admitted being drunk in charge of a pedal cycle

Prosecutor Miss Parveen Akhtar told the hearing that just before 6pm, a
police officer attended a report of an accident and was told a cyclist
had collided with the offside bumper of a Vauxhall Astra, damaging the
wheel arch. The cyclist was sitting on a wall and didn't answer when the
officer asked him his name. He was wearing full cycling clothing,
including a helmet and shoes. The officer could smell alcohol on his
breath and said he was "drunk." Walne was handcuffed after he tried to
pick up his bike and make off and he and the officer argued.Miss Janet
Sime, for Walne, described the case as " very interesting" and said the
allegation was rare.Under the "very old "charge, which covered horses,
carts, carriages and " things from the Victorian era," a pedal cycle was
classed as a carriage.

Where is Judge Lee to refute these charges and trounce the errant
Magistrates?

http://www.pendletoday.co.uk/news/dr...-law-1-8729870

MrCheerful wrote:

Where is Judge Lee to refute these charges and trounce the errant
Magistrates?

http://www.pendletoday.co.uk/news/dr...-law-1-8729870

I think the magistrates in this case should be highly commended. The
cyclist was give a three-month conditional discharge, the minimum the
bench could impose, and had to pay a ?20 victim surcharge.

It appears the cyclist was doing the right thing not riding his bike,
just pushing it home, and didn't know that would be an offence.

It is claimed in the link provided:

Quote:
[The car driver was] very aggressive and started saying Walne [the
cyclist] had damaged a car, when he hadn't.
Unquote.

Presumably the magistrates accepted this view. SOME car drivers are a
menace on the road.

Christie wrote:

MrCheerful wrote:

Where is Judge Lee to refute these charges and trounce the errant
Magistrates?

http://www.pendletoday.co.uk/news/dr...-law-1-8729870

I think the magistrates in this case should be highly commended. The
cyclist was give a three-month conditional discharge, the minimum the
bench could impose, and had to pay a ?20 victim surcharge.

It appears the cyclist was doing the right thing not riding his bike,
just pushing it home, and didn't know that would be an offence.

It is claimed in the link provided:

Quote:
[The car driver was] very aggressive and started saying Walne [the
cyclist] had damaged a car, when he hadn't.
Unquote.

Excuse me. There is an error in my quote the where it says [The car
driver was], that should be [Some random man at the scene was]

Presumably the magistrates accepted this view. SOME car drivers are a
menace on the road.

Never mind, the rest of the post still holds true...

On Thu, 31 Aug 2017 15:44:34 GMT, (Christie)
wrote:

MrCheerful wrote:

Where is Judge Lee to refute these charges and trounce the errant
Magistrates?

http://www.pendletoday.co.uk/news/dr...-law-1-8729870

I think the magistrates in this case should be highly commended. The
cyclist was give a three-month conditional discharge, the minimum the
bench could impose, and had to pay a ?20 victim surcharge.

It appears the cyclist was doing the right thing not riding his bike,
just pushing it home, and didn't know that would be an offence.

It is claimed in the link provided:

Quote:
[The car driver was] very aggressive and started saying Walne [the
cyclist] had damaged a car, when he hadn't.
Unquote.

Presumably the magistrates accepted this view. SOME car drivers are a
menace on the road.



He was obviously ****ed. Had a single pint - my arse.

The cyclist was sitting on a wall and didn't answer when the officer asked him
his name. He was wearing full cycling clothing, including a helmet and shoes.
The officer could smell alcohol on his breath and said he was "drunk."

Walne was handcuffed after he tried to pick up his bike and make off and he and
the officer argued.

On 31/08/2017 16:44, Christie wrote:
MrCheerful wrote:

Where is Judge Lee to refute these charges and trounce the errant
Magistrates?

http://www.pendletoday.co.uk/news/dr...-law-1-8729870

I think the magistrates in this case should be highly commended. The
cyclist was give a three-month conditional discharge, the minimum the
bench could impose, and had to pay a ?20 victim surcharge.

It appears the cyclist was doing the right thing not riding his bike,
just pushing it home, and didn't know that would be an offence.

It is claimed in the link provided:

Quote:
[The car driver was] very aggressive and started saying Walne [the
cyclist] had damaged a car, when he hadn't.
Unquote.

Presumably the magistrates accepted this view. SOME car drivers are a
menace on the road.



The car was parked. What driver?

On 31/08/2017 14:35, MrCheerful wrote:

Prosecutor Miss Parveen Akhtar told the hearing that just before 6pm, a
police officer attended a report of an accident and was told a cyclist
had collided with the offside bumper of a Vauxhall Astra, damaging the
wheel arch. The cyclist was sitting on a wall and didn't answer when the
officer asked him his name. He was wearing full cycling clothing,
including a helmet and shoes. The officer could smell alcohol on his
breath and said he was "drunk." Walne was handcuffed after he tried to
pick up his bike and make off and he and the officer argued.Miss Janet
Sime, for Walne, described the case as " very interesting" and said the
allegation was rare.Under the "very old "charge, which covered horses,
carts, carriages and " things from the Victorian era," a pedal cycle was
classed as a carriage.

Where is Judge Lee to refute these charges and trounce the errant
Magistrates?

http://www.pendletoday.co.uk/news/dr...-law-1-8729870

Interesting...

QUOTE:
He had been out on a bike ride and called for a pint. He didn't feel
drunk, but he didn't feel capable of riding his bike and he pushed it
home...
ENDQUOTE

*One* pint?

Yeah, right.

JNugent wrote:
On 31/08/2017 14:35, MrCheerful wrote:

Prosecutor Miss Parveen Akhtar told the hearing that just before
6pm, a police officer attended a report of an accident and was told
a cyclist had collided with the offside bumper of a Vauxhall Astra,
damaging the wheel arch. The cyclist was sitting on a wall and
didn't answer when the officer asked him his name. He was wearing
full cycling clothing, including a helmet and shoes. The officer
could smell alcohol on his breath and said he was "drunk." Walne was
handcuffed after he tried to pick up his bike and make off and he
and the officer argued.Miss Janet Sime, for Walne, described the
case as " very interesting" and said the allegation was rare.Under
the "very old "charge, which covered horses, carts, carriages and "
things from the Victorian era," a pedal cycle was classed as a
carriage. Where is Judge Lee to refute these charges and trounce the
errant
Magistrates?

http://www.pendletoday.co.uk/news/dr...-law-1-8729870

Interesting...

QUOTE:
He had been out on a bike ride and called for a pint. He didn't feel
drunk, but he didn't feel capable of riding his bike and he pushed it
home...
ENDQUOTE

*One* pint?

Yeah, right.

Are cyclists capable of drinking more than one pint?
We all know that they are little Nancy boys.

On Thu, 31 Aug 2017 17:26:37 +0100, MrCheerful
wrote:

On 31/08/2017 16:44, Christie wrote:
MrCheerful wrote:

Where is Judge Lee to refute these charges and trounce the errant
Magistrates?

http://www.pendletoday.co.uk/news/dr...-law-1-8729870

I think the magistrates in this case should be highly commended. The
cyclist was give a three-month conditional discharge, the minimum the
bench could impose, and had to pay a ?20 victim surcharge.

It appears the cyclist was doing the right thing not riding his bike,
just pushing it home, and didn't know that would be an offence.

It is claimed in the link provided:

Quote:
[The car driver was] very aggressive and started saying Walne [the
cyclist] had damaged a car, when he hadn't.
Unquote.

Presumably the magistrates accepted this view. SOME car drivers are a
menace on the road.



The car was parked. What driver?

What car?

It seems a car wasn't damaged, nor even involved in this incident,
parked or otherwise. But, yes, when I read about an aggressive man,
who wasn't the cyclist, I did wrongly jump to the conclusion that must
have been the car driver who thought his car had been damaged.

On this occasion the aggression came from a passing man at the scene.
A pedestrian presumably. SOME people are a menace on the roads whether
they be on foot, on a bike or in a car. There, I can't be fairer than
that, can I?

Judith wrote:

On Thu, 31 Aug 2017 15:44:34 GMT, (Christie)
wrote:

MrCheerful wrote:

Where is Judge Lee to refute these charges and trounce the errant
Magistrates?

http://www.pendletoday.co.uk/news/dr...-law-1-8729870

I think the magistrates in this case should be highly commended. The
cyclist was give a three-month conditional discharge, the minimum the
bench could impose, and had to pay a ?20 victim surcharge.

It appears the cyclist was doing the right thing not riding his bike,
just pushing it home, and didn't know that would be an offence.

It is claimed in the link provided:

Quote:
[The car driver was] very aggressive and started saying Walne [the
cyclist] had damaged a car, when he hadn't.
Unquote.

Presumably the magistrates accepted this view. SOME car drivers are a
menace on the road.



He was obviously ****ed. Had a single pint - my arse.

The cyclist was sitting on a wall and didn't answer when the officer asked him
his name. He was wearing full cycling clothing, including a helmet and shoes.
The officer could smell alcohol on his breath and said he was "drunk."

Walne was handcuffed after he tried to pick up his bike and make off and he and
the officer argued.

If he hadn't tried to abscond, he might not even have got arrested,
let alone charged and prosecuted. But I agree with you, he must have
been well drunk. This idiot managed to make this matter much worse
than it need have been.

Once the decision was made to prosecute, I think the magistrates
handled this case very well. They imposed the minimum penalty that the
law allowed in recognition that it was, essentially, a relatively
minor incident.