View Single Post
  #23  
Old November 8th 12, 10:25 AM posted to alt.mountain-bike
Blackblade
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 274
Default A Cure for Violence?


If you know the traffic law (pedestrians have the right of way), then you know that the biker was at fault for DELIBERATELY running into me (because he didn't want to hear that he was there illegally). It's not brain science. You just refuse to believe because you don't want to. Obviously, the jury is irrelevant, since they weren't there. Nor were you. No HONEST person would claim to know what happened, given that they weren't there. Mountain bikers are not honest. Every one of them lied under oath.


And, ta da, there we have it ... guilty from your own testimony. Based on your own statements in this thread I would find you guilty of battery if on a jury.

You CANNOT use Right of Way Precedence for pedestrians to illegally detain someone. They are required to give way to you but have done so if they ensure that you can continue on your way. If you then choose to intentionally change your direction and move in such a way as to occasion contact then YOU are the guilty party and of a far more serious offence than trespass.

You are entitled to your views on mountain biking but no one else is obligated to stop and hear them. You are not a police officer, it is not your land and you had not been authorised by anyone with the necessary authority to enforce a no biking rule. As such, you did indeed commit assault/battery and, potentially, illegal detention (maybe US law is a little different on that one).

You seem to think that because mountainbiking was not permitted on the trail (although, by all accounts, it was the norm for bikes to use the trail) that this somehow gives you all kinds of rights over the individuals committing what is, technically, trespass. It doesn't. They are committing what in the US would be a misdemeanour and in the UK a civil matter. A relatively trivial offence.

In forcing them to stop or touching them in any way when it has been made plain to you that this is undesired you commit an offence.

This is what I suspected was the case all along; you are indeed guilty of the offences for which you were convicted because you either don't understand, or don't want to understand, that you may not violate others rights just because they are committing trespass because YOU are a private citizen and not authorised to conduct enforcement.

By your own words ... GUILTY !!!
Ads
 

Home - Home - Home - Home - Home