On 11/08/2017 14:42, Simon Jester wrote:
On Friday, August 11, 2017 at 1:04:46 PM UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
On 10/08/2017 19:06, Simon Jester wrote:

On Thursday, August 10, 2017 at 4:51:06 PM UTC+1, Tony Dragon wrote:
On 10/08/2017 15:54, wrote:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...s-van-M11.html


Unless you are saying it was a cyclist who through the concrete, I can
see no connection to cycling.

When this happened
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/m...de/4212619.stm
It was treated as murder.

Manslaughter (can you not read?).

Originally treated as murder.

That hardly matters.

When this happened
http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/...rrific-6782055
It was treated as a childish prank.

A rope stretched right across Egrement Promenade?

Are you claiming it didn't happen?

Not at all.

I am at least as aware as you of the regard in which cyclists are held
by the majority of people.

It must be sixty feet
wide between possible anchoring points and the rope would be very
visible at normal approach speeds.

At night?

Don't cyclists use their low powered version of headlights at night, then?

Or doesn't it matter whether or not they do use lights because they
stare at the ground below the front wheel in an effort to achieve and
maintain speed?

As it happens, I distinctly remember that cycling was banned on the prom
(yes, all the way from Seacombe to New Brighton) when I was a boy.

http://tinyurl.com/yd44mc9v

The picture shows a cycle lane.

And?

Did Merseyside Police ever manage to trace the alleged prankster?

Do your own research.

It was unjustified and all that, but I'm really not that bothered about
the case.

One might have expected yopu to be a bit more exercised about it.

But clearly not.

Have a problem with women, do you?