Man falls off truck and is struck by passing car

| 15/08/2011

(CNS): A man is in serious but not life threatening condition after he fell off the back of an open truck on Linford Pierson Highway close to Randyke Gardens, and was then struck by a car yesterday evening. Police say it appears that the 22-year-old man had been sitting on the back of the open truck when the driver hadpulled into the side of the road to allow an ambulance to pass. As the truck then moved back into the carriageway, he fell from the back of the vehicle, rolled across the road and was struck by a vehicle travelling in the opposite direction. The victim sustained serious injuries and was conveyed to the Cayman Islands Hospital.A 911 call about the incident was made about 7:40pm Sunday, 14 August. 

Police enquiries into the incident are on-going.

Anyone with information about the incident should call the RCIPS Traffic Management Unit on 9466254.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Category: Local News

Comments (39)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. AnonymousSick and Tired of the B...S... says:

    Drivers of trucks may want to check whether someone who falls off the back of their truck can sue them personally for medical expenses/loss of earnings. They have committed an offense which apparently voids their Third Party insurance cover, but must still have some responsibility/liability for the accident. Good thing we do not have “Ambulance Chasing” attorneys as they have in the US.

    • Anonymous says:

      And what of the tailgating driver that was not situationally aware and failed to appreciate or anticipate the additional danger and increased liklihood that they might run into that guy if he were to fall off?  The rider fell, and they provided insufficient manouevering buffer for that possibility.  Just as you should never tailgate a cyclist – people can and do wipe out occasionally – all drivers should put down their phones and be fully engaged in the task of driving!    

      CNS:You may be right about tailgaiting in general but the article clearly states that in this incident the victim rolled across the road and was struck by a vehicle travelling in the opposite direction.

  2. Anonymous says:

    How long did the ambulance take to get to him?

    • Anonymous says:

      They are appealing for witnessess??? There were witnesses and they tried to tell the police officer what had happened, either it couldn't speak english or just didn't want to be bothered.  People went up to the officer to tell them they WITNESSED THE WHOLE THING and in the usually RCIPS way totally blew them off.  And you wonder why no one comes forward to anything….

  3. Anonymous says:

    people in backs of trucks, no seatbelts, who cares? not the police. i see both things every single minute of the day if i look around me, its a joke. police too tired to pull people over for what they see as silly little things. what chance do we have when the police dont care? oh what happened to tint on cars? the not bothering with that either it seems as so many cars driving around with virtually blacked out windows, again … police not doing what they are paid to do i guess.

    • Anonymous says:

      You could also say the same about those who flaunt the law by refusing to properly display their front licence plate. Now there is easy revenue for the Govt.

      • Anonymous says:

        And tint on windows, loud music…the list is endless….these are all illegal…but again as usual laws are made but CANNOT BE ENFORCED..Case closed

  4. Anonymous says:

    I see people (sometimes kids) riding in the backs of trucks all the time.  This, and young children not protected in child seats in the back of cars is a sign of plain igorance.  It's amazing how, due to sheer laziness, some parents will place their children at risk of death.

    • Anonymous says:

      I was horrified to see the same – about 6 kids of varying ages – the youngest must have been about 4 years old was being held by another child…all lose in the back of a truck.  Some people seem to care little for the safety of their children…..shocking.

      • Anonymous says:

        Many kids in Cayman grow up in an environment of neglect where little time or value is invested or applied to them.  In the big picture the lack of caring is a causal contributor to our crime cycle.    

  5. Anonymous says:

    Riding in the back of pick-ups is dangerous (our dear friends lost their 17 y.o. son riding in the back of a p/u truck after he was thrown out while the driver was doing "fun" donuts in a muddy car park!)  Also very dangerous was the jeep parade of Cayman beauty contestants last Saturday. Beautiful young women were standing tall in the back section the jeep well above roll bar with nothing strapping them in. They were cruising down Crewe Road at around 30 mph. With their center of gravity so high, a small impact or even a bump in the road could have hurled any one of the young women headlong into pavement or oncoming traffic with disastrous results. I think this type of motorcade could be made much safer with some kind of restraints around their waists. Please everyone, stay safe and do not take unnecessary chances!

  6. Tufty says:

    Those riding in the back and those driving the cars should be stopped and have their vehilce confiscated for 6 months.  In addiiton to this there should be serious punishments.

    • Village vicar says:

      In the past two days I have seen two trucks pulling boats on the road with persons including kids in the boats. I am not sure if this is illegal but it did not look safe to me when I was following behind.

    • Anonymous says:

      wont happen

  7. Knot S Smart says:

    This is sad. I bet that young man wont sit on the open back of a truck again.

    And I hope he knows who the driver was because the driver should be charged for this!

    • Anonymous says:

      this is the same reason why some insurance doesnt cover trucks! XXXX

      • Anonymous says:

        The problem is not that "some insurance doesn't cover trucks". The problem is that any passenger sitting in the back, and not in the cab of the truck, is not covered under the driver's or owner's Third Party Liability insurance, passenger liability section. The rider does so completely at his own risk, and should there be an accident caused by the driver and causing him injury, he has no recourse against the driver's insurance.

      • Anonymous says:

        I believe no insurance company covers you for anyone sitting in the bed of a truck. Most of them specify that you are only insured for the number of people specified on the insurance cover note which is normally the number of proper seats and, I believe, seatbelts. I have also been told that the vehicle has NO insurance atall if the number of passengers exceeds the number of people specified on the cover note. This would mean that if someone was sued, they could lose a lot more than their vehicle, not to mention the passenger, who could lose their life!

        • Anonymous says:

          This is one the arguments put forward in 2007 for an RCIPS crack down on carrying passengers in the back of pick ups.

          If you operate a vehicle in a manner that breaches the manufacturer's specifications your insurance is void and, in almost ever case I can think of, carrying passengers in the back does just that.

          In theory it should be a simple matter to enforce, in practice no one wants to do it.

          What you see on the roads is insanity. I've seen families with small chidren riding in the back of trucks and people standing up holding onto things like wardrobes in the back of trucks.

  8. Mike Hawk says:

    In regards to the "sorry to be blunt" comment:

    I personally know this young man and he is an intelligent, polite young caymanian. For you to refer to him as stupid because his swim trunks were wet and he was considerate enough to sit in the rear of the vehicle as to not soak the interior of his friend car; you sir are just as stupid as you may refer to someone else. He could have been killed yet u can sit and call him stupid;; you're heartless. Granted, this could have been avoided by sitting in the bed of the truck.. But the fact of the matter is that it happened and were glad he's alive. If you dont have anything encouraging to say the please just keep your comments to yourself… Noone cares about your negativity.

    • Seriously??? says:

      OK, I see the point from both sides, and appreciate the other comments about the risk of injury or death.  But I have two questions –

      One, would he have had the same consideration for the drivers' seat getting wet if he was 100 miles from home in the USA and had to drive freeways the whole way?  Or would he have gotten a towel then?  Seems he thinks it is OK to do it here in Cayman but would never dream of it in the rest of the world…

      Secondly, what right does he have to make the decision that has left the driver of the vehicle that hit him after he fell out traumatized and scarred for life?  Answer – NONE.  He may be a great guy, but his actions were short sighted, selfish and have caused a lot of pain to a others – not overly intellegent or thoughtful, in other words…

    • Anonymous says:

      I am sure everyone would prefer to have a wet seat then to risk the life of their passenger…..he may have been trying to be considerate but it was still a poor choice.

  9. Anonymous says:

    The other thing that concerns me is the fact that our school children rides on the bus and I am sure there is no seat belts on the bus. Sounds really safe to me 

    • Anonymous says:

      Not to mention that the big yellow buses we now have down here are mostly illegal in the States now because of head injuries occuring then the kids hit the back of the seats in them. Doesn't look safe either when you see the buses overtaking cars going the speed limit on South Sound Road when leaving the schools.

  10. Anonymous says:

    There has always been a baffling inequity in the RCIPS' ticketing policies.  Isn't it strange that not having your seatbelt fastened will land you in court for a whole morning, yet hundreds of human labourers are allowed to pack into the beds of pickups and bounce around on the freeway with seeming impunity?  It is tragic that this behavior is allowed to continue to the point where someone may have been killed or could be permanently injured.  The RCIPS should start the investigation within their own organization and look no further than their own ticketing policies going back 20-30 years.   

    • Anonymous says:

      Back in 2007 when Courtney Myles was head of traffic there was an RCIPS/Streetskill initiative along exactly these lines to clarify the law so that this stupidity would be stopped but political 'speed bumps' got in the way, putting the proverbial brakes on it.

      Since then we have had two Acting Commissioners who did nothing and a CoP whose priorities are somewhere else so the whole thing got buried.

      What does it take? Do you need to wait for a pick up to roll over and several children to be killed before you all wake up and do something.

      20 years ago it was reported that, "The risk of death among pickup truck passengers who were fully ejected from the vehicle was nearly six times that of passengers not fully ejected. Correspondingly, the risk of ejection from the truck was 26.7 times greater among occupants riding in the bed than occupants riding in the cab." Based on that, if you ride in the back of a pick up you are something over 150 times more likely to die in an accident than if you are strapped into one of the passenger seats.

      • Anonymous says:

        I agree and would add that you don't always die. There are thousands of severely injured and paralysed survivors who have told the world that they'd wished they'd been killed.  Now the consequence of their transportation error is an all-consuming dark forever place for them and their families.  All this misery is avoidable.  

    • B.B.L. Brown says:

      Personally, I've always felt that seat belt laws, helmet laws, and the like are an infringement on personal freedom of choice.  If someone wants to take a chance with his own personal well-being, it should not be the government's business, unless it puts others at risk.  Just my opinion…………. I don't recommend driving without your seatbelt,

      • Anonymous says:

        What happens when you exit your vehicle and hit someone else and kill them?


        "Infringment on personal freedom". You sir, are an idiot!

        There's no justification for driving/riding a bike without a seatbelt/helmet. Doing so is infringing on other peoples safety!!!

      • Anonymous says:

        So…….. if you infringe on a childs personal freedom of choice to not sit in a car seat because they don't want to, is this wrong in your opinion? Do you know that you can be charged if one of your passengers is not wearing a seat belt in your car?

  11. Jack N Meoph says:

    Sorry to be blunt – but if you are stupid enough to ride in an open backed vehicle, contrary to the law, then you suffer the consequences.  This is EVOLUTION at work!!!  But the driver should also be prosecuted for allowing it – they were operating the vehicle illegally by allowing someone to sit in the back.


  12. Anonymous says:

    that is so sad


  13. Anonymous says:

    Long overdue for the RCIPS to clamp down on drivers carrying passengers in the back of any kind of open truck.

    • Anonymous says:

      i don't think they can…there is a loophole in the law that allows people to ride in the back of trucks…..

      blame the useless lawmakers(politicians) before the police!

      • Anonymous says:

        For gods sake, stop blaming the politicians for everything, it is ILLEGAL to ride in the back of a truck and you are not insured!

      • Anonymous says:

        there are soooooo many loopholes in so many laws, Cayman looks like a big, pretty christmas bow.