Speeding driver who killed dedicated cyclist days before Christmasgets jail sentence

On 12/09/2020 14:43, Mike Collins wrote:
On Saturday, 12 September 2020 14:40:01 UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
On 12/09/2020 13:14, Mike Collins wrote:

On Saturday, 12 September 2020 12:17:21 UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
On 12/09/2020 03:32, Mike Collins wrote:

[ ... ]

I admit I was wrong about the wording of the legislation, that is not the same as an apology.

You were 100% wrong but you won't apologise?
I see.

To whom do I need to apologise?

To anybody who saw your erroneous claim and were so credulous and
ignorant of the facts that they might have been misled by it* and also
those whom you abused for pointing out your latest error.
[*Don't dismiss that possibility - you saw something which mentioned the
required the legally-required standard of accuracy of a speedometer and
drew entirely the wrong conclusion from it.]

So nobody.

Let's leave aside the fact that there are some cyclists even more stupid
than you, who would have grasped at your your faulty statements as
though gospel truth.

How about when, in an exchange on your blatant untruth about the
provisions of the C&U Regs with respect to speedometers, you said (serially:

QUOTE:
Nugents made a mistake as to the a provision of the C&R regulations and
that fact was pointed out to him. he at least realised he was wrong
because he's gone quiet about it
ENDQUOTE

[Yes, it was *you* who had gone quiet], or

[in response to my question:]

QUOTE:
How much more idiotic can you possibly prove yourself to be? Surely you
can't have much further to go? Do you still insist that a UK motor
vehicle's speedometer (where its presence is mandated by the C&U Regs)
*must* over-read?
ENDQUOTE

You answered:

QUOTE:
"Yes"
ENDQUOTE

So nobody is the correct answer.

On reflection, I accept your implied position that nobody could possibly
be so stupid as to believe what you say.

I hope that helps.

On Saturday, 12 September 2020 15:06:41 UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
On 12/09/2020 14:43, Mike Collins wrote:
On Saturday, 12 September 2020 14:40:01 UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
On 12/09/2020 13:14, Mike Collins wrote:

On Saturday, 12 September 2020 12:17:21 UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
On 12/09/2020 03:32, Mike Collins wrote:

[ ... ]

I admit I was wrong about the wording of the legislation, that is not the same as an apology.

You were 100% wrong but you won't apologise?
I see.

To whom do I need to apologise?

To anybody who saw your erroneous claim and were so credulous and
ignorant of the facts that they might have been misled by it* and also
those whom you abused for pointing out your latest error.
[*Don't dismiss that possibility - you saw something which mentioned the
required the legally-required standard of accuracy of a speedometer and
drew entirely the wrong conclusion from it.]

So nobody.

Let's leave aside the fact that there are some cyclists even more stupid
than you, who would have grasped at your your faulty statements as
though gospel truth.

How about when, in an exchange on your blatant untruth about the
provisions of the C&U Regs with respect to speedometers, you said (serially:

QUOTE:
Nugents made a mistake as to the a provision of the C&R regulations and
that fact was pointed out to him. he at least realised he was wrong
because he's gone quiet about it
ENDQUOTE

[Yes, it was *you* who had gone quiet], or

[in response to my question:]

QUOTE:
How much more idiotic can you possibly prove yourself to be? Surely you
can't have much further to go? Do you still insist that a UK motor
vehicle's speedometer (where its presence is mandated by the C&U Regs)
*must* over-read?
ENDQUOTE

You answered:

QUOTE:
"Yes"
ENDQUOTE

So nobody is the correct answer.

On reflection, I accept your implied position that nobody could possibly
be so stupid as to believe what you say.

I hope that helps.

Thank you for the playground insult.

On 12/09/2020 15:12, Mike Collins wrote:
On Saturday, 12 September 2020 15:06:41 UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
On 12/09/2020 14:43, Mike Collins wrote:
On Saturday, 12 September 2020 14:40:01 UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
On 12/09/2020 13:14, Mike Collins wrote:

On Saturday, 12 September 2020 12:17:21 UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
On 12/09/2020 03:32, Mike Collins wrote:

[ ... ]

I admit I was wrong about the wording of the legislation, that is not the same as an apology.

You were 100% wrong but you won't apologise?
I see.

To whom do I need to apologise?

To anybody who saw your erroneous claim and were so credulous and
ignorant of the facts that they might have been misled by it* and also
those whom you abused for pointing out your latest error.
[*Don't dismiss that possibility - you saw something which mentioned the
required the legally-required standard of accuracy of a speedometer and
drew entirely the wrong conclusion from it.]

So nobody.

Let's leave aside the fact that there are some cyclists even more stupid
than you, who would have grasped at your your faulty statements as
though gospel truth.

How about when, in an exchange on your blatant untruth about the
provisions of the C&U Regs with respect to speedometers, you said (serially:

QUOTE:
Nugents made a mistake as to the a provision of the C&R regulations and
that fact was pointed out to him. he at least realised he was wrong
because he's gone quiet about it
ENDQUOTE

[Yes, it was *you* who had gone quiet], or

[in response to my question:]

QUOTE:
How much more idiotic can you possibly prove yourself to be? Surely you
can't have much further to go? Do you still insist that a UK motor
vehicle's speedometer (where its presence is mandated by the C&U Regs)
*must* over-read?
ENDQUOTE

You answered:

QUOTE:
"Yes"
ENDQUOTE

So nobody is the correct answer.

On reflection, I accept your implied position that nobody could possibly
be so stupid as to believe what you say.

I hope that helps.

Thank you for the playground insult.

It's the only construction of what you said that makes sense.

You lied, but insist that no-one was stupid enough to be misled by your lie.

I'll go along with that.

Unless you want to change it (again)?