Update: a local news station picked up the story… as its top story of the night? Really?
But then, just when everything seems so perfect and all things are right with the wold tragedy struck. As a naked biker turned the corner he heard screams and cheers from the sidewalk, so he took 3 quick lefts and came back around again to see what was up…
“why are all these people on the sidewalk at midnight in Vancouver?” we are paraphrasing).
Turns out a gathering of teens going to a club were totally excited by a 40 yr old biker.
WHAT? DID YOU CATCH THAT?!? As if we needed more proof to the health benefits of cycling, you can still get encouragement from the most cutthroat of demographics even into your 4th decade, provided you live right and are traveling under your own power.
Cops, who were reported to be on the scene to deal with some sort of teenager drug overdose saw the naked biker, pulled him over and then, after the biker had stopped his bike, the cop decided to run into the cyclist… for good measure we assume.
Read the various stories at the Vancouver’s daily paper, the Columbian or on BikePortland.org
Defendant Matthew Vilhauer said naked biking fun way to socialize with other cyclists, but he also believes nudity draws exposure to the vulnerability that cyclists feel sharing the road with vehicles. He said he has been hit, so he feels strongly about promoting bicycle awareness.
This begs the question, did the cop actually see the naked biker? And chose to hit him? Was the cop incapable of operating his car safely? Possibly his emotions got the better of him… if so shouldn’t a sit down with the officer to make sure that latent homophobia is not present, cause no one wants a loose cannon on the streets.
The alleged “contact” between the officer’s patrol car and Vilhauer’s bike disappeared from public discourse months ago. There were rumors that someone in the crowd recorded the incident on a camera phone, but I have yet to see it.
As for vilhauer himself, he seems to fluctuate between claiming the incident was a First Amendment protected act or just a “silly” stunt.
Either way, the incident and its fallout tanked the idea of putting on an official WNBR in Vancouver this year. The idea was to have Vancouver’s WNBR at the end of Pedalplooza to compliment Portland’s ride.
The hung jury voted 5-to-1 to aquit, so 8#% of the jury agreed simple nudity is not indecent.
anonomous please state your name. i do. i own my words.
officer scott tillford knocked me over with his cruiser after i stopped in front of his patrol car. unfortunately there was no dash cam to record this. evidently dash cams have proven to be a statistical liability to law enforcement. go figure ehh?? after tilford said “that looks like an expensive bike” i watched an officer repeatedly slam the trunk on my bike that was shoved in his cruiser (directly in front of tillford’s cruiser that i was siting naked in). crushed the top tube on my rodriguez that i purchased new in 1990. forgive me if i say that’s fucked up. top tube crushed and the bike is toast. my recourse? shut my piehole and consider myself lucky…
fluctuating and considering myself lucky?? ummm… you have a pulse and can congugate a verb right? do i need to spell it out for you? my case is still… unresolved, a year later, facing my second jury trial… for a fucking misdemeaner. do you really need to buy a vowel to solve the puzzle?
if so many folks are worried in vanvouver about a wnbr why have i not heard anything about it? am i such a pariah? fuck you bitches. don’t bother thanking me for being the litmus test when it’s all said and done. phil has been a solid since day one. period.
sorry phil but i had to vent. bunch a bitches….
well the annony post does beg a lot of questions. Some of which were addressed, thank you matt. But not everything posed by annoy was mean spirited.
Can a silly stunt also be protected by 1st amendment? to which we ask, can a stilly stunt NOT be protected by the 1st amendment?
what we have seen in the jaded halls of the internerd is that people want to believe that the actual truth is somewhere between the 2 sides. We have been taught that with a long history of our 2 party system that the middle is safe and probably more fair. But what is frequently the case is that one side understands this behavior and makes the most outlandish claim possible and the other side is duped into believe that just being truthful is going to make the difference.
the same phenomena is happening with politics and with countless financial negotiations right now. the only difference in this case is that many of the people sharing their opinions dont really have any stake in the outcome and are just relying on the safety of the middle.
The middle is where you get squeezed, dont trust it outright.
Interesting Article. Hoping that you will continue posting an article having a useful information. Thanks a lot!
gizli çekim sikiş
obviously NOT Vancouver BC