CCTV shows boy, 4, mown down by cyclist

Obviously the child's fault.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-berkshire-41842047

On 02/11/2017 22:27, doug wrote:

Obviously the child's fault.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-berkshire-41842047

This was published a few days ago, wasn't it?

The offence of which the cyclist was convicted ("causing bodily harm by
wilful misconduct when driving") seems to be "The Alliston Charge", with
the misconduct here being riding in a pedestrianised precinct where no
cycling is allowed and pedestrians - even four year old ones - have a
reasonable expectation of not encountering louts on bikes.

The 27 weeks in prison sentence seems to support that view, too. At
last, the rights of other road-users (if you can call a pedestrian area
a road) seem to be taken seriously by the courts.

Other misconduct giving rise to the same charge in other incidents where
harm is caused might consist of things like cycling the wrong way in a
one way street or disobeying traffic signs and signals.

On 02/11/2017 22:59, JNugent wrote:
On 02/11/2017 22:27, doug wrote:

Obviously the child's fault.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-berkshire-41842047

This was published a few days ago, wasn't it?

The offence of which the cyclist was convicted ("causing bodily harm by
wilful misconduct when driving") seems to be "The Alliston Charge", with
the misconduct here being riding in a pedestrianised precinct where no
cycling is allowed and pedestrians - even four year old ones - have a
reasonable expectation of not encountering louts on bikes.

The 27 weeks in prison sentence seems to support that view, too. At
last, the rights of other road-users (if you can call a pedestrian area
a road) seem to be taken seriously by the courts.

Other misconduct giving rise to the same charge in other incidents where
harm is caused might consist of things like cycling the wrong way in a
one way street or disobeying traffic signs and signals.

Also he had been warned the day before about illegal cycling.

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

On 02/11/2017 23:39, Tony Dragon wrote:
On 02/11/2017 22:59, JNugent wrote:
On 02/11/2017 22:27, doug wrote:

Obviously the child's fault.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-berkshire-41842047

This was published a few days ago, wasn't it?

The offence of which the cyclist was convicted ("causing bodily harm
by wilful misconduct when driving") seems to be "The Alliston Charge",
with the misconduct here being riding in a pedestrianised precinct
where no cycling is allowed and pedestrians - even four year old ones
- have a reasonable expectation of not encountering louts on bikes.

The 27 weeks in prison sentence seems to support that view, too. At
last, the rights of other road-users (if you can call a pedestrian
area a road) seem to be taken seriously by the courts.

Other misconduct giving rise to the same charge in other incidents
where harm is caused might consist of things like cycling the wrong
way in a one way street or disobeying traffic signs and signals.

Also he had been warned the day before about illegal cycling.

"No Cycling" and "No Vehicles" signs don't apply to bikes.

On 03.11.2017 11:59, JNugent wrote:
On 02/11/2017 22:27, doug wrote:

Obviously the child's fault.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-berkshire-41842047

This was published a few days ago, wasn't it?

The offence of which the cyclist was convicted ("causing bodily harm by
wilful misconduct when driving") seems to be "The Alliston Charge", with
the misconduct here being riding in a pedestrianised precinct where no
cycling is allowed and pedestrians - even four year old ones - have a
reasonable expectation of not encountering louts on bikes.

The 27 weeks in prison sentence seems to support that view, too. At
last, the rights of other road-users (if you can call a pedestrian area
a road) seem to be taken seriously by the courts.

In these parts a "road" is defined as "anywhere to which the public has
access".
Including beaches, parks, meadows, mountain tracks etc.

Other misconduct giving rise to the same charge in other incidents where
harm is caused might consist of things like cycling the wrong way in a
one way street or disobeying traffic signs and signals.

On 03/11/2017 09:45, Peter Keller wrote:
On 03.11.2017 11:59, JNugent wrote:
On 02/11/2017 22:27, doug wrote:

Obviously the child's fault.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-berkshire-41842047

This was published a few days ago, wasn't it?

The offence of which the cyclist was convicted ("causing bodily harm by
wilful misconduct when driving") seems to be "The Alliston Charge", with
the misconduct here being riding in a pedestrianised precinct where no
cycling is allowed and pedestrians - even four year old ones - have a
reasonable expectation of not encountering louts on bikes.

The 27 weeks in prison sentence seems to support that view, too. At
last, the rights of other road-users (if you can call a pedestrian area
a road) seem to be taken seriously by the courts.

In these parts a "road" is defined as "anywhere to which the public has
access".
Including beaches, parks, meadows, mountain tracks etc.

It's the same here, but this, of course, is for the purpose of defining
offences committed in such locations as coming under the Road Traffic
Acts. It isn't meant to state or suggest that a beach, park, meadow or
mountain track is a road.

If there ever was a place where it ought to be safe to allow a four year
old "off the leash", the definition ought to include locations where all
traffic is banned.

Other misconduct giving rise to the same charge in other incidents where
harm is caused might consist of things like cycling the wrong way in a
one way street or disobeying traffic signs and signals.

doug wrote:
Obviously the child's fault.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-berkshire-41842047

27 weeks in jail :-) Warned the day before and he ignored the warning.
Typical thick cyclist.
I hope that prison hurts him. I really do.
I also hope that when this arsehole is released he has been evicted from his
council flat for not paying the rent.
Or, can you still claim dole when you are in prison?
We all know that most cyclists are on the dole.
Just imagine on your CV putting cycling down as a hobby. Into the bin goes
the CV.

On Friday, November 3, 2017 at 7:22:11 PM UTC, Mr Pounder Esquire wrote:
doug wrote:
Obviously the child's fault.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-berkshire-41842047

27 weeks in jail

Seems rather harsh when, for the same offence, a motorist would get a £60 fine at most.
And that would be if the 'it was just a momentary lapse of concentration' or the 'I pay rudetax' defences failed.

On Sat, 4 Nov 2017 07:43:03 -0700 (PDT), Simon Jester
wrote:

Seems rather harsh when, for the same offence, a motorist would get a £60 fine at most.

For driving through a pedestrian only shopping area and running
someone down in the process? Seems unlikely.

On Saturday, November 4, 2017 at 4:08:53 PM UTC, Peter Parry wrote:
On Sat, 4 Nov 2017 07:43:03 -0700 (PDT), Simon Jester
wrote:

Seems rather harsh when, for the same offence, a motorist would get a £60 fine at most.

For driving through a pedestrian only shopping area and running
someone down in the process? Seems unlikely.

True, the driver would most unlikely to even be fined.
A custodial sentence is out of the question.