Yet another killer arrested.

On Fri, 15 Oct 2010 17:29:13 +0100 someone who may be David Hansen
wrote this:-

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1421135/Road-rage-driver-reversed-over-child-in-bicycle-buggy.html

http://findarticles.com/p/news-articles/daily-mail-london-england-the/mi_8002/is_2003_Feb_5/road-rage-driver-reversed-girl/ai_n36845739/
which claims to be a copy of a Daily Mail article is worth reading
about the pathetic little man too

"Baxter, 36, initially claimed to police that Mr Kerwin had walked
into his path as he reversed.

"Yesterday however, the father-of-one from Market Weighton, near
Hull, pleaded guilty, smirking as he told the court he was doing so
'on legal advice'."

and

"Baxter, speaking outside court, claimed he had not intended to harm
anyone.

"He said: 'I went back to apologise to the family for driving too
close. I had never seen a trailer like that before. There was no
sign to say a child was in it."

Yes yes. He reversed back to apologise and accidentally crashed into
the bike, rider and trailer, crushing them under the wheels of his
car.




--
David Hansen, Edinburgh
I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000...#pt3-pb3-l1g54

"David Hansen" wrote in message "He
said: 'I went back to apologise to the family for driving too
close. I had never seen a trailer like that before. There was no
sign to say a child was in it."

Yes yes. He reversed back to apologise and accidentally crashed into
the bike, rider and trailer, crushing them under the wheels of his
car.

Surprising how someone could really try and defend his actions as "not
deliberate", but there are some people who take glee at other people's
deaths so anything is possible, I suppose. In bygone days these sort of
people would be knitting at the base of guillotines or attending public
hanging events, so not much is new.

--
Simon Mason
http://www.simonmason.karoo.net/

On Fri, 15 Oct 2010 17:41:36 +0100, David Hansen
wrote:

On Fri, 15 Oct 2010 17:29:13 +0100 someone who may be David Hansen
wrote this:-

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1421135/Road-rage-driver-reversed-over-child-in-bicycle-buggy.html

http://findarticles.com/p/news-articles/daily-mail-london-england-the/mi_8002/is_2003_Feb_5/road-rage-driver-reversed-girl/ai_n36845739/
which claims to be a copy of a Daily Mail article is worth reading
about the pathetic little man too




That cannot be an accurate report. It does not say:

that he reversed in to them intentionally in "order to try and kill
them"

it doesn't say the Range Rover passed "within
inches"


I am sure that that is what has been claimed here before.


--
Stopping distances for bicycles do not appear in the HC ... and so
cannot be of any consequence.
(Simon Mason - who cycles at 25mph in 20 mph limits - and thinks it's clever)

On Fri, 15 Oct 2010 17:56:45 +0100, "Simon Mason"
wrote:


"David Hansen" wrote in message "He
said: 'I went back to apologise to the family for driving too
close. I had never seen a trailer like that before. There was no
sign to say a child was in it."

Yes yes. He reversed back to apologise and accidentally crashed into
the bike, rider and trailer, crushing them under the wheels of his
car.

Surprising how someone could really try and defend his actions as "not
deliberate", but there are some people who take glee at other people's
deaths so anything is possible, I suppose. In bygone days these sort of
people would be knitting at the base of guillotines or attending public
hanging events, so not much is new.


Sorry sunshine - I know that you are not bright - let me try again:

Please point me to the evidence accepted by the court that he
*deliberately* ran over both of them.

When you have found that - perhaps you can then explain why he was not
prosecuted for attempted murder.

That's not too difficult for you is it?

I am not defending his actions. I have never done so. I have said he
is a nasty piece of work.


This has nothing to do with discussing the case from a legal point of
view - rather than just having a wankcry which is no doubt what you
want.



You are "Excellent value"

--
Stopping distances for bicycles do not appear in the HC ... and so
cannot be of any consequence.
(Simon Mason - who cycles at 25mph in 20 mph limits - and thinks it's clever)

"Simon Mason" wrote in message
. uk...
Lorry driver in custody after cowardly fleeing the scene.

http://www.newsandstar.co.uk/news/cy...errerPath=home

Our thoughts are with the cyclist's family.

On Oct 15, 10:52*pm, JMS wrote:
On Fri, 15 Oct 2010 17:56:45 +0100, "Simon Mason"



wrote:

"David Hansen" wrote in message "He
said: 'I went back to apologise to the family for driving too
close. I had never seen a trailer like that before. There was no
sign to say a child was in it."

Yes yes. He reversed back to apologise and accidentally crashed into
the bike, rider and trailer, crushing them under the wheels of his
car.

Surprising how someone could really try and defend his actions as "not
deliberate", but there are some people who take glee at other people's
deaths so anything is possible, I suppose. In bygone days these sort of
people would be knitting at the base of guillotines or attending public
hanging events, so not much is new.

Sorry sunshine - I know that you are not bright - let me try again:

Please point me to the evidence accepted by the court that he
*deliberately* ran over both of them.

When you have found that - perhaps you can then explain why he was not
prosecuted for attempted murder.

That's not too difficult for you is it?

I am not defending his actions. *I have never done so. *I have said he
is a nasty piece of work.

This has nothing to do with discussing the case *from a legal point of
view - rather than just having a wankcry which is no doubt what you
want.

You are "Excellent value"

-- * * *
Stopping distances for bicycles do not appear in the HC ... *and *so
cannot be of any consequence.
(Simon Mason - *who cycles at 25mph in 20 mph limits - and thinks it's clever)

The reason he was not prosucuted for attempted murder is obvious.
It's all about the car cartel that exists, motorists will never give
an unbiased opinion.

UK Radical Campaigns.
http://wow.zing.icom43.net
A driving licence is a licence to kill.

On 15/10/2010 12:02, Simon Mason wrote:

Lorry driver in custody after cowardly fleeing the scene.

http://www.newsandstar.co.uk/news/cy...errerPath=home

You surprise - nay, shock - me.

The word "cowardly", despite its "ly" ending, is an adjective, not an adverb.

"...fleeing the scene like a coward" or "fleeing the scene in a cowardly
manner" would be correct.

On 15/10/2010 12:52, David Hansen wrote:
On Fri, 15 Oct 2010 12:02:10 +0100 someone who may be "Simon Mason"
linked this:-

http://www.newsandstar.co.uk/news/cy...errerPath=home

"Colin Rae, 83, of Whiteclosegate, died after his pedal bike
collided with a lorry"

I wonder if we will find out if this assertion is true, or whether
the newspaper is putting out biased information.

Did the bike collide with the lorry, or did the lorry collide with
the bike?

Why can't the paper say that the bike and lorry, or the lorry and
bike, collided? That formulation does not seek to place
responsibility for the collision on anyone.

Just as you or I would not be "to blame" for colliding with a kerbstone
dropped onto our vehicle from an overbridge, there is no implication of blame
in the way the article was worded.