Cyclist threatened to stab woman, yet no charges brought. Why?

Abuse, physical assault, crminal damage and threatening to wound. Why
no charges??

http://www.bournemouthecho.co.uk/new...rnemouth_Road/

MrCheerful wrote:
Abuse, physical assault, crminal damage and threatening to wound. Why
no charges??

http://www.bournemouthecho.co.uk/new...rnemouth_Road/

Can't be traced.
Yet another case for the cycling scum to have registration plates.
A bicycle is a road vehicle, most cyclists are too stupid to realise this.
I await Jester who will ask if the driver was wearing a helmet.
Jester is a helmet.

On 16/01/18 17:29, MrCheerful wrote:
Abuse, physical assault, crminal damage and threatening to wound.Â* Why
no charges??

http://www.bournemouthecho.co.uk/new...rnemouth_Road/


"The driver of a black Honda CRV – a local woman aged in her 40s –
challenged a female cyclist who she believed was about to go through a
red traffic light."

A vigilante, huh? Was it a verbal challenge, illegal use of the horn or
a threat with a lethal weapon?

On 17/01/2018 09:16, TMS320 wrote:
On 16/01/18 17:29, MrCheerful wrote:
Abuse, physical assault, crminal damage and threatening to wound.Â* Why
no charges??

http://www.bournemouthecho.co.uk/new...rnemouth_Road/


"The driver of a black Honda CRV – a local woman aged in her 40s –
challenged a female cyclist who she believed was about to go through a
red traffic light."

A vigilante, huh? Was it a verbal challenge, illegal use of the horn or
a threat with a lethal weapon?

Reading it, it sounds much more like a criminal on a bike versus a
law-abiding victim, doesn't it?

Do you approve of the criminal cyclist's actions?

On 17/01/18 15:19, JNugent wrote:
On 17/01/2018 09:16, TMS320 wrote:
On 16/01/18 17:29, MrCheerful wrote:
Abuse, physical assault, crminal damage and threatening to wound.
Why no charges??

http://www.bournemouthecho.co.uk/new...rnemouth_Road/


"The driver of a black Honda CRV – a local woman aged in her 40s –
challenged a female cyclist who she believed was about to go through a
red traffic light."

A vigilante, huh? Was it a verbal challenge, illegal use of the horn
or a threat with a lethal weapon?

Reading it, it sounds much more like a criminal on a bike versus a
law-abiding victim, doesn't it?

It says of the driver "believed [the person on the bicycle] was about to
go through a red traffic light".

An attempt at telepathy. Was it you?

"It was reported that the cyclist then verbally abused the woman, kicked
and punched the car, attempted to rip the wing mirror from the vehicle
and then opened the passenger door and slammed it shut."

A description of the bike coming from behind, legally using the space,
and the driver deciding it was a good idea to squeeze it against the kerb.

Do you approve of the criminal cyclist's actions?
No charges have been brought so there is no chance of it going to court
to prove criminal action. I thought you held that principle in high regard.

On 18/01/2018 23:25, TMS320 wrote:
On 17/01/18 15:19, JNugent wrote:
On 17/01/2018 09:16, TMS320 wrote:
On 16/01/18 17:29, MrCheerful wrote:
Abuse, physical assault, crminal damage and threatening to wound.
Why no charges??

http://www.bournemouthecho.co.uk/new...rnemouth_Road/


"The driver of a black Honda CRV – a local woman aged in her 40s –
challenged a female cyclist who she believed was about to go through
a red traffic light."

A vigilante, huh? Was it a verbal challenge, illegal use of the horn
or a threat with a lethal weapon?

Reading it, it sounds much more like a criminal on a bike versus a
law-abiding victim, doesn't it?

It says of the driver "believed [the person on the bicycle] was about to
go through a red traffic light".

An attempt at telepathy. Was it you?

"It was reported that the cyclist then verbally abused the woman, kicked
and punched the car, attempted to rip the wing mirror from the vehicle
and then opened the passenger door and slammed it shut."

A description of the bike coming from behind, legally using the space,
and the driver deciding it was a good idea to squeeze it against the kerb.

Do you approve of the criminal cyclist's actions?

No charges have been brought so there is no chance of it going to court
to prove criminal action. I thought you held that principle in high regard.

Don't dissemble (break that longstanding habit of yours).

Do you approve of the cyclist's criminal actions?

Or do you stick to your usual nonsensical line that cyclists can do no
wrong?

On 18/01/18 23:49, JNugent wrote:
On 18/01/2018 23:25, TMS320 wrote:
On 17/01/18 15:19, JNugent wrote:
On 17/01/2018 09:16, TMS320 wrote:
On 16/01/18 17:29, MrCheerful wrote:
Abuse, physical assault, crminal damage and threatening to wound.
Why no charges??

http://www.bournemouthecho.co.uk/new...rnemouth_Road/


"The driver of a black Honda CRV – a local woman aged in her 40s –
challenged a female cyclist who she believed was about to go through
a red traffic light."

A vigilante, huh? Was it a verbal challenge, illegal use of the horn
or a threat with a lethal weapon?

Reading it, it sounds much more like a criminal on a bike versus a
law-abiding victim, doesn't it?

It says of the driver "believed [the person on the bicycle] was about
to go through a red traffic light".

An attempt at telepathy. Was it you?

"It was reported that the cyclist then verbally abused the woman,
kicked and punched the car, attempted to rip the wing mirror from the
vehicle and then opened the passenger door and slammed it shut."

A description of the bike coming from behind, legally using the space,
and the driver deciding it was a good idea to squeeze it against the
kerb.

Do you approve of the criminal cyclist's actions?

No charges have been brought so there is no chance of it going to
court to prove criminal action. I thought you held that principle in
high regard.

Don't dissemble (break that longstanding habit of yours).

Do you approve of the cyclist's criminal actions?

What criminal actions?

Or do you stick to your usual nonsensical line that cyclists can do no
wrong?

I have no "usual nonsensical line that cyclists can do no wrong".

When the press report has a funny smell I say so. If you want to argue
then you suggest the scenario - mainly the likely position of the
bicycle relative to the car when the "challenge" was made.

On 17/01/2018 09:16, TMS320 wrote:
On 16/01/18 17:29, MrCheerful wrote:
Abuse, physical assault, crminal damage and threatening to wound.Â* Why
no charges??

http://www.bournemouthecho.co.uk/new...rnemouth_Road/


"The driver of a black Honda CRV – a local woman aged in her 40s –
challenged a female cyclist who she believed was about to go through a
red traffic light."

A vigilante, huh? Was it a verbal challenge, illegal use of the horn or
a threat with a lethal weapon?

The cyclist criminal was the one with the lethal weapon:

QUOTE:
....the cyclist approached the victim and again became abusive, produced
a small pointed item from a compartment on the bike and threatened to
stab the [victim].

She also reportedly rammed her bike into the victim...
ENDQUOTE

On Tuesday, January 16, 2018 at 5:29:36 PM UTC, MrCheerful wrote:
Abuse, physical assault, crminal damage and threatening to wound. Why
no charges??

http://www.bournemouthecho.co.uk/new...rnemouth_Road/

If the Police wont prosecute in this case
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kz_c6UH9Ev8
Where the assault with a deadly weapon, the assailant and the (traceable) weapon's serial number were all caught on camera what makes you think they will pursue an unsubstantiated claim?

On 17/01/2018 18:56, Simon Jester wrote:
On Tuesday, January 16, 2018 at 5:29:36 PM UTC, MrCheerful wrote:
Abuse, physical assault, crminal damage and threatening to wound. Why
no charges??

http://www.bournemouthecho.co.uk/new...rnemouth_Road/

If the Police wont prosecute in this case
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kz_c6UH9Ev8
Where the assault with a deadly weapon, the assailant and the (traceable) weapon's serial number were all caught on camera what makes you think they will pursue an unsubstantiated claim?

Are you alright in the head?

That was a rhetorical question, by the way.