days that followed? Absolutely. Think he would have hired the best attorney to represent him? Yes. Because it was an accident. But, mostly, because he loved him. Everyone wants justice - until they need mercy.

Mom

Fri, Sep 11, 2009 : 11:56 a.m.

This really makes me sick! Our family didn't want to ruin this young man's life as he has ruined ours. We were for driver education, loss of his license and public service. We are for justice and if this driver had two wheels over the fog line at any time, it is a criminal act. I have now changed my mind. Prosecute him to the fullest. This should apply to a person in any walk in life at any age, previous infractions or not. This has become a criminal act.

Sally

Fri, Sep 11, 2009 : 10:19 a.m.

I was an eyewitness to the last 4 or 5 seconds of Tim's life. During that entire time, the van was two wheels over the fog line and apparently going to hit him. Then it did. The driver must have looked away for the entire 4 or 5 seconds. Maybe more. Try driving 50 mph, as he was, and count out 4 seconds or 5. 1-one thousand, 2-one thousand, and so on. Notice how much ground you cover in that time. Enough time to correct your course, right down to that final second. I have at times resented bicyclists in traffic--but only when they are not following the same laws I am subject to. For example, when they breeze through a red light or Stop sign. What if I hit the bicyclist? I fear being prosecuted for vehicular manslaughter or worse--without regard for the negligence of the bicyclist. But when we're all following the same rules, my mistake is my mistake and I accept responsibility. Tim did nothing wrong, but died. I don't really understand the reason for all this bickering.

mareka

Fri, Sep 11, 2009 : 10:17 a.m.

I ride the bike at the gym almost every night. Great cardio workout. No worries. No stress.

Barb

Fri, Sep 11, 2009 : 8:52 a.m.

Briggs, you're not getting it. The prosecutor, as KJMClark has already stated, isn't even quoted here. The info from the public safety official is from their perspective which is not always consistent with how a prosecutor views the case. We're not privy to all the facts of the case here so armchair quaterbacking here is kind of silly. And Debling, your statement of, "A charge of manslaughter seems more appropriate since it carries up to 15 years in prison." implies that the sentence is how prosecutors decide what charge is appropriate. It's not. They decide based on what evidence they have. And you can be sure that they have more than "he just looked down for a second" because that's not enough to prosecute anyone on.

nonyo

Fri, Sep 11, 2009 : 8:38 a.m.

Here's a view from another cyclist: http://forums.roadbikereview.com/showpost.php?p=2368851&postcount=1 Well said, and worth the read.

nonyo

Fri, Sep 11, 2009 : 8:37 a.m.

From eyewitness accounts the driver had been driving over the fog line for more than just a moment. From evidence at the scene, the driver had at least 8 seconds where the cyclist would have been clearly visible. To all you irate drivers who feel cyclists are in your way, I would ask why your time is more valuable than mine? Why can't you wait until it's safe to pass, just as you would do with a tractor on the road, or a slow moving vehicle? It's also interesting to note, from an historical point of view, that the roads were first paved to accommodate bicycles, not cars. The cars vs. bicycles feud seems fairly typical of the greater discourse taking place on the political scene. Cognitive dissonance seems to be an overwhelming factor.

dave.fanslow

Fri, Sep 11, 2009 : 8:29 a.m.

Ron, I'm not a hazard to anyone with my 160lbs hurtling along at 20mph. However as we see in case after case aggressive driving and inattentive driving are the real hazards. Like most other cyclist I drive my car a lot as well and I rarely encounter a cyclist that causes a problem for me to deal with as a driver. Unless you count giving a fellow citizen the courtesy of passing safely a problem, which for a skilled driver shouldnt be a problem. Would anyone shove aside the old lady in front of us in line at the grocery store because she's delaying you? Then why would anyone endanger, with a deadly weapon no less, a cyclist perceived as causing a delay? Bizarre.

Hemenway

Fri, Sep 11, 2009 : 8:12 a.m.

Tim was cycling lawfully on a public road and lost his life for the pleasure of afternoon exercise. At a high level this debate bottom lines as a use conflict between motorized and non-motorized vehicles. The government designs in the use conflict between bikes and motorists by providing no accommodation for non motorized vehicles on public roads and then forcing each to use the same road way. Naturally cyclists lose the debate as we are the minority and travel slower. If roads had bike lanes, they don't, I would be pleased to use them, instead I cycle where I can (3k miles per year) understanding the danger I am exposed to. I follow the law, use hand signals, and get road raged regardless. The price of being a cyclist.

Phillip Farber

Fri, Sep 11, 2009 : 8:09 a.m.

@Ron Bikes are not going to be banned from roads without bike lanes so I suggest you deal with that and operate safely and with patience when you drive. Not that a painted stripe on the road would have helped Tim P.

Ron

Fri, Sep 11, 2009 : 7:56 a.m.

This is another reason for bikes to stay off the roads. If the road has a bike lane then it's another story. Bikes clog up the roads and are a hazard on the road. It's too bad someone had to die to bring out the necessary change for banning bikes on the roadway without a bike lane.

KJMClark

Fri, Sep 11, 2009 : 7:30 a.m.

So Briggs, if this driver had crossed the center line and killed a motorcyclist out for a casual drive, or a motorist also out driving for fun, what would you say? BTW, you wrote "looking away for a "moment"--as the prosecutor has, himself, summed up his evidence." From the story, it looks like it was the local public safety director that said that, not the prosecutor. Do you know the prosecutor has no other evidence?

Briggs

Thu, Sep 10, 2009 : 10:40 p.m.

Barb-yes that the driver looked away for a momen ti sthe basis of the charge, as summed up by the prosecutor. If you did not read the story before making comments, you may wish to start with paragraphs 6 and 7: Pittsfield Township Public Safety Director Matt Harshberger said Wahl looked down for a moment just before his van struck Pincikowski's bicycle. Harshberger said Pincikowski was riding along the white line on the roadway or just to the right of it when he was hit. "(Wahl) took his eyes off the road for a second," Harshberger said. "It's a tragic situation on both sides."

debling

Thu, Sep 10, 2009 : 10:38 p.m.

I am pleased that this driver had been finally charged the killing of Tim. However, I am disappointed that the DA has only charged him with negligent homicide, since under Michigan law this is a misdemeanor and carries only a 2 year prison term and $2000 fine. The price of a good flat screen TV. A charge of manslaughter seems more appropriate since it carries up to 15 years in prison. Regardless of whether the driver is a "nice kid", is remorseful or will carry guilt forever, he killed an innocent man by his own negligence and must atone for what he did. I feel sad for the driver, knowing that he has radically changed his life forever, however, he must stand up and take responsibility for his actions and pay the price for them. What price should be paid for taking 40 years of life off a good man in the peak of his career, leaving a son and daughter without and father and wife without a husband? 15 years seems a small price to pay and 2 years is a travesty. The punishment must reflect the harm the driver did and be serious enough to deter others to repeat the same mistake.

cooperwe

Thu, Sep 10, 2009 : 10:36 p.m.

I can't understand the anger, and frankly hatred, that flows so freely from people who treat the bicyclist as a criminal and freeloader. Arguments like a cyclist doesn't pay taxes and has no right to use the roads, which is patently false, cyclists own homes and cars and work and spend money. Using this logic, apartment renters should not have access to schools for their children; emergency services; or parks, etc.; because they don't pay property taxes. It is the law that cyclists are permitted to ride on the road and are expected to obey traffic laws. They have a right use the road, and as a motorist, whether you agree or not, you must give them the same consideration as any other traffic on the road. It takes very little time out of your day to safely pass a cyclist, most motorists safely pass slower cars always making sure that they leave plenty of room when passing. Why? Because if you hit that slower car, you risk hurting yourself as well; you'll damage your car; risk a ticket; risk an increase in your insurance payments. The point is the risk is much greater, so you naturally pay more attention. But with a cyclist, who between the bike and the rider maybe weighs 200 pounds, versus an auto weighing well over 3000 pounds the attitude is that somehow the cyclist is at fault for getting in the way. I just don't understand the anger that many motorists have at cyclists. Where does it come from? If there is that much hatred, you should NOT be allowed behind the wheel of a car. You are not fit to drive a car. Frankly, I was surprised at the charge and the charge fit the crime. Punishment is used as a deterrent in some cases and as a message to others that if you commit a similar crime you may also face punishment. That is what this incident amounted to a crime. If you are not in control of your automobile and you strike another vehicle then you should be charged, no exceptions. According to the police report the road was dry, visibility was not an issue, the cyclist was following the rules and the driver had NO defense. I have no doubt this driver did not intend to kill that day which is why he is charged with homicide and not murder. I don't care how bad he feels or if it affects his quality of life. What about the life he took that day, at least the driver still has his? What about the wife who doesn't get to see her husband walk through that door at the end of the day? What about the children who don't get to share their dreams with their father?

Briggs

Thu, Sep 10, 2009 : 10:34 p.m.

Philip Farber should look to himself in search of a curious bias. I am not connected with any of the parties, and this is the first time I have heard about it. But I am stunned by what purports to be a civilised community will charge a young person for looking away for a "moment"--as the prosecutor has, himself, summed up his evidence. This country was founded by those who could reaqdily imagine themselves on the other side of the table, and this is why we have any constitutional rights; today empathy is extinct. If the United States had to begin again today, we would have few rights indeed (and indeed, the Supreme Court and the Congress and the past few presidents we've had have been working overtime to diminish these rights in every way they can). This discussion doesn't involve any costitutional rights, but it does show how far this country has gone in the wrong direction, when it seems almost no-one can empathize with the powerless, but instead are suspicious, when one questions the powerful. It is my lack of bias that stands out here. It is Philip Farber's successful indoctrination into they system that has become as ordinary as the wallpaper. This kind of thinking--or more properly, lack of it--that is the end of America. Not in our lifetimes probably, but America is done, over with when the public jumps on the government's bandwagon to condemn a man for looking down "momentarily." The goal of such progress in the United States is the criminalisation of the entire population. If this is a legitimate charge, then literally everyone is a potenial criminal. Good luck in that world. You helped create it and you can only hope to live to enjoy it.

Phillip Farber

Thu, Sep 10, 2009 : 9:55 p.m.

I find a curious bias on the part of the commenters here to the effect that cyclists don't have any business riding in traffic and if one dies in a crash it's their own fault. Let's suppose Mr. Pincikowski were struct while walking by the side of the road (no sidewalks out there). Would comments like @Briggs be forthcoming? If not, why not?

Sling Blade

Thu, Sep 10, 2009 : 9:50 p.m.

Negligent homicide? Why blame the driver of the vehicle? Maple road is a dangerous place to ride a bicycle. At the time of the accident on July 28, 2008 at 5pm thunderstorms and heavy rain were in the area of the "accident". With modern technology we have access to a plethora of real time weather data. Why not check the weather before you go for a bike ride in traffic? Riding a bicycle for fun is great but use common sense and ride in a safe area for YOU. Why ride on a proven busy road and dangerous time of day. This was a joy ride not a means of transportation due to economic hardship or a student going to athletic practice or a summer job. Use your common sense people.

Barb

Thu, Sep 10, 2009 : 9:02 p.m.

Briggs, "that he looked down for a moment is the basis of the charge,"? Really? You know this? Unless you're prosecuting the case, I think you might be better served by waiting and seeing how the evidence is presented if this goes to trial (I'll bet it doesn't).

mrs_samuelson

Thu, Sep 10, 2009 : 9:01 p.m.

Oh MY. This story just keeps getting more tragic as I read all of the comments here. I am one of the eyewitnesses to this accident. I saw it all....and I spoke to the man who was driving the vehicle. I was there.....do you all understand what it would feel like if you were behind the wheel and looked away for a moment? This poor young man was terrified...and yes I do believe he is responsible and it was his fault. I think we all need to let him pay his dues and keep our criticism to ourselves. If it was your son who did this, would you be hurling insults at him? Briggs- I understand your frustration with the "ruining of a young life" by prosecuting this young man, but we must understand that the law is the law, and I don't think (maybe in error) that people who decided to prosecute him said to themselves "well, his life isn't that valuable, let's ruin it and make him an example." I guess I don't see the evil in people like that. Also...it is rediculous to call a bicyclist "reckless" by riding on a street. I would NEVER do it (especially after what i have been through) but they have a right to ride, and we as motorists have to take the responsibility to protect our fellow citizens as we share the road with them. I am scared to death every time I see a bicyclist on the road, probably because I witnessed this tragic accident-and maybe that will encourage me and others to keep our eyes on the road at all times....

Briggs

Thu, Sep 10, 2009 : 8:31 p.m.

Julie, Your jaw dropping is an appropriate response. But it should be dropping at the fact that a prosecutor wants to ruin a young life for something that could happen to anyone. Take your eyes off the road for a "moment" and if that moment happens to coincide with the presence of somone who voluntarily put his life at extreme hazard by interacting with multi-ton, highly powered vehicles, with no protection (a bicycle hemet is no protection), then you, who took no such risks nor consented to have others taking such risks ("risk" is not the appropriate term, anyone who takes a bicycle into motor vehicle traffic is hazarding his life, with little possible upside, so it is not a risk but recklessness). The bicyclist was in or on the white line marking the lane of traffic, allowing any passing car little room for error. Life is full of errors. Why trust complete strangers not to make an error when your life is at stake? I have no doubt, just like the 93-yr-old lady in the parking lot, that if the 45-yr-old corporate manager, husband, father, and homeowner had accidently killed a 20-yr-old bicyclist, it would be chalked up as an unfortunate accident and left at that.

Julie

Thu, Sep 10, 2009 : 8:01 p.m.

My jaw is dropping. Briggs, are you serious??? So what then, just oops, sorry, didn't mean it? When you are driving a car, you have a responsibility not to KILL anyone. This means hands on the steering wheel, limited distractions, focus on DRIVING. If a driver hits a pedestrian or bicyclist because he's not paying enough attention -- it's his fault!

Briggs

Thu, Sep 10, 2009 : 7:43 p.m.

This young man is being charged because the prosecutor has determined that he and his future are less valuable than the life of the accidentally (this is what negligence means) killed bicyclist. If the roles had been reversed, would the prosecutor decide to charge the 45-yr-old pilar of the community for accidentally taking the life of an indistinguished 20-yr-old? Why should the 20-yr-old driver be held strictly liable (that he looked down for a moment is the basis of the charge--that amounts to strict liability), and the 45-yr-old, who voluntarily went into automobile traffic without the benefit of an automobile? The charge is BS, and it is politicaly motivated.

Lisa Bashert

Thu, Sep 10, 2009 : 7:07 p.m.

I agree that if any place that does not have a designated bike lane should have been safe, it should have been Maple Road with its wide shoulders, straight aspect, long lines of sight, and unobstructed view. As a regular biker, I am shook up by this incident. When I drive a car, I am constantly reminding myself to LOOK FOR BIKERS -- it's so easy to overlook them, especially at this time of year, with earlier twilight and so many more students biking the roads. Please be careful when driving a car. Please don't use your cell phone while driving. I spend a lot of time while peddling looking in my rear view mirror, trying to anticipate the moves of the drivers behind me. And PLEASE wear a helmet when biking!

Mom

Thu, Sep 10, 2009 : 6:10 p.m.

Mensche, schlemiel, my, my we are easily distracted from the point. These are two different cases. Don't address them in the same paragraph. The elderly lady shouldn't have been driving. The young man was careless. Two different things entirely. The point is, if we have distractions in our cars, first look at the road carefully then do what has to be done and or, pull over. We may save ourselves, our passengers or some stranger walking, driving or riding a bike. KEEP YOUR EYES ON THE ROAD!!!

ShawnS

Thu, Sep 10, 2009 : 6:01 p.m.

My condolences to the family. I've biked and driven that stretch of road many times and I agree with the others who thought it seemed relatively safe for bikes--long site lines, fairly wide shoulders (well, considering some roads barely have any shoulder). It's hard for me to believe a quick glance down would result in this. My daughter and I wondered aloud the very same thing: was texting or a cell phone involved? I suppose that would have come out. It's just tragic all around. I just cannot feature how this could happen on that road, it's scary.

Henry Ruger

Thu, Sep 10, 2009 : 5:39 p.m.

A mensch is just the opposite of a schlemiel.

goblue32

Thu, Sep 10, 2009 : 4:29 p.m.

A very tragic story that could have been easily avoided. I would like to commend Edward Vielmetti of annarbor.com for responding to Patrick, yet he ignores the inappropriate word in his comment. The Ann Arbor News failed for poor quality, and the same will happen to annarbor.com.

ffej440

Thu, Sep 10, 2009 : 4:12 p.m.

This is trajic in every way A)Should bikes be ridden on 45mph busy roads with no bike lane? B)Should a young man be subject to our prison/rape system for a this and how will it help society? No Winners here..All Losers.

Barb

Thu, Sep 10, 2009 : 3:27 p.m.

I guess I don't see how "mensch" could be misunderstood as offensive. It's a commonly used Yiddish word that many people understand.

Barb

Thu, Sep 10, 2009 : 3:22 p.m.

I don't disagree with anything you're saying Joseph. However, if this was an unwinnable case for any reason, I don't see the point in prosecuting her to the cost of taxpayers. For what? To make a point to other 93 yo drivers? She's already surrendered her license and is no longer a threat. Not disagreeing with your point that looking into the facts of the case could be telling but this doesn't seem like it has much of a positive ending in any way.

Barb

Thu, Sep 10, 2009 : 3:07 p.m.

Joseph, not sure if you're serious or not but "mensch" is also Yiddish and means "a person of integrity and honor."

thinking

Thu, Sep 10, 2009 : 3:07 p.m.

Let's assume nothing. I'm sad about Tim's death, too, but "took his eyes off the road for a second" could mean any number of normal things involved in operating a car on the road. It's not just negligence or recklessness. We look away to check the speed. Turn down the air conditioning. Or turn up the radio to learn more about the storm that was rolling in at the time of the accident. It could be anything. And we don't know... because we weren't there.

mareka

Thu, Sep 10, 2009 : 3:06 p.m.

Washtenaw County Circuit Court case CRW-09-0001582 FH. Negligent Homicide. Michigan Statute 750.324 Preliminary exam in October. You may choose to watch this case in the courtroom and learn firsthand about our working justice system. You may be sitting at the defense table in your lifetime. Also, you will have current and correct information about this case then as well.

Barb

Thu, Sep 10, 2009 : 2:54 p.m.

I'm guessing they have more than just him looking down for a moment - that doesn't seem like enough to go after a conviction on. I'll bet that if there's a trial (unless there's plea deal), there will be more evidence than that. Joseph, I don't doubt that the FOIA reports will be telling but I'm just betting that the prosecutor didn't see that he could win this case. Imagine this woman in front of a jury.

dave.fanslow

Thu, Sep 10, 2009 : 2:52 p.m.

When driving I fully accept that if my inattentiveness causes the death of another person, as the operator of dangerous machinery, I am responsible. Yes it could happen to any of us, but a casual attitude toward driving that allows for eating, smoking, phoning, texting, putting on make-up, etc. while operating dangerous machinery makes this type of death a lot more likely. Those of us who choose to transport ourselves by bike or foot are without 2 tons of steel, 6 airbags, and 5-star crash ratings, which perhaps leads those in motor vehicles to feel more secure and casual about driving than they should. 2 years/$2000 is a small price to pay for killing somebody because you were more concerned with a radio or a phone or whatever, than with your responsibility to society.

11GOBLUE11

Thu, Sep 10, 2009 : 2:47 p.m.

Barb - understood. What I read about the incident involving the 93 year old woman seemed to indicate she hit the accelerator thinking it was the break.

Barb

Thu, Sep 10, 2009 : 2:39 p.m.

Right, mom. I believe the 93 yo driver's story is that her car was malfunctioning (brake wasn't working or something). Which they can find no proof of, btw.

Mom

Thu, Sep 10, 2009 : 2:36 p.m.

This young man did't plan to kill anyone. He did however admit to negligence.

11GOBLUE11

Thu, Sep 10, 2009 : 2:32 p.m.

Barb - What do you see in this case (involving Mr. Pincikowski) that involves prosecutable negligence on the part of the driver? I am trying to understand the difference. Thx

Barb

Thu, Sep 10, 2009 : 2:31 p.m.

Sorry - not "prosecutorial negligence". I should say proof of negligence that can be prosecuted.

mareka

Thu, Sep 10, 2009 : 2:28 p.m.

I doubt this man got into his car with the intent or with a plan to kill a bicyclist with his vehicle. And I doubt that while driving down Maple Road at that moment, he decided to kill a bicyclist with his vehicle. No doubt some people will need counseling and therapy to deal with their rage and resentment over this tragedy. Maybe watching the case unfold in the courtroom will help them heal in some way.

Barb

Thu, Sep 10, 2009 : 2:24 p.m.

Joseph - what evidence of negligence is there from what you've seen in the case of the woman at Meijer's? Although tragic and preventable, I'm just not seeing actual prosecutorial negligence on the part of the driver.

beulahmi

Thu, Sep 10, 2009 : 2:03 p.m.

Nicholas-Know that my Prayers are with you. Your life is changed forever with ONE simple mistake. Goblue-the lady at Meijer did not set out to hurt anyone as Nick. Patrick-could not put it any better. Joe Simon is a good lawyer- GOD speed to everyone involved

Mom

Thu, Sep 10, 2009 : 1:56 p.m.

The death of our son in such a tragic and careless act as a driver tuning a radio must bring attention to our driving habits. Whether it is a (bikers carelesness or a drivers careless act), the DRIVER of a CAR has a safety advantage simply because of the weight of his vehicle. HE MUST assume total responsibility for others. Otherwise it is a "we don't care about the other guy" attitude. Let us learn to "KEEP OUR EYES ON THE ROAD!" We only hope that this young driver will turn our tragedy into his goal, making people of all ages aware how precious life is and to value the "other guys" safety.

beulahmi

Thu, Sep 10, 2009 : 1:52 p.m.

Nicholas-Know that my prayers are with you. ONE mistake and your life is changed forever. Go Blue-I agree the lady at Meijer, did not set out to hurt anyone as Nick didn't. DanielF- Joe Simon is a good lawyer-- May the Lord be with you all.

Barb

Thu, Sep 10, 2009 : 1:50 p.m.

No vehicular homicide does not require intent.

Barb

Thu, Sep 10, 2009 : 1:49 p.m.

And we should be aware that we probably don't have all the facts of either case.

11GOBLUE11

Thu, Sep 10, 2009 : 1:47 p.m.

DanielF - I suspect 'vehicular homicide' requires intent to kill...whereas 'negligent homicide' does not require intent. Sad stuff.

brianew

Thu, Sep 10, 2009 : 1:45 p.m.

I do not know the particulars of the Meijer case but what I can tell you is that Equal protection does not mean equal enforcement. Equal protection is for a citizens right to protection from government action. The government has the ability to not act if it chooses. This is based on a decision by the U.S. Supreme Court in the DeShaney v. Winnebago County Department of Social Services case in 1989.

Barb

Thu, Sep 10, 2009 : 1:44 p.m.

Not true - it has to do with the facts of the case and what the prosecutor thinks they can prove. The facts with the 93 yo woman indicate it would be hard to prove negligence. Not so much with this case where the driver admits taking his eyes of the road, as a start - and there's probably even more to it than that. As for why it's not vehicular homicide, they'd have to prove he was driving while committing an unlawful act. They must not feel they have that evidence.

brownfields

Thu, Sep 10, 2009 : 1:41 p.m.

The charge was negligent homicide, not "murder". There is a huge difference between the two. One question to all out there, Do you ever look down or away for just a second? I suggest everyone be careful, because everyone does one time or another. Yes, a simple mistake may just turn into a criminal charge for you too.

salineguy

Thu, Sep 10, 2009 : 1:36 p.m.

Very interesting question you raise GoBlue. Really no difference as far as blindness of justice, so to speak. Tragic all the way around.

DanielF

Thu, Sep 10, 2009 : 1:35 p.m.

11GoBlue_ I agree with you about how unfair it seems that the 93 yr old woman got off scott free after killing one person, and injuring another. Must seem very unfair to this driver who killed Tim. As far as the death of Tim P. is concerned, I am a bit miffed to see that the driver is charged with only a minor negligent homicide charge. Why didnt they charge him with 2nd degree Vehicular Homicide? Given that he has hired Mr Simon to represent him, I am sure that he will get off with only a slap on his wrist.

11GOBLUE11

Thu, Sep 10, 2009 : 1:29 p.m.

This involved a very sad loss. I'm curious about others' opinions on one aspect -- I don't recognize any difference, other than the age of the driver, between this case and the one where the lady backed into and killed a pedestrian in a Meijer parking lot. This seems disturbing in light of 'equal protection under law' principles.