The system works. Driver found not guilty

Gang of cyclists holding up traffic, one claims he was rammed onto a
bonnet, eye witness refuted that, case collapsed. Job's a good 'un.

http://www.gazetteseries.co.uk/news/...nd_not_guilty/

MrCheerful wrote:

Gang of cyclists holding up traffic, one claims he was rammed onto a
bonnet, eye witness refuted that, case collapsed. Job's a good 'un.

http://www.gazetteseries.co.uk/news/...nd_not_guilty/

This is fabulous news !

Needless to say, you and your fellow psychopaths who troll this newgsroup
are too stupid to understand why.

--
john smith |MA (Hons)|MPhil (Hons)|CAPES (mention très bien)|LLB (Hons)
'It never gets any easier. You just get faster'
(Greg LeMond (1961 - ))

On 31/03/2016 22:06, Phil W Lee wrote:
MrCheerful considered Thu, 31 Mar 2016
08:48:33 +0100 the perfect time to write:

Gang of cyclists holding up traffic, one claims he was rammed onto a
bonnet, eye witness refuted that, case collapsed. Job's a good 'un.

http://www.gazetteseries.co.uk/news/...nd_not_guilty/

It seems cyclists will have to take careful note of his details and
exact justice themselves, since the courts failed to do so.
Despite the independent witness stating that he drive deliberately
into the cyclist.

Flaying him slowly and hammering all his joints to a pulp would be
justifiable self-defence, if he is seen near a motor vehicle in
future. That would at least prevent him having access to his weapon
of choice in the future.


you are a loony

On 31/03/2016 23:40, MrCheerful wrote:

On 31/03/2016 22:06, Phil W Lee wrote:
MrCheerful :

Gang of cyclists holding up traffic, one claims he was rammed onto a
bonnet, eye witness refuted that, case collapsed. Job's a good 'un.

http://www.gazetteseries.co.uk/news/...nd_not_guilty/

It seems cyclists will have to take careful note of his details and
exact justice themselves, since the courts failed to do so.
Despite the independent witness stating that he drive deliberately
into the cyclist.
Flaying him slowly and hammering all his joints to a pulp would be
justifiable self-defence, if he is seen near a motor vehicle in
future. That would at least prevent him having access to his weapon
of choice in the future.

you are a loony

That's putting it mildly.

MrCheerful wrote:
On 31/03/2016 22:06, Phil W Lee wrote:
MrCheerful considered Thu, 31 Mar 2016
08:48:33 +0100 the perfect time to write:

Gang of cyclists holding up traffic, one claims he was rammed onto a
bonnet, eye witness refuted that, case collapsed. Job's a good 'un.

http://www.gazetteseries.co.uk/news/...nd_not_guilty/

It seems cyclists will have to take careful note of his details and
exact justice themselves, since the courts failed to do so. Despite the
independent witness stating that he drive deliberately into the cyclist.

Flaying him slowly and hammering all his joints to a pulp would be
justifiable self-defence, if he is seen near a motor vehicle in future.
That would at least prevent him having access to his weapon of choice in
the future.

you are a loony

And you are a car-driving troll who has no business being on a
cycling-related newsgroup.

A car driver has committed a serious offence, and has gone unpunished.

That situation _must_ be corrected. Natural justice demands no less.

--
john smith |MA (Hons)|MPhil (Hons)|CAPES (mention très bien)|LLB (Hons)
'It never gets any easier. You just get faster'
(Greg LeMond (1961 - ))

Phil W Lee wrote:
MrCheerful considered Thu, 31 Mar 2016
08:48:33 +0100 the perfect time to write:

Gang of cyclists holding up traffic, one claims he was rammed onto a
bonnet, eye witness refuted that, case collapsed. Job's a good 'un.

http://www.gazetteseries.co.uk/news/...nd_not_guilty/

It seems cyclists will have to take careful note of his details and exact
justice themselves, since the courts failed to do so. Despite the
independent witness stating that he drive deliberately into the cyclist.

Sadly, I see no other option.

Flaying him slowly and hammering all his joints to a pulp would be
justifiable self-defence, if he is seen near a motor vehicle in future.
That would at least prevent him having access to his weapon of choice in
the future.

I don't see any need to make him suffer pain before he is justly executed.

--
john smith |MA (Hons)|MPhil (Hons)|CAPES (mention très bien)|LLB (Hons)
'It never gets any easier. You just get faster'
(Greg LeMond (1961 - ))

On 01/04/2016 12:37, Anthony '****_Taker' Janssen wrote:
MrCheerful wrote:
On 31/03/2016 22:06, Phil W Lee wrote:
MrCheerful considered Thu, 31 Mar 2016
08:48:33 +0100 the perfect time to write:

Gang of cyclists holding up traffic, one claims he was rammed onto a
bonnet, eye witness refuted that, case collapsed. Job's a good 'un.

http://www.gazetteseries.co.uk/news/...nd_not_guilty/

It seems cyclists will have to take careful note of his details and
exact justice themselves, since the courts failed to do so. Despite the
independent witness stating that he drive deliberately into the cyclist.

Flaying him slowly and hammering all his joints to a pulp would be
justifiable self-defence, if he is seen near a motor vehicle in future.
That would at least prevent him having access to his weapon of choice in
the future.

you are a loony

And you are a car-driving troll who has no business being on a
cycling-related newsgroup.

A car driver has committed a serious offence, and has gone unpunished.


He was found not guilty, and it was found that the cyclist lied, now
really the cyclist should be punished.

On 01/04/2016 14:11, Mrcheerful wrote:
On 01/04/2016 12:37, Anthony '****_Taker' Janssen wrote:
MrCheerful wrote:
On 31/03/2016 22:06, Phil W Lee wrote:
MrCheerful considered Thu, 31 Mar 2016
08:48:33 +0100 the perfect time to write:

Gang of cyclists holding up traffic, one claims he was rammed onto a
bonnet, eye witness refuted that, case collapsed. Job's a good 'un.

http://www.gazetteseries.co.uk/news/...nd_not_guilty/


It seems cyclists will have to take careful note of his details and
exact justice themselves, since the courts failed to do so. Despite
the
independent witness stating that he drive deliberately into the
cyclist.

Flaying him slowly and hammering all his joints to a pulp would be
justifiable self-defence, if he is seen near a motor vehicle in future.
That would at least prevent him having access to his weapon of
choice in
the future.

you are a loony

And you are a car-driving troll who has no business being on a
cycling-related newsgroup.

A car driver has committed a serious offence, and has gone unpunished.


He was found not guilty, and it was found that the cyclist lied, now
really the cyclist should be punished.

Absolutely.

And it was a particularly mean and spiteful nasty little crime the
cyclist turd committed, trying to wreck the livelihood and family life
of his victim.

Mrcheerful wrote:
On 01/04/2016 12:37, Anthony '****_Taker' Janssen wrote:
MrCheerful wrote:
On 31/03/2016 22:06, Phil W Lee wrote:
MrCheerful considered Thu, 31 Mar 2016
08:48:33 +0100 the perfect time to write:

Gang of cyclists holding up traffic, one claims he was rammed onto a
bonnet, eye witness refuted that, case collapsed. Job's a good 'un.

http://www.gazetteseries.co.uk/news/...nd_not_guilty/

It seems cyclists will have to take careful note of his details and
exact justice themselves, since the courts failed to do so. Despite the
independent witness stating that he drive deliberately into the cyclist.

Flaying him slowly and hammering all his joints to a pulp would be
justifiable self-defence, if he is seen near a motor vehicle in future.
That would at least prevent him having access to his weapon of choice in
the future.

you are a loony

And you are a car-driving troll who has no business being on a
cycling-related newsgroup.

A car driver has committed a serious offence, and has gone unpunished.

He was found not guilty,

Which does not mean that he didn't do it. It just means that twelve idiots
who probably all drive and who are probably all just as biased against
cyclists as the idiots who troll here, decided that the cyclist 'had it
coming'.

and it was found that the cyclist lied, now really the cyclist should be
punished.

It was 'found' no such thing, you ignorant, trolling cur.


--
john smith |MA (Hons)|MPhil (Hons)|CAPES (mention très bien)|LLB (Hons)
'It never gets any easier. You just get faster'
(Greg LeMond (1961 - ))

Phil W Lee wrote:
Anthony '****_Taker' Janssen
considered Fri, 1 Apr
2016 12:39:17 +0100 the perfect time to write:
Phil W Lee wrote:
MrCheerful considered Thu, 31 Mar 2016
08:48:33 +0100 the perfect time to write:

Gang of cyclists holding up traffic, one claims he was rammed onto a
bonnet, eye witness refuted that, case collapsed. Job's a good 'un.

http://www.gazetteseries.co.uk/news/...nd_not_guilty/

It seems cyclists will have to take careful note of his details and
exact justice themselves, since the courts failed to do so. Despite
the independent witness stating that he drive deliberately into the
cyclist.

Sadly, I see no other option.

Flaying him slowly and hammering all his joints to a pulp would be
justifiable self-defence, if he is seen near a motor vehicle in future.
That would at least prevent him having access to his weapon of choice
in the future.

I don't see any need to make him suffer pain before he is justly
executed.

Maybe I'm too lenient - I see no reason to execute him, provided he is
prevented from ever being able to operate his weapon of choice again.

Alas, I cannot agree. Someone who would inflict such harm on attempt to
inflict such harm on another person, is human flotsam. This world is
overpopulated already, and that this pile of filth should be breathing,
walking around the streets, nipping into shops, driving around, basically..
existing, is an affront to natural justice.

--
john smith |MA (Hons)|MPhil (Hons)|CAPES (mention très bien)|LLB (Hons)
'It never gets any easier. You just get faster'
(Greg LeMond (1961 - ))