Thankfully the rider appears to not be seriously injured. However as a cyclist myself I will point out that this is not an isolated example. Riding in Millburn and its vicinities is a dangerous occupation mostly because of the careless and/or impatient approach taken by many drivers. It is rare to complete a ride without having to take evasive maneuvers to protect yourself from bad driving. On other occasions drivers hurl abuse at riders. My wife has been knocked down and left lying in the road by a motorist who sped away. To those of you that may recognize your behavior in the description above: WHAT IS SO IMPORTANT ABOUT YOUR SCHEDULE THAT YOU ARE PREPARED TO PUT OTHER PEOPLES LIVES AT RISK JUST TO GET TO THAT NEXT TRAFFIC LIGHT A FEW SECONDS EARLIER????

ah well i am not surprised that this happened as drivers go down Millburn Ave. at 50 -60 miles an hour ! mostly because Millburn Ave. isn't two way ...used to be many years ago and is two way at either end of town but we have a traffic philosphy to rush traffic thru downtown isnstead of follwoiing the examples of most NJ downtowns of having two way streets and SLOW traffic...we now have rte. 78, 24, 280 which did not exist in the past when the current traffic pattern was developed.... we need to rethink and make changes now... hello is the traffic dept. listening ?

No matter who caused the accident, what kind of low-life takes off after hitting a human being with their car??? Plus, I happen to know John Cain, and he is an upstanding citizen, man, son, husband, and soon-to-be father. He is *not* a crazy cyclist. I hope they track down the person who hit him.

What about all the bike riders that ride against the traffic and ride in between cars or wherever they feel like going?

I think I'll make a left turn and randomly cut in front of your car just because I feel like it.

Sorry someones bike got broken but I have had a close call with a bike rider that was 1000% not my fault.

Mr. Cannizzo, HELLO, you were on the Township Committee??

There is no such thing as the “Traffic Department”, the road is owned by the County of Essex. So, Millburn Township Committee would have to request the Board of Choose Freeholders that Millburn Avenue be returned to two ways (which is a real bad idea on so many levels).

In addition, where the accident occurred is two way and if you think cars are going 50-60 miles per hour, you don't know what you are talking about.

How about we find out what happened before we shoot off our mouth??

There is also nothing unlawful for the media to publish pictures of the accident. Only if a first responder sent it in. Get over it, this is what the media does.

As a cyclist myself (and no, I don't ride against traffic, and I always have my helmet and blinking lights on), my biggest car fears are SUV drivers (because they often don't realize how wide they are), cell phone drivers (do I really need to say why?) and BMW drivers (who tend to be jerks in the first place). I almost had a BMW sideswipe me last week by Overlook Hospital because the shmuck was in a race to get someplace.

Millburn Avenue was changed to two ways in the mid 1950's because the road was not setup for such a volume of two way traffic and there were many head-on collisions that are far more dangerous than today. Cars on sidewalks, into buildings, real bad idea...

Bottom line no matter who is/was at fault: if you hit someone and then flee the scene, you're in the wrong.

Does it strike anyone that the nasty tone of some of the comments on this article closely mirror the attitude of many drivers and riders in our community? The combination of too many who drive with a sense of entitlement and self-righteous riders is bound to combust. I am only surprised it has not happened more frequently, and share everyone's relief that this rider----whether he shared fault for the collision or not----appears to be OK. Now if only we could catch the driver......

Thank you, Dee! My sentiments exactly!

I walk three miles to work and have noticed that drivers are not as aware of pedestrians as they were 30 years ago probably due to the face there are less pedestrians now and may drivers are not even familiar with being a pedestrian as they always ride everywhere. I would assume the same for bike riders. The biker happens to be an EMT that I volunteer with and I know he is quite familiar with bike accidents and rides cautiously.

Thank you Dean for your comments. I myself was surprised at the at the insensitive tone of these posts. A good man could have died today because of this accident. If we all would just drive, ride and walk with an attitude of respect to those around us, we would have less accidents. I am so thankful that the bike rider is OK!

I cycle frequently, and although in this case the driver of the car was at fault for not signaling (if that was indeed the case), the rider is mostly to blame. It is the job of the cyclist, pedestrian, scooter operator etc. to be aware of the traffic when crossing an intersection. The driver is not required to stop and check who is coming along on the shoulder before making a right hand turn. Instead of confronting the driver, which could have resulted in a much worse outcome, the cyclist should have checked his arrogance at the door and continued on his way, thankful that he wasn't run over. Cyclists have to be aware of cars just as much as cars have to be aware of bicycles.

you don't tell the guy you just hit " I have the right of way" and then take off

John Cain doesn't have an arrogant bone in his body, therefore he has no arrogance to "check at the door". I have seen my share of crazy and arrogant cyclists, and I assure you, John isn't one of them. Again, no matter with whom the fault of the accident lies, any driver who strikes a human (or his/her bicycle) with his/her car should "check *their* arrogance at the door and remain at the scene until the authorities arrive.

Wow, a lot of you folks just don't get it! Fist of all, leaving the scene of an accident is a crime, period. Second, the idea that the operator of an automobile is not responsible for what is around them, as some have suggested, is simply absurd. Try telling that to a judge if you hit a pedestrian in a crosswalk when you are turning (regardless of whether you have signaled).
Here it is plain and simple... when you are operating a 2 ton vehicle, you are responsible for controlling that vehicle, and being aware of what is around you.
If you hit someone, you have to stop, plain and simple (I am actually shocked that I should have to say that, but it seems some people still don't get it).
Some folks twist and turn to try to justify doing the wrong thing, but it doesn't take much effort to just do the right thing, which in this case would have been stopping and waiting for the police, regardless of fault. The fact that he sped off makes him instantly guilty of a crime.

Also, some have the suggested that the SUV had the right of way, which is not necessarily true. If the SUV were "overtaking" the cyclist, the SUV would not be able to then cut in front of the cyclist to make a turn across his path. Again, regardless of the cyclist's behavior, there is no justification for leaving the scene of an accident... doing the right thing is not contingent on the behavior of others.

Hedley, this from the pamphlet that State Of NJ publishes for bicycle safety:

"Ride Right
This means riding on the right side of the road or on the shoulder, with
traffic, not against it. The law says you must ride as far to the right as
practicable. This does not mean as far to the right as possible. Don’t
“hug the curb” where you may not be visible to motorists. You should
ride far enough out from the edge of the pavement to avoid broken up
pavement edges, debris, drainage grates and standing water. ...
New Jersey Bicycling Manual
-"
The point is the cyclist may not have been "coming up on the right", but may have been riding on the right shoulder, as is appropriate (and legal), when the SUV turned into his path. There is nothing in the description of the accident to suggest that the cyclist was doing anything "wrong" or illegal, and in fact seems to have been operating his bicycle in accordance with State recommended practices.
The assumption that cyclists are required to ride in an actual traffic lane is wrong (and dangerous), this is only true if the shoulder is too narrow, which was not the case in this instance.

To further clarify (also from State Of NJ):
"If the
outside lane plus shoulder (if available) is
too narrow for side-by-side sharing with motor
vehicles, move toward the middle of the lane
(i.e., “take the lane”) to indicate that motorized
traffic must change lanes to pass safely.
When approaching and at intersections,
determine your lane and position within the lane
by the direction you want to go. Position yourself
so your intentions are clear. If there is only one
lane for travel in your direction, approach the
intersection in the part of that lane that
corresponds to the direction you are going.
When you have a choice of lanes
to use, ride in the right-most lane that goes in the
direction you want to go."

So clearly the recommendation is for "side-by-side sharing", meaning the bicycle should ride in the shoulder lane, unless the shoulder lane is too narrow to safely ride.

Well, yes, but the fact that the SUV struck the bicycle would suggest, pending further information, that it was the SUV that did not take proper precaution approaching the intersection to insure that the intersection was clear.
And while I certainly understand the possibility that the driver of the SUV was unaware of the presence of the bicycle, that, to me, only further suggests that the driver of the SUV was not paying enough attention to his surroundings.
I find that far too many people take a sense of entitlement and aggressiveness into their vehicles, when awareness and caution would be much more appropriate companions.
And I agree that many feel that a directional is optional... pretty frustrating.

Bottomline: SUV driver drove away from the scene of an accident - he didn't even wait to see if the guy was okay! Thank goodness someone saw the license plate.

Exactly right, Lindsay.

Actually, there is no legal obligation to use a turning signal. As an impartial observer, it looks to me like the bicyclist was at fault. This is why he was hit in the front tire rather than the rear tire. Clearly the motorist could not see him. As for stopping, once determining no injury, the motorist did not have to stop. Bicyclists do not carry insurance and unless the motorist incurred damage, they had no obligation to remain on the scene.

Wow, "impartial observer", then you had better notify New Jersey to update their Motor Vehicle Statutes, because they clearly state:

"39:4-126. Failure to Use Directional Signal

39:4-126. Signaling before starting, turning or stopping
No person shall turn a vehicle at an intersection unless the vehicle is in proper position upon the roadway as required in section 39:4-123, or turn a vehicle to enter a private road or driveway or otherwise turn a vehicle from a direct course or move right or left upon a roadway, or start or back a vehicle unless and until such movement can be made with safety. No person shall so turn any vehicle without giving an appropriate signal in the manner hereinafter provided in the event any other traffic may be affected by such movement."

When you state "clearly the motorist could not see him", was that because the bicyclist magically appeared? The vehicle must have overtaken the cyclist at some point, and therefore should have been aware of it's general location.
And as to the lack of injury, that is not for the driver to determine. Damage was caused due to impact with the vehicle, therefore an accident had occurred, and it was the driver's responsibility to stop and await the arrival of police. But that's OK, as I'm sure the summons he will receive, as well as the probable date in court will make that all very clear.

And further, from the same statute, lest there be any confusion:

"A signal of intention to turn right or left when required shall be given continuously during not less than the last 100 feet traveled by the vehicle before turning.

No person shall stop or suddenly decrease the speed of a vehicle without first giving an appropriate signal in the manner provided herein to the driver of any vehicle immediately to the rear."

Wow. To all of you tasking issue with my post, I was simply stating what should be the obvious. Do none of you feel that some responsibility lies with the cyclist when approaching an intersection? Who is more likely to be injured in the case of an accident...the cyclist or the driver? Also, if I'm making a right hand turn legally, with signaling, am I at fault if someone/something runs out in front of me and I hit it? What difference does it make just because it was someone on a bike that darted in front of me? How about using some common sense before you knock what someone else says...that other person might possibly be right.

"taking issue", obviously

Hey GarageRock, we disagree, simple as that. you stated your opinion, which I disagree with, the courts will surely decide one way or the other. The idea that the cyclist should ride away, "thankful that he wasn't run over." is what bugs people most (at least it did me). A far more powerful vehicle, with the ability to kill a pedestrian (or cyclist), should bear a larger burden of responsibility on the roads, in my opinion. You are free to disagree, of course. Most of my posts have referred to incorrect statements about the traffic laws in NJ. And to answer your question in the extreme, does your signalling to make a turn absolve you of any guilt for running over, say, a child in a stroller? Would you sleep better at night knowing that you had signaled? The idea that you have signaled and therefore are in the right seems particularly arrogant to me, particularly given what is at risk. Again, we just disagree, you are entitled to your opinion, as I am to mine.

Again, my point wasn't that the cyclist "should ride away thankful etc..", but that confronting the motorist in a hostile way was wrong, and just plain stupid. You never know who you're dealing with, and to attack another person verbally just makes you more vulnerable to being attacked yourself. As for "a child in a stroller" darting out in front of you, I doubt that would happen, but if it did it would be the person pushing the stroller's fault. Bottom line is, who would enter an intersection without checking to see if a car was coming? Both parties are responsible...that's my point.

Did bicyclist run into car or car into bicyclist?
The bicyclist said he jumped from bike after being hit and landed on curb/sidewalk to his right.
If the bicyclist had forward momentum he would have landed diagonally forward to the right possibly hitting car.
It appears the bicyclist had little if none forward momentum therefore he must have been close to no speed to the right of the cars front window or front fender. Anyone disagree.

How about don't confront the person at all, hostile or otherwise...is that better, Robert Dunne?! Let the police handle it. Also, since when is it legal to pass a car on the right, or on the shoulder?

GarageRock, as I posted earlier, it is not only legal for a bicycle to ride to the right of a vehicle on the shoulder, it is in fact recommended by the State of NJ in their bicycle safety manual.

Wow So not John's fault. I hope none of you get hit by a car and have to defend yourself against ridiculous criticism.

Something seems to happen to some people when they get behind the wheel of an SUV; the physical power & size of the vehicle seem to bring out the latent brutishness & barbarism lurking in their nature. Why don't we require SUV drivers to submit to a more rigorous DMV training & testing, say to the same level as a CDL license. Demanding more from drivers of these behemoths might make them think twice about approaching an intersection with too much speed & too little precaution.

Further, the SUV driver in this case behaved reprehensibly & should be severely punished: jail time; financial penalties; loss of license; hours & hours of community service, viz., sweeping Millburn's gutters & cleaning out public toilets; & mandatory attendance at various rehab programs & driver re-education classes. The combination of the driver's brutality with his cowardliness is so repellent, it offends so thoroughly every notion of human goodness or kindness. It is anti-kind.

How about regardless what the "law" states, just use some common sense! How much good is it going to do you when you're dying in the hospital because, technically, you were "in the right"?! When the law is counter to basic intelligence and common sense, then the law needs to be changed. I bike all the time nearly year round, and I never just assume the driver sees me. I value my health more than that. As I stated repeatedly, the driver in is case was clearly wrong and shouldn't have acted the way he did, but that doesn't absolve the cyclist from taking responsibility for his own safety. When you approach an intersection, you make sure it's safe to proceed...period. That goes for all vehicles and pedestrians. Never assume the other person is paying attention to you, because that could be a fatal mistake.

O.K.
SO I bike to work everyday rain, sun, snow, freezing rain. And I can say first hand that it is a 50/50 blame game. There are cyclists who put them selves at risk and there are drivers who put everyone at risk. Everyone throwing around who's to blame about this event is ridiculous. I narrowly missed getting hit yesterday by someone who "right hooked" (sped up passed me and immediately turned right in front of me. The driver stopped halfway around the corner inches from pinning me to a telephone pole. When I got off my bike and said to him you almost killed me his response was "not now pal I'm on the phone"
I can honestly say that everyday someone either throws their door open directly in front of me, or pulls out of a intersection in my path or generally puts my life in immediate danger. I lived 6 years in NYC, one in L.A, one in Seattle, 3 in Toronto, and one in Chicago. Not to mention 3 in the Caribbean but NJ is by far the worst area for bikers to mix with motor vehicles. There is no respect what so ever.
Slow down, give me an extra foot if you can, I want to make it home to see my kids too. I don't care who's fault it was I hope Mr.Cain is o.k and the jerk that left the scene of an accident is held accountable, cyclist or not.

UnFreakingbelievable

YOU Hit something, YOU Are Wrong. Then to STOP and ARGUE with the Person you hit and then SPLIT

Burn the MOTHER DOWN

Trevor Heather is right about NJ being the worst area for barbaric drivers. NJ just keeps getting thuggier & thuggier every day. Enlightened activities such as bicycling are threatening to these brutes, which may be why they seem to go out of their way to target bike riders ... maybe not enough to kill the cyclists, just enough to wreck the bike, & to rough up the bike riders. Maybe we need more of those closed circuit cameras at intersections & along roads to catch these thugs in action.

GarageRock, if you had been in John Cain's shoes that day, I sincerely doubt you (or anyone, for that matter) would have refrained from confronting the driver (hostile or otherwise).

I can appreciate your awareness and restraint, GarageRock. I'm curious though... why do you consider John Cain's words to the SUV-driver an act of irresponsibility? The SUV-driver spoke to John too. By this logic, wouldn't the SUV-driver's comments (and ultimate departure from the scene) be considered acts of irresponsibility too? I'm sure you've never struck a bicyclist with your car, but if you ever did, I'm certain you would remain at the scene until the police arrived, wouldn't you? Possibly even check to make sure the rider (guilty or not) was okay?

cycle commuter here- my 1st feeling is relief that Mr Cain survived the SUV encounter, it sounds like he's got serious cat-like agility!!! a problem with cycling on NJ roads are drivers just not understanding how the speed of a bike relates to the speed of their car. this is the classic "right hook" where a driver, once past a moving cyclist, will make their right turn assuming the cycle is now as far behind them as a stationary object would be. That's pretty much a universal human problem only compounded by "jersey drivers"... solutions anyone? PS, can we talk about those crazy cyclists when the event relates to one?

Of course I would. The only difference is that I would not mouth off to anyone, because you never know who you're dealing with. Trust me, I understand the entire situation, and this whole conversation has gotten out of hand because some people just have to have the last word, I guess. If I hit someone with my car, regardless of the situation, I would call the police myself and stay there until help arrived, as I'm sure most non-lunatics would do. My only point since the beginning, was that the cyclist shares responsibility for being hit, regardless of what the law says, and that they should bite their lip until the police arrive, rather than risk getting hurt even more. Being "in the right" or having "the law on your side" isn't going to matter much to you if your skull is crushed, or if the moron that hit you decides to shoot you. I'm done with this story...it's gotten ridiculous.

I agree with you, GarageRock... your points are well-made and well-intentioned. The only reason I care so much is because John Cain is my brother-in-law, and his wife (my sister) is 7 months pregnant with their son. John was riding his bike to work that day (as opposed to driving) because my sister had an ultrasound appointment, and needed the car. I was just being a protective (read: meddling) older sister. Peace.

let's go political!!! If the cyclist was legitimately hit, he would have ways of shutting the whole getting run over thing down, I think...

PS- this comes from someone who's survived being driven into 4 times and a few to many close calls because I ride my bike way too much. I'm not trying to be funny, just pointing out the reality-less mentality some people have...

Sasquatch, completely hysterical!

Garage, you should have quit while you still seemed sane.

LOL!

Classic. After a long thread of exchanging opinions (most of which the Millburn police seem to agree with, given that they issued summonses to the driver of the SUV for careless driving, leaving the scene and failure to report an accident), this devolves into cursing and calling someone a liar... really classy... if you can't get someone to agree with you, just scream louder and call them names.

GarageRock:
Wrong assumptions: If you zoom in on the bike you will see normal pedals, no clips, Also asked John and said normal pedals and bike is far from pro.

Garage Rock must actually be the hit & run driver, what's his name? Marc Somebody. He's just way too rabid.