M E M O R A N D U M
TO: NCOM BOARD OF ADVISORS
FROM: THOMAS STICKEL, ATTORNEY AT LAW -- NEW YORK/INDUSTRIAL ENGINEER
DATE: July 23, 1996
RE: PRODUCT LIABILITY LAWSUITS
The AIM attorneys do not believe that a motorcycle accident is just another case. The AIM attorneys I have worked with are attorneys that ride motorcycles because they enjoy the unique freedom that only this sport can provide. It appears that the motorcycle companies are attempting to attack our efforts to insure freedoms. The motorcycle companies and other persons would like to put a stop to our efforts to keep riders fully informed and safe.
For more than 30 years the motorcycle companies had failed to address the issue of motorcycle safety as it relates to the product itself. We have independently served and represented motorcyclists in thousands of accidents involving foreseeable collision with other vehicles as well as collision with fixed objects along the roadway. Indeed, some of our cases have involved lawsuits concerning the condition of the roadway itself (i.e. presence of rocks, gravel, anti-skid material and other roadway hazards that affect biker safety). We have carried the torch in this type of litigation when other attorneys and legal organizations have refused, either because they did not appreciate riders rights or they do not appreciate riders as clients. ( . . . OR because other attorneys and legal organizations are not IDIOTS!! ed)
Along other lines it should be noted that while we have supported legislation and court battles allowing bikers to have the freedom of choice in whether to wear helmets, we are also concerned and firmly believe that if the bikers chose to wear helmets, that those helmets should be reasonably safe and not cause greater injuries in the case of an accident. The same thing is true as to the concept of the safety of the motorcycle itself. We know that all bikers, or their lawyers for that matter, are not biochemical engineers. We also know that the motorcycle manufacturers have refused to investigate and/or address biker interests as they pertain to the biomechanics of an injury which occurs with particular motorcycle models. For example, our research has shown not only that motorcycle accidents are foreseeable and the manufacturers know this, but also that in less than 30% of motorcycle accidents is the rider at fault. These statistics are important because when a motorcycle and rider are struck by 3000 to 5000 lbs. of car, it is the motorcyclist who is bound to lose. However, it is not necessary for our riders to suffer leg amputations when these collision occur. Adding insult to injury, very often the offending driver has little or no insurance coverage in the situations where the most typical and foreseeable accident scenarios occur, i.e. left turning car into the path of the motorcyclist due to car driver inattention. Too often this results in completely unnecessary, unwanted amputations of the riders' legs.
Despite this information, several of the motorcycle manufacturing companies, have for decades refused to crash test a single motorcycle except in defense of litigation propounded by biker advocate attorneys. These attorneys brought suit to examine films of the hostile and extremely dangerous left leg environment the rider is exposed to in an accident. Harley Davidson, it was discovered in lawsuits, completely refused to conduct any crash tests with motorcycles until 1989. In 1989, they began a series of secret crash testing which involved over 90 collisions. This crash testing was kept secret from the entire bike and legal community. Last week one of the AIM attorneys, while in extensive litigation, uncovered this extensive secret crash testing program. The analysis of HDs crash testing is not yet completed, but what is clear is that the testing was designed to conceal super-dangerous side contours and propensity for metal failures on the HD motorcycles and accessories. The "derby" or protrusion of metal located behind every HD rider's left foot causes extreme aggravation and exacerbation of leg injuries and has resulted in hundreds of unnecessary and unwanted amputations.
All bikers are aware of the fact that motorcycles do not have a reverse gear. Consequently, in every accident scenario the motorcycle will be moving in a forward motion. On contact with a car or fixed object, the rider's foot, and ankle are being swept into this dangerous protruding cast aluminum cover which virtually acts with the bumper as a dull pair of scissors to destroy soft tissue, muscles, nerves, veins and arteries, leading to the amputation of the left leg below the knee. HD made motions in over 1/2 dozen cases across the country to keep their crash testing secret and concealed from legal review.
The recent attack against the AIM attorneys and NCOM is made by individuals who did not bother to wait to see the crash testing. Had our accusers been willing to be as patient as our AIM attorneys had been in planning lawsuits to gain access to secret information, they would realize categorically how wrong they are.
Interestingly, and analogous to our riders who close to use certain safety equipment, is that HD had for 55 years made strong, satisfactorily reliable and effective crash bars for motorcyclists, according to the company's own ads.
However, in the late 1970's while HD was under AMF ownership (AMF controlled HD from 1969 to 1990) many steps were taken that attempted to increase profits while decreasing rider safety. One of these steps resulted in the calculated compromise of the integrity of the makeup of HD's crash bars. HD, for 60 years, manufactured, patented and sold, at a profit, safety guards that were made of best treated steel. HD advertised them as "better then insurance". In the mid to late 70's AMF switched to a product that was substantially weaker and more dangerous, but they charged more money for it, and changed the name from safety guards to engine guards. These changes were secretly forced on riders by executives at AMF. They were revealed for the first time in litigation that AIM attorneys brought. Our litigation is still ongoing and the crash testing recently uncovered verifies our contentions.
How is the rider to know that the clutch cover is made of a fragile pot metal which eats the riders boot and flesh in a collision? We believe in freedom of choice, but we believe that the rider has the right to know the results of secret testing and secret design dangers. We believe we perform a service to the motorcycling community in revealing this previously secret information and we deeply regret the impatience of our detractors who couldn't wait to learn the result of our tremendous efforts on behalf of bikers.
(end)
NOTE: The sad part about all this is that for all the harm it will eventually cause, they won't win with these arguments anyway. Harley Davidson builds motorcycles. More than any other motor vehicle, the motorcycle is the one who's use is a considered risk, an assumed risk. If the motorcycle explodes and injures you, sue them and you may win. But if some biker gets in a wreck on a Harley Davidson and lives to sue about it, there's no jury in this country that is going to award damages for a lost leg because motorcycles are not safe. In fact it could work against the rider if the insurance company's side had a lawyer that can get the biker to admit that he knew in advance that "Harley Davidsons are 'dangerous'." Contributory negligence. From the jury's point of view, you're lucky to just be alive.
Against nothing to gain, we have the damage that will come with the myths to be built on the rumors that Richrd Lester (and his band of merry litigators) made. To the rescue, Richard!
The point is, it wasn't necessary for any of this to happen. The fact that this AIM attorney (above) doesn't see what's wrong with what he's doing is bad enough. The worst of it is that the insurance lobbiests will have the AIM arguments all printed out and in the hands of the various legislators in no time. Rest assured. And with AIM being the motorcycle "experts," that will be absolute proof to the legislators that motorcycles are dangerous, and must be regulated, or even banned . . . and to us, that Lester is an absolute idiot!
By the way, if AIM had this information that Harley Davidsons are unreasonably dangerous, when and where were they going to tell the rest of us about it? And doesn't Bish ride one of those Leg eaters. If he gets in a collosion (God forbid) and loses a leg, how is he going to sell his problem to a jury? See what we're getting at?