Cyclist who killed pedestrian in high speed crash said people had 'zero respect' for those on bikes, court hears

On 18/08/2017 08:46, TMS320 wrote:
On 18/08/17 04:01, JNugent wrote:

You *did* say that there was no difference between walking with a bike
and riding it.

I did.

Then you changed your mind and said there is a difference.

So quote the part you think says this.

Tell you what: you tell everyone what your current position is, just in
case it's changed again.

Is there (right now) a difference between pushing a bike and riding a bike?

On 18/08/2017 08:49, TMS320 wrote:
On 18/08/17 04:02, JNugent wrote:
On 18/08/2017 00:23, TMS320 wrote:
On 17/08/17 18:24, JNugent wrote:
On 17/08/2017 17:51, TMS320 wrote:
On 17/08/17 12:30, JNugent wrote:
On 17/08/2017 10:11, TMS320 wrote:
On 16/08/17 20:47, JNugent wrote:

And behaved like that cyclists immediately before the collision and
as he did after it? And then posted on the internet that it was all
the pedestrian's fault?

The noise before the crash is similar to the noise often made by
drivers in an attempt to try to sweep others out of their way.

But how does the vocal and written noise made by the accused
after the
event alter the mechanics of the crash?

It speaks to the issue of his intentions and motivation.

I asked about the mechanics of the crash. Would the woman be less
dead?

The court is concerned with the behaviour of the killer cyclist.

His behaviour is highly relevant to questions about his behaviour,
you see.

At the top you made one of your sweeping derogatory statements about
"cyclists". I want to know from you how *you* think it affected the
mechanics. I am not interested in "the court will decide".

There is no mechanical connection between a cyclist's bellowed
obscenties aimed at a pedestrian and the non-existent brakes of his bike.

What ever made you think there could be one?

I was asking you why you were making a connection to the crash. It's at
the top so don't claim you don't remember.

His behaviour before, during and after the running down of the innocent
victim is relevant to his... er... behaviour.

What's your current problem with that, and might it change?

On 18/08/2017 08:54, TMS320 wrote:
On 18/08/17 04:57, JNugent wrote:
On 18/08/2017 00:23, TMS320 wrote:

At the top you made one of your sweeping derogatory statements about
"cyclists".

Ah.... that was a typo.

Doesn't make much difference.

Well spotted.

It should have read just "cyclist". It was about the cyclist on trial
for manslaughter.

Mind you, you ought to have been able to infer from the context...

Interesting how you think others should be able to do that from your
writings but you always fail from others. Except, of course, when you
turn failed telepath and tell people what they have written that they
haven't.

It was a typo.

Get over it.

You should have been able to see that it was simply a typo (especially
from the plentiful context), but you failed to so so.

Get over your own failure.

On Sat, 19 Aug 2017 13:28:27 +0100, Birdbrain Macaw (now "James Wilkinson"),
the pathological attention whore of all the uk ngs, blathered again:


Same difference as far as scum cyclists are concerned.

This is what trolls do. I thought that even a thicko such as yourself knew
that.
Hucker is a well known troll. I thought that even a thicko such as yourself
knew that.
You really are quite a stupid person.



I've long suspected that you are gay as most cyclists are. Are you?
I've nothing against gay people.

Contradicting yourself within 2 lines, oh dear.

Displaying your abysmal stupidity in just one line, again, Birdbrain?

--
More of Birdbrain Macaw's (now "James Wilkinson" LOL) life as a ******:
"When I was 14, there were places in forests where people would leave
magazines for anyone to use."
MID:

On Sat, 19 Aug 2017 13:28:42 +0100, Birdbrain Macaw (now "James Wilkinson"),
the pathological attention whore of all the uk ngs, blathered again:

Mr Sword is quite the contrarian; he'll post in favour of cycling one
minute and then indicate a complete disregard for the law whilst driving
the next.

Why are those incompatible?

Congenital idiot Hucker can't understand again. BG

--
More of Birdbrain Macaw's (now "James Wilkinson" LOL) sociopathic "wisdom":
"The only way to ruin someone's life is to kill them, or render them
disabled."
MID:

On Sat, 19 Aug 2017 13:29:10 +0100, Birdbrain Macaw (now "James Wilkinson"),
the pathological attention whore of all the uk ngs, blathered again:

No, because I scan through the subjects until I spot one that interests
me. I actually read very few.

The subject doesn't tell you if the reply is interesting. There may be 7
people in a conversation, and 4 are idiots.

....says the village idiot of ALL the UK ngs, Birdbrain himself! LOL

--
More of Birdbrain Macaw's (now "James Wilkinson" LOL) sociopathic "wisdom":
"You'd never have the car going perfectly straight to begin with. 0.00001
degrees out and you'd have to correct it in a quarter mile, and you'd never
correct it just right, then have to correct it again. Easier just to keep
one hand on the wheel."
MID:

On 19/08/17 00:15, JNugent wrote:
On 18/08/2017 08:46, TMS320 wrote:
On 18/08/17 04:01, JNugent wrote:

Then you changed your mind and said there is a difference.

So quote the part you think says this.

Tell you what: you tell everyone what your current position is, just in
case it's changed again.

My position has not changed. Unless you quote the part that confuses
yoy, I have no idea what you're talking about.

On 19/08/17 00:17, JNugent wrote:
On 18/08/2017 08:49, TMS320 wrote:
On 16/08/17 20:47, JNugent wrote:

And behaved like that cyclists immediately before the
collision and as he did after it? And then posted on
the internet that it was all the pedestrian's fault?
I was asking you why you were making a connection to the crash.
It's at the top so don't claim you don't remember.

His behaviour before, during and after the running down of the
innocent victim is relevant to his... er... behaviour.

Only if it had any bearing on the crash. You would not have mentioned it
it if you thought it did not.

What's your current problem with that,

You haven't answered my question.

On 19/08/17 00:18, JNugent wrote:
On 18/08/2017 08:54, TMS320 wrote:
On 18/08/17 04:57, JNugent wrote:
On 18/08/2017 00:23, TMS320 wrote:

At the top you made one of your sweeping derogatory statements about
"cyclists".

Ah.... that was a typo.

Doesn't make much difference.

Well spotted.

It should have read just "cyclist". It was about the cyclist on trial
for manslaughter.

Mind you, you ought to have been able to infer from the context...

Interesting how you think others should be able to do that from your
writings but you always fail from others. Except, of course, when you
turn failed telepath and tell people what they have written that they
haven't.

It was a typo.

Get over it.

You should have been able to see that it was simply a typo (especially
from the plentiful context), but you failed to so so.

Don't expect from others what you are rarely able to do. There is enough
backround to know your ideas about the behaviour of "cyclists".

On 20.08.2017 00:28, James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Fri, 18 Aug 2017 19:34:39 +0100, Mr Pounder Esquire
wrote:

Kerr-Mudd,John wrote:
On Fri, 18 Aug 2017 17:17:27 +0100, Bod wrote:

[] wasn't me that elided the posting history.


Which just goes to show that the three or four main cyclist
haters in this group are saddos who scan newspapers daily,
cherrypicking badly behaving cyclists with glee. They are sad
people. Never do they write about the countless good cyclists which
well
overide
the bad contingent.

Best KF them. But they do mutter amongst themselves some terrible
things about "all" cyclists.


I don't Killfile anyone.

Doesn't your head get fed up of reading things you don't want to
read? 50% of what's posted is pointless.

No, because I scan through the subjects until I spot one that
interests me. I actually read very few.

Mr Sword is quite the contrarian; he'll post in favour of cycling one
minute and then indicate a complete disregard for the law whilst
driving the next.

Same difference as far as scum cyclists are concerned.

This is what trolls do. I thought that even a thicko such as yourself
knew
that.
Hucker is a well known troll. I thought that even a thicko such as
yourself
knew that.
You really are quite a stupid person.



I've long suspected that you are gay as most cyclists are. Are you?
I've nothing against gay people.

Contradicting yourself within 2 lines, oh dear.

There is no contradiction