|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Pavement cyclist loses in court
Mr Arnold, who cycles to Cambridge station daily, was caught in an operation
by special officers who said residents were angry at cyclists avoiding traffic lights by riding on pavements. The 35-year-old, who was convicted of riding a pedal cycle on a footpath after a one-hour trial at Cambridge Magistrates' Court, was one of 40 cyclists caught at the junction of Arbury Road and Milton Road on September 6 - but chose to fight his case as he said the path followed on from a shared use pavement and there was nothing to show it was illegal to cycle there. A Cambridgeshire County Council spokesman said: "Shared use footpaths are clearly marked and our advice to cyclists would be that unless the footpath is clearly signed as such they should not use it as a cycleway." Looking on google earth the pavements are awash with cyclists, it must be awful for pedestrians. http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/News...t-06122012.htm |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Pavement cyclist loses in court
On 10/12/2012 20:07, Mrcheerful wrote:
Mr Arnold, who cycles to Cambridge station daily, was caught in an operation by special officers who said residents were angry at cyclists avoiding traffic lights by riding on pavements. The 35-year-old, who was convicted of riding a pedal cycle on a footpath after a one-hour trial at Cambridge Magistrates' Court, was one of 40 cyclists caught at the junction of Arbury Road and Milton Road on September 6 - but chose to fight his case as he said the path followed on from a shared use pavement and there was nothing to show it was illegal to cycle there. A Cambridgeshire County Council spokesman said: "Shared use footpaths are clearly marked and our advice to cyclists would be that unless the footpath is clearly signed as such they should not use it as a cycleway." Looking on google earth the pavements are awash with cyclists, it must be awful for pedestrians. http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/News...t-06122012.htm I see that the cyclist was "given a criminal record" and that the: "... Arbury Court resident was fined £30 plus a £15 victim surcharge. Fixed penalty notices on the day involve a £30 fine". Bearing in mind that he must have been *observed* committing this mean, nasty, selfish, offence, he should have had an additional exemplary fine (say, £1,000) for wasting the time, and insulting the intelligence of, the court and all involved. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Pavement cyclist loses in court
On Mon, 10 Dec 2012 21:57:02 +0000, JNugent
wrote: On 10/12/2012 20:07, Mrcheerful wrote: Mr Arnold, who cycles to Cambridge station daily, was caught in an operation by special officers who said residents were angry at cyclists avoiding traffic lights by riding on pavements. The 35-year-old, who was convicted of riding a pedal cycle on a footpath after a one-hour trial at Cambridge Magistrates' Court, was one of 40 cyclists caught at the junction of Arbury Road and Milton Road on September 6 - but chose to fight his case as he said the path followed on from a shared use pavement and there was nothing to show it was illegal to cycle there. A Cambridgeshire County Council spokesman said: "Shared use footpaths are clearly marked and our advice to cyclists would be that unless the footpath is clearly signed as such they should not use it as a cycleway." Looking on google earth the pavements are awash with cyclists, it must be awful for pedestrians. http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/News...t-06122012.htm I see that the cyclist was "given a criminal record" and that the: "... Arbury Court resident was fined £30 plus a £15 victim surcharge. Fixed penalty notices on the day involve a £30 fine". Bearing in mind that he must have been *observed* committing this mean, nasty, selfish, offence, he should have had an additional exemplary fine (say, £1,000) for wasting the time, and insulting the intelligence of, the court and all involved. While I wouldn't put his offence in the same terms as you, I'm minded to agree of the order of the fine you suggest should have been imposed. A one hour trial must cost something in the region of £1000. As an alternative to court and such a fine, I propose he should have been given a meaningful act of public duty to carry out, such as removing all the D-locks, without bike attached, some cyclists leave attached to public bike stands. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Pavement cyclist loses in court
On Dec 10, 9:57*pm, JNugent wrote:
On 10/12/2012 20:07, Mrcheerful wrote: Mr Arnold, who cycles to Cambridge station daily, was caught in an operation by special officers who said residents were angry at cyclists avoiding traffic lights by riding on pavements. The 35-year-old, who was convicted of riding a pedal cycle on a footpath after a one-hour trial at Cambridge Magistrates' Court, was one of 40 cyclists caught at the junction of Arbury Road and Milton Road on September 6 - but chose to fight his case as he said the path followed on from a shared use pavement and there was nothing to show it was illegal to cycle there. A Cambridgeshire County Council spokesman said: "Shared use footpaths are clearly marked and our advice to cyclists would be that unless the footpath is clearly signed as such they should not use it as a cycleway." Looking on google earth the pavements are awash with cyclists, it must be awful for pedestrians. http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/News...or-riding-on-p... I see that the cyclist was "given a criminal record" and that the: cool, 12"? 78 or 45? mono/stereo? 1.8mil , 1 mil or 0.7mil? "... Arbury Court resident was fined 30 plus a 15 victim surcharge. Fixed penalty notices on the day involve a 30 fine". and he had good reason to reject such an on-the-street judgement. Bearing in mind that he must have been *observed* committing this mean, nasty, selfish, offence, did the fence "need" painting? he should have had an additional exemplary fine (say, 1,000) for wasting the time, and insulting the intelligence of, the court and all involved. Bull****, these "court hearings" are part of the indoctrination and the funding for such is long established for the oppression of the common man. Accepting payment from the the oppressed in order to oppress is so obviously corrupt that one can't help but think that for those involved, their sentence to endure hell and damnation for all eternity cannot come soon enough. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Pavement cyclist loses in court
On 10/12/2012 21:57, JNugent wrote:
On 10/12/2012 20:07, Mrcheerful wrote: Mr Arnold, who cycles to Cambridge station daily, was caught in an operation by special officers who said residents were angry at cyclists avoiding traffic lights by riding on pavements. The 35-year-old, who was convicted of riding a pedal cycle on a footpath after a one-hour trial at Cambridge Magistrates' Court, was one of 40 cyclists caught at the junction of Arbury Road and Milton Road on September 6 - but chose to fight his case as he said the path followed on from a shared use pavement and there was nothing to show it was illegal to cycle there. A Cambridgeshire County Council spokesman said: "Shared use footpaths are clearly marked and our advice to cyclists would be that unless the footpath is clearly signed as such they should not use it as a cycleway." Looking on google earth the pavements are awash with cyclists, it must be awful for pedestrians. http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/News...t-06122012.htm I see that the cyclist was "given a criminal record" and that the: "... Arbury Court resident was fined £30 plus a £15 victim surcharge. Fixed penalty notices on the day involve a £30 fine". Bearing in mind that he must have been *observed* committing this mean, nasty, selfish, offence, he should have had an additional exemplary fine (say, £1,000) for wasting the time, and insulting the intelligence of, the court and all involved. Perhaps his legal adviser was Anchor Lee? -- Dave - Cyclists VOR. "Many people barely recognise the bicycle as a legitimate mode of transport; it is either a toy for children or a vehicle fit only for the poor and/or strange," Dave Horton, of Lancaster University, wrote in an interim assessment of the Understanding Walking and Cycling study. "For them, cycling is a bit embarrassing, they fail to see its purpose, and have no interest in integrating it into their lives, certainly on a regular basis." |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Pavement cyclist loses in court
Dave - Cyclists VOR wrote:
On 10/12/2012 21:57, JNugent wrote: On 10/12/2012 20:07, Mrcheerful wrote: Mr Arnold, who cycles to Cambridge station daily, was caught in an operation by special officers who said residents were angry at cyclists avoiding traffic lights by riding on pavements. The 35-year-old, who was convicted of riding a pedal cycle on a footpath after a one-hour trial at Cambridge Magistrates' Court, was one of 40 cyclists caught at the junction of Arbury Road and Milton Road on September 6 - but chose to fight his case as he said the path followed on from a shared use pavement and there was nothing to show it was illegal to cycle there. A Cambridgeshire County Council spokesman said: "Shared use footpaths are clearly marked and our advice to cyclists would be that unless the footpath is clearly signed as such they should not use it as a cycleway." Looking on google earth the pavements are awash with cyclists, it must be awful for pedestrians. http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/News...t-06122012.htm I see that the cyclist was "given a criminal record" and that the: "... Arbury Court resident was fined £30 plus a £15 victim surcharge. Fixed penalty notices on the day involve a £30 fine". Bearing in mind that he must have been *observed* committing this mean, nasty, selfish, offence, he should have had an additional exemplary fine (say, £1,000) for wasting the time, and insulting the intelligence of, the court and all involved. Perhaps his legal adviser was Anchor Lee? Evidently not: The cyclist was convicted. If Lee had been involved then the cyclist would have been found not guilty and received substantial damages plus the key to the city and an honorary doctorate. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Pavement cyclist loses in court
On Mon, 10 Dec 2012 20:07:02 -0000, "Mrcheerful"
wrote: Looking on google earth the pavements are awash with cyclists, it must be awful for pedestrians. Really!? http://goo.gl/maps/I9zNI I can see a few bicycles on the footway, and some of those pedestrians might also be cyclists. But I can't spot anyone riding a bike on the footway. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Pavement cyclist loses in court
Bertie Wooster wrote:
On Mon, 10 Dec 2012 20:07:02 -0000, "Mrcheerful" wrote: Looking on google earth the pavements are awash with cyclists, it must be awful for pedestrians. Really!? http://goo.gl/maps/I9zNI I can see a few bicycles on the footway, and some of those pedestrians might also be cyclists. But I can't spot anyone riding a bike on the footway. I was looking on Google earth (rather than google maps) and the whole area around the junction was covered in bicycles, probably around twenty or more, and only one was riding in the road. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Pavement cyclist loses in court
On Dec 10, 11:41*pm, "Mrcheerful" wrote:
Bertie Wooster wrote: On Mon, 10 Dec 2012 20:07:02 -0000, "Mrcheerful" wrote: Looking on google earth the pavements are awash with cyclists, it must be awful for pedestrians. Really!? http://goo.gl/maps/I9zNI I can see a few bicycles on the footway, and some of those pedestrians might also be cyclists. But I can't spot anyone riding a bike on the footway. I was looking on Google earth (rather than google maps) and the whole area around the junction was covered in bicycles, probably around twenty or more, and only one was riding in the road. They must be big bicycles if 20 were sufficient to cover a whole area. Idiot. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Pavement cyclist loses in court
Justin wrote:
On Dec 10, 11:41 pm, "Mrcheerful" wrote: Bertie Wooster wrote: On Mon, 10 Dec 2012 20:07:02 -0000, "Mrcheerful" wrote: Looking on google earth the pavements are awash with cyclists, it must be awful for pedestrians. Really!? http://goo.gl/maps/I9zNI I can see a few bicycles on the footway, and some of those pedestrians might also be cyclists. But I can't spot anyone riding a bike on the footway. I was looking on Google earth (rather than google maps) and the whole area around the junction was covered in bicycles, probably around twenty or more, and only one was riding in the road. They must be big bicycles if 20 were sufficient to cover a whole area. Idiot. Is idiot your sig.? You might want to change that. Anyway, since you don't know how big the area I am describing is, you are not qualified to comment, but I do realise that perhaps you are mentally challenged and foreign to boot ('to boot' is an English idiom, meaning 'also'). |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
cyclist loses control and hurls himself into a van. | Mrcheerful[_3_] | UK | 6 | September 12th 12 11:33 AM |
Cyclist rams car and loses big time | Mrcheerful[_2_] | UK | 69 | May 14th 11 05:56 AM |
Cyclist loses nearly 8 stone. | Doug[_3_] | UK | 3 | April 13th 09 04:21 PM |
Cyclist loses suit against fellow rider | Dave | Racing | 6 | February 9th 08 05:52 PM |
In the News: Santiago Perez loses appeal at Spanish court | Jason Spaceman | Racing | 2 | January 29th 05 12:30 PM |