Cyclist killed in King's Lynn - hit & run

In King's Lynn. On Teletext - current URL

http://www.teletext.co.uk/news/story...&intarticlenum
ber=3&intRegionID=1&intSubsectionID=1&From=I&inden t=30

I'm not putting a shorter URL - as Teletext changes what's on a page quite
frequently. The full text is below though.

"CYCLIST KILLED IN HIT-AND-RUN
Police are appealing for witnesses after a cyclist died in a hit-and-run
accident in Norfolk.

The cyclist was in collision with a metallic burgundy vehicle which failed to
stop in Wootton Road, King's Lynn.

Police have not yet named the cyclist, but said he was a 33-year-old local man.
The car will have notable front end damage, a spokesman said.


RECEIVED: 12/12/2003 11:43:05"

Let's hope the cowardly scum bag who has done the running is found.

helen s


--This is an invalid email address to avoid spam--
to get correct one remove dependency on fame & fortune
h*$el*$$e**nd***$o$ts***i*$*$m**m$$o*n**s@$*$a$$o* *l.c**$*$om$$

On 12 Dec 2003 12:37:40 GMT, omcom
(dirtylitterboxofferingstospammers) wrote:

The cyclist was in collision with a metallic burgundy vehicle which failed to
stop in Wootton Road, King's Lynn.

See? Thiose bloody cyclists, always in collision with road-owners :-(

Guy
===
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://chapmancentral.demon.co.uk

"Just zis Guy, you know?" wrote:

On 12 Dec 2003 12:37:40 GMT, omcom
(dirtylitterboxofferingstospammers) wrote:

The cyclist was in collision with a metallic burgundy vehicle which failed to
stop in Wootton Road, King's Lynn.

See? Thiose bloody cyclists, always in collision with road-owners :-(

*I * see the point you are making but I wonder if the cyclist's family or indeed
the collegues of the killer would see it the same.
Sorry, guy, but I think such comments are a *tad* insensitive.

John B

"JohnB" wrote in message
...


"Just zis Guy, you know?" wrote:

On 12 Dec 2003 12:37:40 GMT, omcom
(dirtylitterboxofferingstospammers) wrote:

The cyclist was in collision with a metallic burgundy vehicle which
failed to
stop in Wootton Road, King's Lynn.

See? Thiose bloody cyclists, always in collision with road-owners :-(

*I * see the point you are making but I wonder if the cyclist's family or
indeed
the collegues of the killer would see it the same.

I'm sorry, but I don't see *your* point, unless you're an apologist for
newspaper journalists and hit and run motorists.
___
Michael MacClancy

Michael MacClancy wrote:

"JohnB" wrote in message
...


"Just zis Guy, you know?" wrote:

On 12 Dec 2003 12:37:40 GMT, omcom
(dirtylitterboxofferingstospammers) wrote:

The cyclist was in collision with a metallic burgundy vehicle which
failed to
stop in Wootton Road, King's Lynn.

See? Thiose bloody cyclists, always in collision with road-owners :-(

*I * see the point you are making but I wonder if the cyclist's family or
indeed
the collegues of the killer would see it the same.

I'm sorry, but I don't see *your* point, unless you're an apologist for
newspaper journalists and hit and run motorists.

I'm not at all surprised.

John B

JohnB wrote:
Michael MacClancy wrote:
"JohnB" wrote in message
...


"Just zis Guy, you know?" wrote:

On 12 Dec 2003 12:37:40 GMT, omcom
(dirtylitterboxofferingstospammers) wrote:

The cyclist was in collision with a metallic burgundy vehicle
which
failed to
stop in Wootton Road, King's Lynn.

See? Thiose bloody cyclists, always in collision with road-
owners :-(

*I * see the point you are making but I wonder if the cyclist's
family or
indeed
the collegues of the killer would see it the same.

I'm sorry, but I don't see *your* point, unless you're an apologist
for newspaper journalists and hit and run motorists.
I'm not at all surprised.
John B



I know as I type this you will probably reply"mind your own business
yank" But I think you guys are straying from the spirit of the subject.
It is a sad thing for the family especially when no closure can be
attained because someone is not responsible enough to admit to their
guilt. It is especially true here in the states. Too much freedom ,not
enough responsibility. Just human nature I guess although I will never
accept that as an excuse. Bad time to lose a family member, of course
there is no good time. I sure hope the offending person is found soon
for the sake of the family.



--

jhuskey wrote:

JohnB wrote:
Michael MacClancy wrote:
"JohnB" wrote in message
...


"Just zis Guy, you know?" wrote:

See? Thiose bloody cyclists, always in collision with road-
owners :-(

*I * see the point you are making but I wonder if the cyclist's
family or
indeed
the collegues of the killer would see it the same.

I'm sorry, but I don't see *your* point, unless you're an apologist
for newspaper journalists and hit and run motorists.

I'm not at all surprised.

I know as I type this you will probably reply"mind your own business
yank" But I think you guys are straying from the spirit of the subject.
It is a sad thing for the family especially when no closure can be
attained because someone is not responsible enough to admit to their
guilt. It is especially true here in the states. Too much freedom ,not
enough responsibility. Just human nature I guess although I will never
accept that as an excuse. Bad time to lose a family member, of course
there is no good time. I sure hope the offending person is found soon
for the sake of the family.

No you are spot on.
It is a serious issue although I'd like to think it is not human nature to
avoid responsibilities.
I am indeed quite concerned about where this will all eventually lead,
having four children. The future for them is not good. I am sure there are
many who would say in all seriousness "see? those bloody cyclists, always in
collision with road-owners"
It is a statement which to me is far too close to the truth.

The sentences handed out to the killers are a complete joke. Its not as if
they can be concerned about the penalties - a few points and a hundred or so
quid fine - they are laughable.
I can only these morons are *so* wedded to their motor vehicles that they
cannot contemplate life without them, *if* they ended up without them.
They place more importance on that than anything financial penalties the
courts hand out.

Until this car-reliance is addressed then I fear the killers will continue
to roam our roads at will and cyclists will eventually be forced off them.

John B

On 13 Dec 2003 06:15:11 +1050, jhuskey
wrote:

I know as I type this you will probably reply"mind your own business
yank"

Nah, not me.

The thing is, as is usual in these cases, the newspaper reports that
the cyclist was "in collision with" the motor vehicle. Usually (as in
almost always, when discussed here anyway) it means the motor vehicle
driver crashed into the cyclist.

Why not the motor vehicle was in collision with the cyclist? Why not
the motor vehicle and the cyclist collided? To say that the cyclist
was "in collision with" the motor vehicle implies, to many of us, that
the cyclist was in some way at fault. Generally they aren't.

Guy
===
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://chapmancentral.demon.co.uk

On Fri, 12 Dec 2003 16:44:06 +0000, JohnB wrote:

*I * see the point you are making but I wonder if the cyclist's family or indeed
the collegues of the killer would see it the same.
Sorry, guy, but I think such comments are a *tad* insensitive.

You are entitled to your opinion. I would suggest that anybody who
has been here more than once would know where I'm coming from.

Guy
===
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://chapmancentral.demon.co.uk

JohnB wrote:
jhuskey wrote:
JohnB wrote:
Michael MacClancy wrote:
"JohnB" wrote in message news:3FD9F056.387758-
...


"Just zis Guy, you know?" wrote:

See? Thiose bloody cyclists, always in collision with road-
owners :-(

*I * see the point you are making but I wonder if the
cyclist's family or
indeed
the collegues of the killer would see it the same.

I'm sorry, but I don't see *your* point, unless you're an
apologist for newspaper journalists and hit and run motorists.
I'm not at all surprised.

I know as I type this you will probably reply"mind your own business
yank" But I think you guys are straying from the spirit of the
subject. It is a sad thing for the family especially when no closure
can be attained because someone is not responsible enough to admit to
their guilt. It is especially true here in the states. Too much
freedom ,not enough responsibility. Just human nature I guess although
I will never accept that as an excuse. Bad time to lose a family
member, of course there is no good time. I sure hope the offending
person is found soon for the sake of the family.
No you are spot on. It is a serious issue although I'd like to think it
is not human nature to avoid responsibilities. I am indeed quite
concerned about where this will all eventually lead, having four
children. The future for them is not good. I am sure there are many who
would say in all seriousness "see? those bloody cyclists, always in
collision with road-owners" It is a statement which to me is far too
close to the truth.
The sentences handed out to the killers are a complete joke. Its not
as if they can be concerned about the penalties - a few points and a
hundred or so quid fine - they are laughable. I can only these
morons are *so* wedded to their motor vehicles that they cannot
contemplate life without them, *if* they ended up without them. They
place more importance on that than anything financial penalties the
courts hand out.
Until this car-reliance is addressed then I fear the killers will
continue to roam our roads at will and cyclists will eventually be
forced off them.
John B


Wish I had a quick solution to negligent people. The only thought I can
leave you with is to spend time with those children. I lost my son 2
years ago in an auto accident. Wish I had the time to do over. Too many
things not done and not said.

Hope you have a great holiday.



--