[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.

[cozzyd]

1) is hard to imagine given that neither of the streets are one-way (a crossing cyclist would not be occluded by the truck on the right and would not be able to go straight when the truck partially cleared the intersection from the left, unless they were traveling in the wrong lane.

2) doesn't make much sense to me... a cyclist with so little sense would have been hit by a car long ago.

Looking at streetview, I see bike lanes so there is also another possibility:

4) The cyclist was parallel to the truck on a bike lane, but the truck overtook the cyclist while in the intersection while the Waymo turned left after the truck cleared. This would be a similar situation as if there were pedestrians in the crosswalk.

edit: according to https://www.theverge.com/2024/2/7/24065063/waymo-driverless-... , the truck was turning? That opens up a number of other possibilities...