[belltaco]

Looks like the Waymo vehicle was turning after an all-way stop sign?

Is this a good representation with the blue car being the Waymo and the truck being the red car?

https://taylorkinglaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/4-Way-S...

Wonder why it was cutting so close to the large truck's back while accelerating during the turn that it couldn't see the cyclist till it was too late.

Them saying the car braked only after the cyclist was fully visible is additional cause for concern. Those are precious fractions of seconds. Doesn't Waymo use LIDAR? Shouldn't it detect the partial cyclist as a solid obstruction and start braking before the object recognition kicked in and recognized it as a cyclist? What if it was a trailer?

[TaylorAlexander]

Yeah. Seems like good driving means "don't drive in to places you cannot see". If you are just accelerating after a stop sign, there is no reason to have such high speed and urgency when making the turn.

[lokar]

Well, it sounds like the cyclist was doing the same while failing to stop or yield at a stop sign.

[cozzyd]

Right there can also easily be pedestrians in the crosswalk who are also occluded, though I guess with a bit more stopping distance (but then you may be blocking a lane that would otherwise be able to go).

[Retric]

Are we sure the Waymo was turning instead of the cyclist?

The only description is Waymo entered an intersection after a complete stop. “The cyclist was occluded by the truck and quickly followed behind it, crossing into the Waymo vehicle’s path.”

[pavon]

Yeah the ways I can interpret that are

1) The cyclist entered from a cross street going straight as soon as the truck partially cleared the intersection.

2) The cyclist was following behind the truck and then turned in front of the Waymo.

3) The cyclist was following behind the truck and the Waymo turned into it.

To me "crossing into the Waymo vehicle's path" is a pretty weasel-worded way to say (3), but it is technically true.