HomeTraffic incidentsUPDATE: Cyclist fatally injured by pickup truck on NE 39th Avenue

UPDATE: Cyclist fatally injured by pickup truck on NE 39th Avenue

October 3, 2025

Staff report

Updated at 8 p.m. after notification that the cyclist succumbed to his injuries.

GAINESVILLE, Fla. – A male cyclist was fatally injured today when a pickup truck side-swiped him on NE 39th Avenue.

According to a Gainesville Police Department spokesman, at about 5:32 p.m. on October 3, the cyclist and the pickup truck were traveling westbound on NE 39th Avenue near NE 15th Street when the pickup truck side-swiped the bicycle. The cyclist sustained life-threatening injuries, including a head injury, and was trauma-alerted to a local hospital, where he succumbed to his injuries.

The driver of the pickup truck remained at the scene.

  • And this is why I will never ride with the flow of traffic. It’s an antiquated law that needs to be reconsidered. I’m encouraged at least that the driver remained on the scene.

    • We have no idea what happened in this crash. It’s very sad that someone was killed, and that someone else has to live with the memories and knowledge of what occurred. I hope relevant details about this crash are released so we can learn from what happened…
      Cyclists who ride seriously (who ride lots of miles) always ride with traffic, and they use a mirror on their bike handle bar, or on their helmet or eyeglasses. They have lights on their bikes, they always wear a helmet, and they usually wear high-visibility clothing.
      Riding a bike on the roads facing traffic is not safer than riding with the flow of traffic. A mirror helps cyclists have situational awareness, just as it does for vehicle drivers.
      It is distracting to drivers, who don’t expect to see a cyclist coming at them. It is like seeing another driver crossing the center line.
      I hope you stay on quiet neighborhood streets while you are riding your bike against traffic, and don’t ride that way on busy roads. Take care.

      • You’ve already tried to have this argument with me. I’ve already disputed all your arguments, so I’m not going to rehash. I’ve also told you that I don’t ride my bicycle in traffic at all, largely because of incidents like the above. Here’s one more death doing it your way. Show me a death doing it my way.

        • I’m pretty sure it is illegal to ride a bike against traffic if you’re on the road. You are supposed to obey all traffic laws and signs which you couldn’t even see from the wrong side, so it’s moot.

          I will disagree with Truth on a small detail. I use a handlebar – or helmet – mirror and highly recommend it, but in my experience most bicyclists don’t use one. I don’t know why as it’s common sense, except that the perfect easy to use one hasn’t been invented. They’re generally clumsy and ones that fit your handlebars vary by type and sizing, so not uiniversal.

          I see Clay below made my same 1st point and then some.

          • I know it is illegal. I will never follow that law. Mirrors that wiggle and bounce with each turn of the handlebars and head, and which are convex and distort perceived distance in favor of field-of-view are a poor means of judging the split-second timing necessary to avoid a distracted driver racing up behind them. They’re not like mirrors on a car, which also aren’t perfect. You have your signs; I have my brain.

          • Michael, here’s hoping you stay off the road, or given your disregard for laws and other riders, maybe stay on the porch.

          • Jazzman,
            I agree that not enough (bike) riders are using mirrors. I know that GCC encourages their use. I would never ride my bike on roads without one. I understand your frustration, having bought/tried many bike mirrors over the years.
            If you don’t mind a look that is possibly slightly dorky, there is an excellent option out there. There is a helmet mirror that is very easy to adjust, stays in place, doesn’t wiggle at all no matter how many bumps you ride over, is easy to remove (for photos) and quickly put back on, and doesn’t distort the image that you are seeing and is big enough to give you a very adequate view of what is behind you.
            You can get it from Amazon (“evt safe zone bicycle helmet mirror”) or from EVT, (a WA state company) directly.
            http://www.efficientvelo.com
            This is the best mirror. Essentially, it is the same as the driver’s side mirror on your vehicle.

          • Thanks Truth. The mirror I use now is helmet mounted but is not as good as that one. I’ll look into it.

        • I will agree with you that it is good that the driver remained on the scene. He/she is obviously a person of decent character. For awhile, there was a string of hit and runs, which says a lot about the moral condition of our culture. It is awful that this bike rider was killed. I hope there were witnesses who stayed at the scene too, and that GPD is able to discern the truth of what happened. The truth is what everyone will benefit from (except the person who was killed, of course 🙁 Either the cyclist or the driver made an error that caused this crash. This is a tragedy. It is also an opportunity to learn something. I hope the Alachua Chronicle will follow up on this.(It isn’t easy for us average citizens to get crash data/police reports….)

          • This is hard to believe, but under Florida statutes, Alachua Chronicle cannot get crash reports. Thanks to the legislature, crash reports are only available to outlets that qualify to run legal notices, which requires a print edition. It’s very frustrating, and our legislative delegation is uninterested in catching up with the industry, which is increasingly turning to digital publishing.

          • That’s really sad to learn, Jennifer. I knew that publishing legal notices was key to journalistic legitimacy, but I didn’t realize those notices were required to still be printed. The inability of bureaucracy to keep up with the times is one of several reasons I’m ambivalent about following a lot of laws. Thanks for the information.

          • I wouldn’t say legal notices are “key to journalistic legitimacy”; there is no relationship between journalistic integrity and the decision to take advantage of the revenue stream provided by publishing legal notices. Today, governments are allowed to publish them on websites, so only private businesses (mostly storage unit companies, lawyers, and DBA notices) are required to pay to run them in print newspapers.

          • Legitimacy, Jennifer, not integrity. Legitimacy comes from legitimate, which means “legal, according to the rules.” Because the current rules dictate that “crash reports are only available to outlets that qualify to run legal notices, which requires a print edition,” (i.e., legitimate outlets) and yours is an outlet that does not qualify, it stands to reason that your publication is not considered legitimate journalism under the law. We could argue whether the word journalism is appropriate to describe what you produce, but I think that’s a different story. Legitimacy doesn’t mean value, and I’m not saying what you produce has no value. I have taught two wound care physicians how to dress a Stage 4 decubitus ulcer, and I have demonstrated to a plastic surgeon with a Ph.D. how to successfully apply a V.A.C. dressing that she could not apply, but I am not a legitimate physician. Maybe you would prefer if I said legal notices are key to the legitimacy of news outlets.

          • Thank you for explaining that, Jennifer. I will see what I can do to find out what happened there. I may encounter the same obstacles, although I have gotten pretty involved in local road safety issues recently, and there may be some ways to access some basic info. It’s a shame that we only hear that “there was a crash with serious injury or a fatality,” yet rarely hear what caused it, and how to prevent something similar from happening again.
            I enjoy reading our “other local newspaper” online, but it’s kind of a waste for them to deliver MSDN to everyone’s driveway (whether they want it or not.) It is good for starting fires in my fire pit, but by the time it arrives on Tuesday, it’s old news.

      • “It’s very sad that someone was killed, and that someone else has to live with the memories and knowledge of what occurred.”
        Imagine if it was an unborn child and the police said you were not at fault but the insurance documents say you were.
        This article gives me chills because, I’ve lived a similar situation and seen it go the wrong way.
        Remember people there is what the police say and that is the criminal part.
        Next comes the insurance part, imagine his adjuster uses an erroneous medical examiners report to blame him, but tells him he is not at fault.
        He gets a lawyer who sends him to a doctor that says he doesn’t need any X-ray or mri even though he was tboned, and his head knocked the window out of the car.
        He parts ways with the lawyer after informing he about the doctor and he taking no action.
        He never bothered to get the medical examiners report, and thats why he dropped the ball, he thought it was a typical template case.
        Turns out the medical examiner got the info from a crash report that doesn’t match the one given to me.
        In that report it says I hit them. They still refuse to release it to me.
        The rest is slowly becoming a movie. Stay tuned.

    • When a cyclist rides against the traffic flow, they endanger themselves, other cyclists that are complying to the Uniform Traffic Code, and motorists. I have personally collided with wrong-way cyclists (they with me) because I look to the left, as does every other motorist, and not to the right, as I do not expect traffic from the right.

      • That’s a pitiful argument. I don’t expect people to run red lights, but before entering an intersection I wait, look both ways, and make sure nobody is doing anything foolish, because it’s about my being safe and not about expecting people to obey the law. I’m sorry you weren’t paying enough attention to avoid a collision; I’ve never had that problem.

        Or maybe for the crowd here I should put adherence to the law in gun-enthusiast terms. Do people here forego their rights to carry firearms to protect themselves because the law says they shouldn’t be assaulted? Do they go around just expecting everyone to obey the law?

        Natural law supersedes manmade law every time. All I’m saying about the manmade law for cyclists is it flies in the face of natural law when it comes to the effects of collisions between a few hundred pounds of cyclist versus a few thousand pounds of automobile. Case in point above.

        • I agree with your first paragraph.
          I don’t think that your following statements apply to riding a bike on the roads, which I am very glad that you do not do. (You are not likely to be able to avert a head-on collision with a vehicle going 45 MPH or more while you are pedaling toward them at maybe 10-15 MPH.) True, in this case, if the cyclist (or the driver) had been on the other side of the road, this death would not have happened. If the cyclist or driver had stopped for gas or a swig of gatorade, same thing… The cyclist wasn’t killed because he was riding with traffic (and not riding against traffic.) There aren’t many cyclist deaths that occur while riding against traffic because very, very few cyclists ride against traffic (except on sidewalks.) Your argument is pretty weak. the only people I see riding facing traffic are riding without helmets, lights and mirrors, and wearing dark clothing. I am sure the stats are out there, but the way they will be found is looking for fatalities that are determined to be the fault of the cyclist, for not following the law.
          I am not someone who blindly follows the law if it makes no sense/is wrong. I will challenge it, and currently am doing so… But in this case, I do not think it is the law that is wrong. Riding a bike on a road with traffic makes more sense and is the law.

          • I can see a car well into the distance if I’m facing it. That same car becomes a pinprick in a convex mirror until it’s practically on me. That’s why there are legally required warnings printed on passenger side view mirrors (“Objects are closer than they appear”). Thanks for confirming that you aren’t aware of any fatalities from doing things my way, your ruminations about why aside.

      • I absolutely agree with your first sentence. After that… Hmmm. I hope you will look both ways in the future when you ride! We have to take responsibility for our own safety when we are riding. Some drivers ignore the rules of the road. Sometimes the rules that the governing authorities give us, and their fancy traffic control devices are confusing/make no sense. We are going to bethe ones that pay the lethal price if we abruptly meet up with a vehicle… Cycle defensively!!!

    • Michael, that law is not so antiquated. I am eighty years old and in every state and in city that I have lived, bike riders and walkers moved along facing the traffic. Such a tragic waste of life. If only the biker had seen the car coming at him he might have moved. I think riding and walking with the traffic is just a dangerous Gainesville idea.

      • You’re not supposed to walk on the road at all Mary, and if on a bike, with traffic.

          • Jody, thanks for the link. Here is the relevant part:

            (3) “Where sidewalks are provided, no pedestrian shall, unless required by other circumstances, walk along and upon the portion of a roadway paved for vehicular traffic.
            (4) Where sidewalks are not provided, any pedestrian walking along and upon a highway shall, when practicable, walk only on the shoulder on the left side of the roadway in relation to the pedestrian’s direction of travel, facing traffic which may approach from the opposite direction.

            “…walk only on the shoulder” where no sidewalk means not on the road. Same when there is a sidewalk – not on the road.

      • It’s been U.S. law (Uniform Vehicle Code) since 1926. But it’s a poorly conceived law. In no way are cars and bicycles uniform, except that both have wheels. I can imagine only that lawmakers didn’t consider how ubiquitous cars and the ensuing traffic might become. I grant that sensible people have long ignored that law and continue to. Those who follow it take their lives into their own hands, as is their right. I’m still waiting for someone to demonstrate a case wherein violating that law has caused death. And although there may well be instances of that occurring, they pale in comparison to the number of deaths that occur regularly in following that law.

        • Only paling in comparison because, fortunately, it is very rare to see anyone at all, except very rarely someone who is riding with no helmet, no lights, no mirror, and wearing dark clothes at dusk or after dark riding towards traffic on a busy road… If only few people ride this way, there are not going to be huge numbers of fatalities. Based on miles rode each way, I am certain that the few who ride against traffic have worse fatality stats than the many/vast majority who ride with traffic/follow the law.

          • I see them regularly, and I lock eyes with them so they know that I see them. Instead of saying what you’re sure of without evidence, and using passive voice to suggest that others perceive what you perceive, maybe just say what you see or don’t see.

          • Michael, How about you do an internet search and see whether it is safer to ride a bike facing traffic or with traffic, and show me a legitimate study or report that supports your point of view. I have searched and find nothing that supports your point of view on this.

            Why Riding With Traffic Is Safer
            Reduced Impact Speed: When two vehicles travel in the same direction, their relative speed is the difference between their speeds. If a bicycle is traveling against traffic, their relative speed (and thus the impact speed) is the sum of both speeds, leading to far more severe injuries.
            Better Visibility: Riding with traffic allows drivers to see cyclists from the direction they expect to see them. Drivers are less likely to be blinded by their own headlights and more likely to see the cyclist.
            Increased Reaction Time: With a lower closing speed, both drivers and cyclists have more time to react to unexpected events or hazards.
            Predictability: Cyclists who ride with traffic are following the same laws as drivers, making their actions predictable and easier for motorists to anticipate and avoid.
            The Dangers of Riding Against Traffic
            Head-On Collisions: Riding against traffic dramatically increases the risk of head-on collisions with oncoming vehicles.
            Higher Injury Severity: Head-on collisions result in higher impact speeds and are much more likely to cause severe injuries or fatalities.
            Drivers’ Expectations: Drivers are not looking for cyclists coming from the opposite direction, so they are less likely to see them in time to react.
            In summary, always follow the rules of the road and ride with traffic, not against it, to improve your safety on busy roads.

          • An “internet search”? LOL.

            I’m no master of statistics manipulation, but I know R and RStudio well enough to massage just about any data set you can think of to support whatever claim I want to make. Welcome to the world of studies.

          • Go to the eastside of Gainesville and you will see that it is very common to see bike riders that have no helmet, mirrors, or light and that ride in the middle of the road.

          • True. (And this crash happened on the east side.) I hope more details are released about what caused this crash.

          • Unfortunately Gary, bike riders on and around the UF campus – the very few still doing that – behave similarly. There are virtually no bike riders on the west side except a few kids and performance riders like me and others. In general, if the bike is for transportation, not exercise, there will be no helmet, light, or rules.

            This used to be a very bike active town, but no more.

          • Please pass that on to the idiots who turned NW 8th between 6th & Main.

            They don’t seem to have gotten the memo.

      • Mary, riding a bike with traffic if riding on a road, and walking and running facing traffic if there is no sidewalk is not just a “Gainesville idea.” It is the law in Florida, and it is also the law in many other states, and the recommendation of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. We don’t know for sure what happened in this case.The cyclist may have been the one that made the mistake. We may never find out the results of the investigation into this death. I will say that if a cyclist is riding at typical cycling speed of 10-20 mph while facing traffic, and sees a vehicle approaching them erratically at 45 MPH (the speed limit on NE 39th Ave., although most drivers are actually going more like 50 MPH there,) the cyclist isn’t going to have much time to react evasively. (Especially if there are curbs or other obstacles to his/her left.) If you get hit from behind, you are going to have a better chance of survival than if you get hit head on or t-boned. Although a pedestrian or cyclist hit by a vehicle going 45 MPH or higher is always going to be seriously injured or killed.

  • I ride motorcycles and I see it all the time, drivers distracted for one reason or another drifting into the bicycle lane or over the center line. I ride a bicycle also and never ride in the bike lanes only when necessary. I read about things like this especially in this college town where everyone is on their phones mostly texting.

  • Condolences to the family but one can’t help but wonder, was distracted driving or distracted riding a contributor to this likely preventable accident?

    Glad the driver of the vehicle stayed as well. In the least, they’ll be able to provide their version of the accident and with any luck, considered for some degree of leniency for not leaving the scene of an accident.

    • Agree with your first 2 sentences. I hope there were non-biased witnesses who stopped and gave their report of what they saw to the GPD officers, and that the truth will be discerned… If the driver was at fault, he/she should face charges, which will not be severe, since he/she stayed on the scene. I am thankful that the driver had the decency and good character to stay, and hopefully try to help and report what happened at that awful, chaotic scene.

  • I’d NEVER ride my bike on bike lanes on busy highways like 39th Ave. Just ride on the sidewalk there. 😢😢😢

    • Just be sure to look ahead as you approach businesses’ driveways and all crossroads. Many drivers are not going to be looking out for you, so you need to make sure no one is coming to your right. Make sure you see the drivers’ eyes, if someone appears to be stopping. Wave. Stand up on your pedals. Make sure they see you before you proceed.

    • Sure JK, just be mindful of pedestrians and be careful crossing roads and driveways because you will be less visible to drivers than if you are on the road in a bike lane.

  • I’ve read most of the comments here about riding with or against traffic. In my opinion neither of these actions is a solution. I think the problem is in the design of the infrastructure. As more people turn to bikes as their mode of transportation, we have to change the roads to include protected bike lanes that have a barrier between the car traffic and the bikes. This may mean taking a lane away from the cars to provide the bike lane. This may mean the cars should be traveling at a lower speed. It will definitely mean fewer car/bike interactions.
    As to the helmet and mirror comments, I’ve heard arguments pro and con. I am a pretty novice bike rider (although a senior citizen) and I’ve opted to wear a helmet and mount a mirror to the handlebar. I’ll take a look at the helmet mounted mirror because I want to give myself the best chance to ride safely.
    And at the time I’m writing, the article does not talk about who did what when. I hope that when the facts are in, the article will get an update. This is a tragic occurrence. That’s certain.

    • You must not have lived here very long. In my days of going to UF back in ’96-’99 there were a LOT more bikes on the road then. There are only a fraction of bikes on the roads in the city limits today. Most kids ride those fancy scooters around town which is a whole ‘nother problem.

      I used to ride 100-200 miles a week on a road bike when I lived in ORL from 2000 – 2013 when I moved back up here. The problem nowadays is the cellphone and distracted drivers. That is #1.

    • Dave Goboff, There is no one solution, that’s for sure. There are many ways to make it SAFER for cyclists and drivers (and pedestrians) to share the same roads, but there is no one thing that will make it SAFE to do so. It would take a whole lot of things being done correctly by everyone in order for that to happen. And unfortunately, there is not an endless supply of money to make all the infrastructure changes (like protected bike lanes) needed to make this city significantly safer for cyclists, unfortunately.
      I agree with GetReadyForIt. Road cycling seems to have peaked here and is on the decline. Fewer cyclists want to take their chances on our paved roads with so many distracted drivers on their phones, the increased population/volume on the roads, and the lack of safe infrastructure here (and in most American cities.)
      Riding bikes on unpaved country roads and paved and unpaved trails seems to be the current trend, thankfully.
      I am not sure that we will get answers on what happened in this crash that killed the bike rider last week. Jennifer Cabrera explained why. I will try to get some answers through my contacts. I agree that an update would be a good thing. We all need to watch out for each other out there and stop being so self absorbed. That would go a long way towards making things safer!

  • Bikes on the roads have always been a recipe for disaster, regardless the direction of travel. But no matter how hard you advocate against it, for the safety of the bicyclists, a government with an agenda to get cars off our roads will in fact endanger lives as they find ways to obstruct traffic. From the lack of investing in road repair, eliminating drive lanes, to creating shared car/bike lanes, the blame for these accidents can be pinned on the left wing voters that that empower the Alachua BoCC and GCC. They have created this issue and people Jazzy continue to support them.

    • Marxists, I don’t have the data other than my subjective observations, but probably bike ridership grew and peaked and is now declining. Back in the 1970’s – when “10 speeds” were becoming popular – for fun I would ride from the farm I lived on near Alachua into Gainesville on Saturdays on 441 and my “bike lane” was the narrow white paint on it’s edge. I kept my head down. Given the relative low cost of adding a still modest bike lane to most of our main roads as well as the safety that adds for autos as well, I count that as progress which leaves us cheap infrastructure for those still biking as well as for new adherents if behavior changes again.

      I don’t applaud major redesigns to accomodate bike riders like what happened recently on NW 8th Ave, but we should keep in mind that a good part of the justification for that isn’t bicyclists, but “traffic calming” by narrowing roads to supposedly encourage pedestrian traffic. South Main Street was treated this way, but by on street parking, not bike lanes and I think is a success in creating pedestrian friendly space in our downtown – a special location in the city – by slowing traffic. I don’t think the NW 8th Ave change is a good one and is a by product of “one size fits all” thinking by advocates: What they favor, they favor – or oppose – everywhere without regard for conditions. That’s how we have both high functioning round abouts on SW 6th St and along Depot Rd but ridiculous ones in residential neighborhoods like Florida Park. Opponents of round abouts and bike lanes tend to be similar purists who don’t consider the location and application.

      Something tells me that not all bicycle enthusiasts are left wing Marxist but if they are we’ll take the credit. In the meantime, we should acknowledge the increased safety of sensibly located and dedicated bike lanes as public assets that cost not much compared to state and local road budgets.

      • PS I didn’t make clear that the purpose of the “traffic calming” on NW 8th Ave and on S Main is to increase pedestrian traffic, but not for itself but in both those case in the expectation that it will increase commercial activity . Studies in fact show that is possible and likely with other contributing factors. People feel safer on sidewalks if they are screened from adjacent fast traffic by parked cars or mandated space as with bike lanes.

        • But on the new 3/10 of a mile of bike lane recently added on NW 8th Ave., (by taking away a 3/10 mile traffic lane,) there isn’t even much to be gained as far as walkability and increased commercial activity. It might have helped Cafe C, (which was a great place for lunch “back in the day.” ) but there isn’t much there now except for GPD a sign shop, a gas station, the Haven Hospice thrift shop, U-Haul and a funeral home. Not the kind of places most people are going to walk to. And from where? It’s a bike lane that goes nowhere. It abruptly ends after 3/10 of a mile, plus it becomes a turn lane for the vehicles, so what could go wrong with that plan? The City wasted time and money on this useless virtue signal when there were much more important things to do with their limited funds, (like making the Downtown Connector Trail crossing at SE Williston Road safer and less confusing!) Yet, they needlessly pissed off a bunch of drivers with those hazardous lumps that they put in the road to mark their new “bike lane” (which they then had to remove after Florida DOGE and FDOT told them those things were not allowed by code.) True, it was only 3/10 of a mile of traffic lane removed, but I don’t think it has helped anyone, and it now symbolizes to many drivers what they have come to believe- that the people running the City don’t want them to be able to get around easily in their vehicles.

          • Truth, I wasn’t trying to justify the 8th Ave bike lanes but explain the reasoning. That stretch of road has varied commercial retail businesses from just east of 6th to Main and is also connected to the 10th Ave retail community.

    • I am not a marxist. I even voted for Trump 3X.I drive about 17,000 miles/year, and ride my bike 5,000 miles/year, so, while I am not an expert, I do have some knowledge gained through lots of experience. Bikes on the roads predated cars on the roads, and bikes are on roads all over the world. American drivers and cyclists, and Florida drivers and cyclists especially, are pretty bad at sharing the roads, as is seen by our relatively very high injury and death rates when cyclists and vehicles use the same roads. I stopped doing paved road rides about 1.5 years ago, and only ride paved roads that are heavily traveled by vehicles when riding from one unpaved (dirt/lime rock) road to another. I also ride paved and unpaved bike trails. But, I have put in many, many miles riding paved roads. Cycling is an excellent way to get cardio exercise.It can be a lot of fun, and it can be a great way to get around and really experience the surrounding area. But how to make it less dangerous than it is… That is the tough question. It will have many answers, not just one. First, we all need to apply the Golden Rule when we are out there. Drive and ride as you would have others do to you or your loved ones. Look out for others. Realize that it is just not worth it to maybe get there a few seconds or minutes sooner if it puts the lives of others (and maybe your own) at risk. This is something we should all be able to agree on, and be willing to work together on.

      • We agree Truth and unspoken is the fact that bicyclists have a legal right to use the roads. Hopefully this is not another issue to gin up partisan rancor on, or any kind of rancor for that matter,

      • I never claimed or implied that bicyclist were marxists, I simply stated that Alachua County and CCG governments use bicyclist to further their reduction of vehicular traffic on our roads. Look what they did to 16th Ave a few years back by dedicating the outside lanes as a shared auto/bike lane, knowing that cyclist would never keep up with the posted speed limits. It was used as a weapon to discourage vehicle/fuel use. I believe the State DOT stepped in on that one as well. I harbor no ill will against those that cycle, and recognize the great health benefits from the exercise, but a bicyclist has zero chance when you place them in the same space as a car. If you want traffic calming, lower the speed limits but do not endanger the lives of those that drive or those that cycle.

    • >