It would be of service to the bicycling and driving community if the staff of the Almanac would spend the time and money ($10 bucks ?) to get the CHP report and write a complete update on this tragic accident. Another clarification statement could be added above, as the Almanac's June Editorial column falsely that stated the driver "hit the cyclist from behind". This could now also be corrected by stating the hard evidence that negates that assumption. Why is the paper so relaxed about filing a complete and updated article with facts now present?

Because misinformation is remaining as fact, this paper does a disservice to it's community and fails to educate cyclists on the evidence (hard evidence) that eliminates driver error in the cause of this accident and could serve as a source of good preventative information.

Instead, the paper runs a half-researched story that once again makes cyclists infailable, "older" car drivers irresponsible and negligent and leaves enough "grey areas" of information that nobody will learn the hard and valuable lessons from this tragic accident.

I guess that sells more papers.

The Almanac requested a copy of the CHP report on the accidental death of Rodney Smith but was told that such reports are not public information, a claim that has been been verified to be true by a reliable second source.

The facts in the story reflect CHP responses to the Almanac's questions, some of which the CHP chose not to answer.