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

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".

Ah.... that was a typo.

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 that the
string "...behaved like that cyclists immediately before the collision
and as he did after it?" was a reference to *a* cyclist rather than to a
plurality of cyclists.

Had it been a plural reference, I would have used "those" instead of
"that" and "they" instead of "he".

I want to know from you how *you* think it affected the
mechanics. I am not interested in "the court will decide".

Are you talking about the "cyclists" you profess to have believed my
post was about, or the cyclist it was actually about?

On 17/08/2017 20:25, Kerr-Mudd,John wrote:
On Wed, 16 Aug 2017 18:37:46 +0100, Bod wrote:

On 16/08/2017 18:28, Nick wrote:
On 16/08/2017 18:20, Bod wrote:

I honestly have never encountered any of these despicable events in
all of my years of driving and cycling. The odd **** and inconsiderate
driver, yes. I can only assume that these devil cyclists derive from
low life areas and large towns, which I rarely travel in.

Not really. I mainly work close to old street where this crash happened.
I have never had any bad experiences with cyclists.

I'm quite happy for the police to prosecute him for having a dangerous
bike. However I very much doubt they would have prosecuted a motorist or
bus driver even if they were behaving far more dangerously.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Not really. I mainly work close to old street where this crash
happened.
I have never had any bad experiences with cyclists.

I'm quite happy for the police to prosecute him for having a dangerous
bike. However I very much doubt they would have prosecuted a
motorist or
bus driver even if they were behaving far more dangerously.
*
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.

On Fri, 18 Aug 2017 15:21:34 +0100,Birdbrain Macaw (now "James Wilkinson"),
the pathological attention whore of all the uk ngs, blathered again:


Yeah, that's the thing to do. Have you always been a spineless little ****
all?

Name three people you actually like.

Sociopathic asshole Hucker believes he's in a position to ask questions! LOL

--
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 Fri, 18 Aug 2017 15:21:59 +0100, Birdbrain Macaw (now "James Wilkinson"),
the pathological attention whore of all the uk ngs, blathered again:

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.

....and this coming of course from the pointless pesky troll who cowardly
keeps hiding behind his hilarious, "huge" pretend-killfile! LOL


--
More of Birdbrain Macaw's (now "James Wilkinson" LOL) sociopathic "wisdom":
"If you're going somewhere, it must be somewhere you need or want to go."
MID:

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.

--
Bah, and indeed, Humbug

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.