[LCC City] City of London Cycle Accident Assessment Study

So why is he gaining in public stature? Why is his work increasingly
referred to in the media as a 'road safety campaign'?

Given the years of widespread public attention, surely someone would
have taken him down by now if he was lying or perverting the course of
justice?

Or is it because no-one can fault his claims that speed cameras are
not as effective as the SCPs claim?

uk.tosspot is thataway

LOL good answer, very considered and insightful, it's sure to make
any reader question the SS campaign - not!

Go on, 'plonk' me

No newspaper has ever carried such a shocking incitement to pervert
justice, that's why you are singularly unable to name these newspapers.

The evidence is clear, proven liar and perverter of justice Paul
Smith's words are reproduced faithfully above.

No newspaper has ever carried such a shocking incitement to pervert
justice, that's why you are singularly unable to name these newspapers.

This took 15 seconds to find (and it's recent):

http://news.ft.com/cms/s/14bb7164-99...00e2511c8.html

Put a variation of that that in an opinion column and you've struck
gold

smeggy wrote:

No newspaper has ever carried such a shocking incitement to pervert
justice, that's why you are singularly unable to name these newspapers.

This took 15 seconds to find (and it's recent):

http://news.ft.com/cms/s/14bb7164-99...00e2511c8.html


1/

That article doesn't mention even smith or his encouragement of the
perversion of justice, and the article from the FT doesn't encourage
the perversion of justice.


2/

smith explicitly said:

""In some areas kids think it is funny to attach black tape to a
number plate to make the numbers and letters different; this is a trend

well worth encouraging." .


Which is a million miles away from what the FT article said.

Why are you telling lies please?


Smith's rumbled.

His casual, arrogant dismissal of road traffic laws designed to ensure
the safety and protection of road users has been exposed, your risible
defence that other media have REPORTED such cases comes nowhere near a
defence for smith to ENCOURAGE such practices.


The man's a charlatan, a fraud and a liar.

On 20 May 2006 04:52:32 -0700, "spindrift"
wrote:

That article doesn't mention even smith or his encouragement of the
perversion of justice, and the article from the FT doesn't encourage
the perversion of justice.

Who said it did? It was something I found in 15 seconds, not bad
going. It gave the idea, all it needs is for someone to write in their
opinion about it and the job is done (something you I could do so
easily - for example the 'your views' section on Sky News). Do you
agree that could indeed happen? Ifso then that's the end of it; if not
then you are seriously, seriously deluded.

Why are you telling lies please?

Prove that I did (I won't hold my breath)

The man's a charlatan, a fraud and a liar.

And guess what, you still haven't proven any of this, those are just
your words - for all your efforts you're still at square 1.


So how is your prosecution of the 'pretend policeman' coming along?


How is your correspondance with Essi Ahari going?


Hey spindrift, have you had any near misses today? It would seem odd
that someone of your claimed knowledge about issues of road safety
would suffer"'a near miss vrtually every day" [quoted from spindrift
on Sheffield forums 1 week ago].

1/

That article doesn't mention even smith or his encouragement of the
perversion of justice, and the article from the FT doesn't encourage
the perversion of justice.


2/


smith explicitly said:


""In some areas kids think it is funny to attach black tape to a
number plate to make the numbers and letters different; this is a trend



well worth encouraging." .


Which is a million miles away from what the FT article said.


Why are you telling lies please?


You claimed that other articles had carried the same incitement to
pervert justice as Smith had.

You lied.
Prove me wrong post the article here.

Remember though, REPORTING the incident is not the same as saying the
incident "SHOULD BE ENCOURAGED".


See the difference?


Paul Smith of Sakespeed encourages people to pervert justice , the FT
REPORTED on a similar case.


Get a grown up to expain the difference if you like, until you grasp
the point you are plainly a liar, unless you'd like to retract your lie
above?



People are dying on the roads because of arrogant, selfish boy racers
like Smith. He has a long record of disregard for any traffic laws and
a history of threats and abuse against anyone who disagrees with him.
The man is an unprincipled, dishonest blow hard which is why he never
shows his face on open forums and prefers his toady acolytes to use his
own dishonest tactics instead, like you smegma, claiming that the FT
encourage the perversion of justice.



Smith has no partner, no job, no life beyond his nodding dog forum.
Every time he speaks publicly he embarrasses himself and confirms his
position among the media contacts I have as vain, drunken gob****e much
like the Fathers For Justice cretins or Captain Gatso, who used to be
advertised on the crapspeed website.


He is an irrelevance, but the fact that you have your tongue so far up
his fundament that you refuse to even admit his despicable
announcements are illegal and terribly dangerous shows nothing so much
as your utter dependancy on lies to bolster your case.


The police think he's a joke, the media laugh behind their hands every
time smith's terribly pompous and self important "Press releases" are
despatched and the general public have never heard of him or think he
makes suits.


But smith depends for credibility on fake coppers like In Gear (you do
realise that In Gear posts as two other people on crapspeed, don't
you?) or besotted lying half wits like you.

That article doesn't mention even smith or his encouragement of the
perversion of justice, and the article from the FT doesn't encourage
the perversion of justice.

………..

See the difference?
Are you being deliberately obtuse or just plain stupid? Seriously!

I already that that particular article didn't encourage; I actually
said that all someone need do is reply to such a story via an opinion
column - I notice you are avoiding a direct response to that by doing
your 'stuck record' trick and not properly quoting me. I ask again: do
you agree that could indeed happen?

Besides, I don't need to find the specific report (and it would be
unreasonable to expect me to do so). You actually said that no news
report would contain such a phrase, I replied by demonstrating how you
could be wrong. Now you are twisting your own words.

See the difference?

People are dying on the roads because of arrogant, selfish boy racers
like Smith.
Prove he is a 'boy racer' - I know you cant! (1)
People are also dying on the roads because of inattentive drivers, are
these the same road users who have "a near miss virtually every day" -
people like yourself?

He has a long record of disregard for any traffic laws
'Any'? So do you mean all traffic laws? Please show us this 'long
record' (2)

a history of threats and abuse against anyone who disagrees with him.
Many disagree with him on the forums yet I've never seen any threats
against those who are polite, unless you can prove otherwise? (3)

which is why he never shows his face on open forums
How ironic, you post your crap only on cycling sites - go figure!

and prefers his toady acolytes to use his
own dishonest tactics instead, like you smegma, claiming that the FT
encourage the perversion of justice.
Oh please tell me where I said "the FT encourage the perversion of
justice" (4)

Smith has no partner
Lol you are such a loser - obviously you're not doing your homework,
either that or you are a liar! Prove that claim! (5)

Every time he speaks publicly he embarrasses himself and confirms his
position among the media contacts I have as vain
I suspect you have absolutely no media contacts, I say this because
his opinion is obviously so respected in the media; how else could he
appear in it soooo many times? How many times do you think he's
appeared on TV stating his case? Does that in itself not tell you
anything? (6)

drunken …..
Oooh, is this a real sign of desperation?
Oh please elaborate…… (7)
I rank this next to your other lies such as: "he started safespeed cos
he got a speeding ticket" and "he was previously a delivery driver"

He is an irrelevance, but the fact that you have your tongue so far up
his fundament that you refuse to even admit his despicable
announcements are illegal
You are yet to prove they are/were illegal, you're still at square
one…..

In fact I could turn that against you and say "You have an irrational
dislike of PS. The fact you've been showing it for 2.5 years shows
just how unbalanced you really are, the fact you've been unsuccessful
shows how stupid/wrong you are"

The fact that my belief is aligned with his doesn't mean I'm a
sycophant; I'm defending SS because I believe you to be a liar
(something which is easy to demonstrate because you simply can't prove
your claims - any of them - let alone all of them). Allowing you to
succeed with your lies could jeopardise what I wish to have achieved.

The police think he's a joke
And how do you know that? Do you have police contacts too (or are they
pretend contacts like you've already alleged PS to have?) (8)

Funny that, most here - on a cycling newsgroup - think the same about
you. Check out just how many times you were ****ed upon and kill-filed
by your comrades he

"more on the war on drivers" - author: spindrift

http://groups.google.co.uk/group/uk....2c2ee05fbf98d6

LOL you are too easy :c)

the media laugh behind their hands every
time smith's terribly pompous and self important "Press releases" are
despatched
Can I assume there is absolutely no way you can prove any of that? If
so how can you stand by that statement? If you can't, how can you
disprove yourself to be a liar or a charletan? (9)

But smith depends for credibility on fake coppers like In Gear (you do
realise that In Gear posts as two other people on crapspeed, don't
you?) or besotted lying half wits like you.

Oh the irony - ben potter, martin crow, cathy browne, bike clips(s)……
I've asked you this sooo many times before and not once did you give
any answer so it's worth repeating: How does PS depend on IG?

OK, I count 9 separate claims in total (the numbers in the brackets),
I expect you will be able to substantiate all 9 otherwise you leave
yourself open to being called what you have been calling PS so much: a
liar!

Time for my own stuck record trick…..


So how is your prosecution of the 'pretend policeman' coming along?


How is your correspondance with Essi Ahari going?


Have you had your near misses every day this week? It would seem odd
that someone of your claimed knowledge about issues of road safety
would suffer"'a near miss vrtually every day" [quoted from spindrift
on Sheffield forums 2 week ago] - this isn't something you've denied!

smeggy wrote:


I already that that particular article didn't encourage;!

Just so that I understand you, and for the fifth time of asking, you do
now concede that Smith explicitly encouraged the perversion of justice?

Tampering with licence plates is a criminal offence, the FT reported
such a case, Smith encouraged it.

And you maintain that a man who encourages such acts can fairly be
described as a "road safety campaigner"?

LOL!!