PK wrote:

"Daniel Barlow" wrote:
"PK" writes:

Whether cyclist stopped or not, the first Para of the first report is
the most telling:

"A girl of five was left fighting for her life after she was mown down
by a speeding cyclist on the *pavement* outside her home."

You're right, but it's not telling me what I think you think it's
telling you. If they're not correct that the cyclist left the scene,
it's entirely probable that the cyclist wasn't speeding *or* sporting
lawnmower blades on the front of her bike either. What this tells me
mostly is that the Daily Mail uses other peoples misery to sell
newspapers (or to draw visitors to their web site, whatever)

Don't get me wrong, if the situation *was* as reported then the cylist
is scum of the lowest order, but I have a certain amount of
scepticism. It's interesting to note that the text seems to have been
changed since you quoted it.

Not much of a change:

"A girl of five was left with horrific head injuries after she was mown
down by a cyclist on the pavement outside her home."

The key issue, is whether the cyclist was on the pavement.

It says she was. That doesn't sound like much of an "ishoo".