Might it have something to do with the reason that people cycle across junctions when the lights tell them otherwise?
Know what you mean, though - you can often see people wading though traffic between Doyle Street and the convenience store on London Road despite the crossing twenty feet away. Perhaps it's that little extra convenience. Perhaps it's a Darwin thing.
Oh, well, sorry then, didn't intend to get slaggy about it. It's just that people tend to think that they're somehow better able than the rules of the road (and pavement) to judge when it's safe to do something, and are often proven wrong with unhappy consequences. And that tends to apply across the board - pedestrians, cyclists, motorists, skateboarders, the lot. Do I cross the road wherever I like when I think it's safe to do so? Yup. Am I always right? Nope.
(I mentioned the bit of London Road by the convenience store because someone was run down there by a bus a couple of months ago; did enough damage to the bus, so goodness knows what happened to the pedestrian. A few weeks after that one of the guys in the shop was remonstrating with someone he'd just seen doing the same thing, who wasn't having any of it. He always crossed the road there! He knew what was safe!)
This thread has immediately jumped to the conclusion that it was the pedestrian that was at fault with absolutely no evidence what so ever, except that other pedestrians cross the road there when we shouldn't . Of course he/she may have been at fault but then again they may not. The motor vehicle may have jumped the lights (its not just cyclist that do) they may simple have been traveling a little too fast or either one or both of them may simple have had a momentary lack of concentration. I was not there so I do not know and neither were most of the people passing comment. London cyclist hints but doesnt actually state that they crossed when they should not have, nor is it clear weather he was present at the time of the accident. so why apportion blame with out any facts?