That is why we use fog light in this condition and drive at lesser speeds... No matter how much you do to defend the woman this stinks more on the case of poor investigation or lack of evidence to prove guilty than to say she have done everything reasonable to avoid an accident.

How can you sue the municipality for poor conditions of the road and drive above limit on even poorer conditions (low light, rain, possible fog, etc)??? To me this says she was confident enough on the street to drive that fast.

odd wording, was she 90kph over the 80kph limit? This whole thing is pretty horrible tho, suing aside those familys will never be the same now after this, family would probably never be able to leave their other kids own a bike or car themselves for years knowing what happened to their son on the road.

not all cars have fog lights, and if a car is coming towards you, you shouldnt be using your highbeams.   People are very sensitive to light contrast, its one of the reasons cars have day-time running lights.  and studies have shown that a normal reaction time (from seeing the object to applying corrective measures) is about 1.5 seconds. (http://www.visualexpert.com/Resources/pedestrian.html).   at the speed limit, in that time she would have travelled 33 meters or 108 feet.  and thats all before she even applies the break and if she even saw them.  there are reasons we have reflector laws.

im also going to add i dont think shes going to win her case, not only is proving damages exceptionally hard and that number extremely high for cases in canada, holding the parents liable for the actions will be a major battle. i just dont think people should be so hard on her, especially since she is being sued for a million

You are supposed to slow down at night on unlit roads, and especially when weather conditions further reduce visibility. A fog light is no excuse to keep driving at the speed limit at night, and she admitted to going over the limit.
It's weird no thorough investigation was done, you would expect that to be standard in case of death or serious injury.

1 million is the standard liability clause in car insurance in Canada, she should take it up with her insurance company.

there was a thurough investigation.  their is a 26 page report on its findings somewhere but im still looking for it. the province and post mention it

A collision reconstruction team from the South Simcoe Police Service investigated the crash; their 26-page report found that the “lack of visibility” of the cyclists “was the largest contributing factor,” and that on a dark overcast night, “the driver of the Kia did not see the cyclists on the roadway and was unable to make an evasive reaction.”

Ah, I got the impression from the thread that corners were cut, like an alcohol test.

Anyway as long as "lack of visibility" as the largest contributing factor is regarded as an excuse for responsibility, we'll never get the death rate down. Car accident fatalities have been going down over time, mainly due to cracking down on drunk driving, yet it's still about 2000 a year in Canada. Maybe instead of stating to slow down at night on unlit roads, there should be dual speed limits on the signs to make it clear. 80 from 1 hour after dawn to 1 hour before dusk, 60 otherwise and in rain/icy/fog conditions. Apparently common sense is not enough.

Cracking down on cyclists that don't carry night at light should also be a priority. Ofcourse the best solution is to have separate bicycle paths, yet in the town I live in they can't even afford to provide proper side walks.

The largest factor? Very strange to say because if she was going below the speed limit as she should have been doing while it was raining and at night then she would have had a higher chance of seeing them and reacting.

I got a maceral coloured cat... it always sleeps on one of my stairs, it is the same colour as the carpet, if I walk down the stairs it's np to see it and stand over it or nudge him to the side, if the lights are off in our stair well and I go running down the stairs and trip over him... is him being hard to see 100% to blame for me standing on him and falling down the stairs?

from the sound of things they did a road side test that blew zero.   and i would assume they would check her phone records to see if it was used around that time.   they also investigated the kids as their was a house party nearby but they werent there according to one article.

i think all bikes should have one of those little light generators to power a small front and rear light.  make it mandatory on all bikes sold.  the little tiny as reflector things most come with a garbage.

Seriously, lady?

The bicycle dynamo, I hated those things as a kid. Such fragile tech that requires a lot of maintenance (wires, mis alignment from bumps) Too dim when you go slow or in rain (little wheel slips on wet tires), burns out the lightbulb if you go too fast. I'm sure there are much better ones nowadays, but as you noted with the flimsy tiny reflectors, it will be the cheap crap that comes with bikes.

A clip on LED flasher that automatically turns on at night works much better.
http://gearjunkie.com/rear-red-blinking-lights-for-bicycle

Most bicycles are recreational mountain bikes without splash guards even, making it mandatory for all bikes sold is not going to fly. Awareness programs in schools would be a good idea (maybe they exist already).