Cyclist is injured in menacing hit-and-run

First published in Local News

A CYCLIST has described the terrifying moment a motorist drove deliberately into him.

The 47-year-old man from Shoebury, who did not want to be named, was injured after the car hit him as he rode across the junction of Burges Road and Thorpe Hall Avenue, in Thorpe Bay.

He was cycling home from work at about 3.30pm, and said the driver had shouted at him prior to knocking him off his bike when they passed Thorpe Greenways infant and junior schools.

The driver had been following behind him as far as the junction of Burges Road and Thorpe Hall Avenue, where the driver caught the man’s bike with his car.

The cyclist added: “He turned in the road and just came straight at me.

“He was shouting and screaming at me – he was really going ballistic.

“One of the people who stopped to help me up had been in a car behind him.

“I didn’t say anything because it was such a shock.

“That is the trouble with being on a bike – it is probably once a week someone gets too close, talking on a phone or not taking notice.”

The driver left the scene after hitting the cyclist, who was treated for cuts and bruises at Southend Hospital.

He added: “I have scrapes and bruises and I was concussed. I am feeling pretty nauseous.

“Obviously, the more witnesses the better. I know there were a few people who were there.

“Anyone who wants to come forward will only strengthen the case.”

Police say the car was a maroon, M-registration Mercedes, and the motorist headed towards Shoebury. Anyone with information about the incident on Tuesday, May 25, should contact Sgt Paul Stacey at Rayleigh road policing unit, on 0300 3334444.

Comments (51)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

11:27am Tue 8 Jun 10

Mark D says...

Why leave it such a long time before appealing for information?
Why leave it such a long time before appealing for information? Mark D
  • Score: 0

12:22pm Tue 8 Jun 10

no1sawus says...

I don't know why the Police are interested. it's only a cyclist. Being driven at, knocked or abused is part of cycling.
I don't know why the Police are interested. it's only a cyclist. Being driven at, knocked or abused is part of cycling. no1sawus
  • Score: 0

12:48pm Tue 8 Jun 10

ShoeburyCyclist says...

I would urge all of Southend's cyclists, especially those who are wearing video cameras, to keep an eye out for any 'M reg maroon Mercedes', especially in the Shoebury area.
Report any sightings and registration numbers to the police. They can then start eliminating the innocent until this maniac is caught, removed from the roads, and put in prison for attempted murder.
I would urge all of Southend's cyclists, especially those who are wearing video cameras, to keep an eye out for any 'M reg maroon Mercedes', especially in the Shoebury area. Report any sightings and registration numbers to the police. They can then start eliminating the innocent until this maniac is caught, removed from the roads, and put in prison for attempted murder. ShoeburyCyclist
  • Score: 0

4:54pm Tue 8 Jun 10

nails says...

Cyclists should pay road tax, and be insured just like car drivers. We all use the road, even where there are cycle tracks. Most cyclists ubuse the system, and then they are the first to complain, and then, theres riding on the pavements. They should be taxed and insured. Full stop.
Cyclists should pay road tax, and be insured just like car drivers. We all use the road, even where there are cycle tracks. Most cyclists ubuse the system, and then they are the first to complain, and then, theres riding on the pavements. They should be taxed and insured. Full stop. nails
  • Score: 0

4:58pm Tue 8 Jun 10

Ray Von says...

I am in support of the cyclist here, as one myself. Some car drivers are fricking idiots and i had before now i've had a car pull out in front of me and i had nowhere else to go other than straight into the side of the car. Even last week had a car was inches away from hitting me and i've had many near misses in the last year - despite being a very safe cyclist. Its not all us!
I am in support of the cyclist here, as one myself. Some car drivers are fricking idiots and i had before now i've had a car pull out in front of me and i had nowhere else to go other than straight into the side of the car. Even last week had a car was inches away from hitting me and i've had many near misses in the last year - despite being a very safe cyclist. Its not all us! Ray Von
  • Score: 0

4:59pm Tue 8 Jun 10

ShoeburyCyclist says...

nails wrote:
Cyclists should pay road tax, and be insured just like car drivers. We all use the road, even where there are cycle tracks. Most cyclists ubuse the system, and then they are the first to complain, and then, theres riding on the pavements. They should be taxed and insured. Full stop.
Cyclists DO pay 'road tax' because roads are paid for through income tax and council tax, both of which cyclists pay. The disc in your windscreen is Vehicle Excise Duty, in other words, car tax, a tax on car ownership and has absolutely NOTHING to do with rights of using roads. 'Road Tax' was abolished in 1936. 'Road Tax' does not exist.

The driver who deliberately used his car to ram a cyclist needs to be found and locked up. What they did is nothing less than attempted murder.
[quote][p][bold]nails[/bold] wrote: Cyclists should pay road tax, and be insured just like car drivers. We all use the road, even where there are cycle tracks. Most cyclists ubuse the system, and then they are the first to complain, and then, theres riding on the pavements. They should be taxed and insured. Full stop.[/p][/quote]Cyclists DO pay 'road tax' because roads are paid for through income tax and council tax, both of which cyclists pay. The disc in your windscreen is Vehicle Excise Duty, in other words, car tax, a tax on car ownership and has absolutely NOTHING to do with rights of using roads. 'Road Tax' was abolished in 1936. 'Road Tax' does not exist. The driver who deliberately used his car to ram a cyclist needs to be found and locked up. What they did is nothing less than attempted murder. ShoeburyCyclist
  • Score: 0

5:08pm Tue 8 Jun 10

!!meanstreak!! says...

Why can't we all,
All just be honest,
Admit to ourselves,
That everyone's on it.

From grown politicians,
To young adolescents,
Prescribing themselves,
Anti-depressants.

How can we start to tackle the problem,
If you don't put your hands up,
And admit that you're on them.
Why can't we all, All just be honest, Admit to ourselves, That everyone's on it. From grown politicians, To young adolescents, Prescribing themselves, Anti-depressants. How can we start to tackle the problem, If you don't put your hands up, And admit that you're on them. !!meanstreak!!
  • Score: 0

5:13pm Tue 8 Jun 10

nails says...

ShoeburyCyclist. OK. Then cyclists should pay CYCLE TAX. Words, words, words. You know exactly what I mean. You are vey good at sending the same, word for word post re tax. Bikes should be taxed and insured just like cars. they use the same road.
ShoeburyCyclist. OK. Then cyclists should pay CYCLE TAX. Words, words, words. You know exactly what I mean. You are vey good at sending the same, word for word post re tax. Bikes should be taxed and insured just like cars. they use the same road. nails
  • Score: 0

5:19pm Tue 8 Jun 10

ShoeburyCyclist says...

nails wrote:
ShoeburyCyclist. OK. Then cyclists should pay CYCLE TAX. Words, words, words. You know exactly what I mean. You are vey good at sending the same, word for word post re tax. Bikes should be taxed and insured just like cars. they use the same road.
As bikes are zero emission vehicles, the tax on them would be precisely £0.00. The cost of administration for all those free tax discs would then be added to the cost of tax discs on cars…

Also when would your tax and insurance on bicycles begin? The toddler on their pushalong? The five year old on their trike? The eight year old on their BMX?
[quote][p][bold]nails[/bold] wrote: ShoeburyCyclist. OK. Then cyclists should pay CYCLE TAX. Words, words, words. You know exactly what I mean. You are vey good at sending the same, word for word post re tax. Bikes should be taxed and insured just like cars. they use the same road.[/p][/quote]As bikes are zero emission vehicles, the tax on them would be precisely £0.00. The cost of administration for all those free tax discs would then be added to the cost of tax discs on cars… Also when would your tax and insurance on bicycles begin? The toddler on their pushalong? The five year old on their trike? The eight year old on their BMX? ShoeburyCyclist
  • Score: 0

5:24pm Tue 8 Jun 10

ShoeburyCyclist says...

I would like to apologise to people reading these comments for allowing the discussion to be derailed.

The topic here is a driver who tried to murder a cyclist by using their car as a weapon. This is an extremely serious issue.

As I have said previously, the maniac who did this needs to be found and locked up.

@nails, you have yet to condemn the Mercedes driver's actions.
I would like to apologise to people reading these comments for allowing the discussion to be derailed. The topic here is a driver who tried to murder a cyclist by using their car as a weapon. This is an extremely serious issue. As I have said previously, the maniac who did this needs to be found and locked up. @nails, you have yet to condemn the Mercedes driver's actions. ShoeburyCyclist
  • Score: 0

5:28pm Tue 8 Jun 10

LocalBoy says...

nails wrote:
Cyclists should pay road tax, and be insured just like car drivers. We all use the road, even where there are cycle tracks. Most cyclists ubuse the system, and then they are the first to complain, and then, theres riding on the pavements. They should be taxed and insured. Full stop.
Typical ignorant comment from someone who knows nothing.

Road Tax was abolished in 1937. Winston Churchill, no less, is the politician who started the process to get rid of it.

Winston didn't want motorists to think a token payment gave them ownership of the road.

Vehicle Excise Duty (VED) is what is paid for some road vehicles. If you care to check your facts (rather than rely on your bigotry) you will find that a number of road vehicles are exempt from VED; usually the non polluting type. So even if bicycles were required to have a VED the cost would be £0.

Road Maintenance is paid for out of general taxation. So all those people who don't own a car have the right to question the arrogance of those that do who believe they have the sole right to use the road.

Most cyclist are insured via cycling organisations and home insurance policies.

I trust that has nailed the rubbish you spout nails?
[quote][p][bold]nails[/bold] wrote: Cyclists should pay road tax, and be insured just like car drivers. We all use the road, even where there are cycle tracks. Most cyclists ubuse the system, and then they are the first to complain, and then, theres riding on the pavements. They should be taxed and insured. Full stop.[/p][/quote]Typical ignorant comment from someone who knows nothing. Road Tax was abolished in 1937. Winston Churchill, no less, is the politician who started the process to get rid of it. Winston didn't want motorists to think a token payment gave them ownership of the road. Vehicle Excise Duty (VED) is what is paid for some road vehicles. If you care to check your facts (rather than rely on your bigotry) you will find that a number of road vehicles are exempt from VED; usually the non polluting type. So even if bicycles were required to have a VED the cost would be £0. Road Maintenance is paid for out of general taxation. So all those people who don't own a car have the right to question the arrogance of those that do who believe they have the sole right to use the road. Most cyclist are insured via cycling organisations and home insurance policies. I trust that has nailed the rubbish you spout nails? LocalBoy
  • Score: 0

5:42pm Tue 8 Jun 10

R85 says...

The above comment by localboy is exactly what I was going to say. Some cars that have low emissions (but still some) don’t pay any road tax at all, therefore a cyclist definitely wouldn’t! They have every right to be on the road; if they were on the pavement and hit a pedestrian there would be outrage!!!
How cowardly anyway, hitting a cyclist in his big metal car. If he was a real man he'd get out the car if he had beef (then again a real man wouldn't be going mad for no apparent reason). I'm generally on the side of the biker; only thing I will say is I've often seen cyclists jump red lights which is infuriating!!! If they're going to use the roads they must obey the highway code, why do so many think they can ride on the roads but just jump lights whenever they feel like it?
The above comment by localboy is exactly what I was going to say. Some cars that have low emissions (but still some) don’t pay any road tax at all, therefore a cyclist definitely wouldn’t! They have every right to be on the road; if they were on the pavement and hit a pedestrian there would be outrage!!! How cowardly anyway, hitting a cyclist in his big metal car. If he was a real man he'd get out the car if he had beef (then again a real man wouldn't be going mad for no apparent reason). I'm generally on the side of the biker; only thing I will say is I've often seen cyclists jump red lights which is infuriating!!! If they're going to use the roads they must obey the highway code, why do so many think they can ride on the roads but just jump lights whenever they feel like it? R85
  • Score: 0

5:53pm Tue 8 Jun 10

Mark D says...

R85 wrote:
The above comment by localboy is exactly what I was going to say. Some cars that have low emissions (but still some) don’t pay any road tax at all, therefore a cyclist definitely wouldn’t! They have every right to be on the road; if they were on the pavement and hit a pedestrian there would be outrage!!! How cowardly anyway, hitting a cyclist in his big metal car. If he was a real man he'd get out the car if he had beef (then again a real man wouldn't be going mad for no apparent reason). I'm generally on the side of the biker; only thing I will say is I've often seen cyclists jump red lights which is infuriating!!! If they're going to use the roads they must obey the highway code, why do so many think they can ride on the roads but just jump lights whenever they feel like it?
I am a car driver and a cyclist, and would never jump a red light in either vehicle. Like you, I sometimes see cyclists jump red lights, but can't ever remember being inconvenienced by it. Of course, they shouldn't do it; but often it is no more dangerous than pedestrians crossing the road when the little man is red, instead of green. Yes, there are quite a few reckless cyclists (and reckless car drivers, for that matter) - my own pet hate is cyclists racing along pavements - but I think a lot of the animosity from car drivers towards cyclists stems from resentment at being overtaken, rather than at any danger or inconvenience that the cyclist causes.
[quote][p][bold]R85[/bold] wrote: The above comment by localboy is exactly what I was going to say. Some cars that have low emissions (but still some) don’t pay any road tax at all, therefore a cyclist definitely wouldn’t! They have every right to be on the road; if they were on the pavement and hit a pedestrian there would be outrage!!! How cowardly anyway, hitting a cyclist in his big metal car. If he was a real man he'd get out the car if he had beef (then again a real man wouldn't be going mad for no apparent reason). I'm generally on the side of the biker; only thing I will say is I've often seen cyclists jump red lights which is infuriating!!! If they're going to use the roads they must obey the highway code, why do so many think they can ride on the roads but just jump lights whenever they feel like it?[/p][/quote]I am a car driver and a cyclist, and would never jump a red light in either vehicle. Like you, I sometimes see cyclists jump red lights, but can't ever remember being inconvenienced by it. Of course, they shouldn't do it; but often it is no more dangerous than pedestrians crossing the road when the little man is red, instead of green. Yes, there are quite a few reckless cyclists (and reckless car drivers, for that matter) - my own pet hate is cyclists racing along pavements - but I think a lot of the animosity from car drivers towards cyclists stems from resentment at being overtaken, rather than at any danger or inconvenience that the cyclist causes. Mark D
  • Score: 0

6:18pm Tue 8 Jun 10

!!meanstreak!! says...

I know that we are young
And I know that you may love me
But I just can't be with you like this anymore
Alejandro
I know that we are young And I know that you may love me But I just can't be with you like this anymore Alejandro !!meanstreak!!
  • Score: 0

7:13pm Tue 8 Jun 10

VillagerNo6 says...

Surely all the police have to do is enter "Mercedes, M reg, Maroon, S.E Essex" into their computer then pay a visit to those that flag up....
Surely all the police have to do is enter "Mercedes, M reg, Maroon, S.E Essex" into their computer then pay a visit to those that flag up.... VillagerNo6
  • Score: 0

7:38pm Tue 8 Jun 10

John the resonator says...

Having researched this myself, I say ShoeburyCyclist and LocalBoy have all the bases covered in terms of the history of 'road tax.' Quite simply, they are right.

First thing some idiots resort to if a cyclist is hit by a car is this ill-informed debate about 'road tax,' which then focusses the topic onto the behaviour of some cyclists rather than that of a criminally dangerous motorist.

I am sure this won't be treated as attempted murder but in what other circumstances would someone hit a person with a great big metal box at speed and expect to get off lightly? Only car drivers who hit cyclists.

Incidentally, I am both a car driver and cyclist and take both responsibilities seriously.
Having researched this myself, I say ShoeburyCyclist and LocalBoy have all the bases covered in terms of the history of 'road tax.' Quite simply, they are right. First thing some idiots resort to if a cyclist is hit by a car is this ill-informed debate about 'road tax,' which then focusses the topic onto the behaviour of some cyclists rather than that of a criminally dangerous motorist. I am sure this won't be treated as attempted murder but in what other circumstances would someone hit a person with a great big metal box at speed and expect to get off lightly? Only car drivers who hit cyclists. Incidentally, I am both a car driver and cyclist and take both responsibilities seriously. John the resonator
  • Score: 0

7:46pm Tue 8 Jun 10

Mary Lou says...

VillagerNo6 wrote:
Surely all the police have to do is enter "Mercedes, M reg, Maroon, S.E Essex" into their computer then pay a visit to those that flag up....
Ring Ring.
.
Policeman: Did you knock a cyclist over?
.
Mercedes Owner: No. what evidence have you got?
.
Policeman: Your car is an M reg and maroon.
.
Mercedes owner: Goodbye.
.
That should clock up a quite a few police hours to good effect then.
[quote][p][bold]VillagerNo6[/bold] wrote: Surely all the police have to do is enter "Mercedes, M reg, Maroon, S.E Essex" into their computer then pay a visit to those that flag up....[/p][/quote]Ring Ring. . Policeman: Did you knock a cyclist over? . Mercedes Owner: No. what evidence have you got? . Policeman: Your car is an M reg and maroon. . Mercedes owner: Goodbye. . That should clock up a quite a few police hours to good effect then. Mary Lou
  • Score: 0

9:09pm Tue 8 Jun 10

Nebs says...

1. M Reg maroon mercedes shouldn't be hard to find for the police.
2. No road tax (you know what I mean) for cyclists.
3. Age limit and bicycle size limit for riding on the pavement.
4. Bicycle number plates to catch the numerous idiots who can't afford batteries or can't tell red from green, and 3 yearly MOT type test for those who think tyres chains and brakes never wear out.
5. Compulsory third party insurance, via household or separate cycle policy.
1. M Reg maroon mercedes shouldn't be hard to find for the police. 2. No road tax (you know what I mean) for cyclists. 3. Age limit and bicycle size limit for riding on the pavement. 4. Bicycle number plates to catch the numerous idiots who can't afford batteries or can't tell red from green, and 3 yearly MOT type test for those who think tyres chains and brakes never wear out. 5. Compulsory third party insurance, via household or separate cycle policy. Nebs
  • Score: 0

9:28pm Tue 8 Jun 10

John the resonator says...

It just seems impossible to focus this back onto a criminal car driver.

This fellow was knocked off his bike, isn't that enough or does he have to get caught up in a cyclist scapegoating campaign as well?
It just seems impossible to focus this back onto a criminal car driver. This fellow was knocked off his bike, isn't that enough or does he have to get caught up in a cyclist scapegoating campaign as well? John the resonator
  • Score: 0

9:28pm Tue 8 Jun 10

Mary Lou says...

Nebs, finding the car is not the problem. Its finding the driver who knocked down the cyclist and proving a chain of evidence in a criminal court.
.
Each when a speed camera takes a picture unless it clearly shows the face of the driver, the owner of the vehicle can claim they were not driving the vehicle that day and therefore they are not liable.
Same here, you can track down every M reg Maroon Merc in the UK. but to prove where the car was at a particular time and place and who was driving is another matter.
Nebs, finding the car is not the problem. Its finding the driver who knocked down the cyclist and proving a chain of evidence in a criminal court. . Each when a speed camera takes a picture unless it clearly shows the face of the driver, the owner of the vehicle can claim they were not driving the vehicle that day and therefore they are not liable. Same here, you can track down every M reg Maroon Merc in the UK. but to prove where the car was at a particular time and place and who was driving is another matter. Mary Lou
  • Score: 0

9:41pm Tue 8 Jun 10

ShoeburyCyclist says...

nebs said:
"3. Age limit and bicycle size limit for riding on the pavement."

That law already exists, anyone over the age of 16 who cycles on a pavement is breaking the law, unless there is no bylaw prohibiting cycling on the path, for example on footpaths where there is no road.

"4. Bicycle number plates to catch the numerous idiots who can't afford batteries or can't tell red from green, and 3 yearly MOT type test for those who think tyres chains and brakes never wear out. "

Who will this apply to, at what age will it start? What size of bicycle? Adults only or children as well? How big will they be? Who will finance the cameras that can read them? Where will number plates be put on the bicycles? For example on a small folding bicycle or on a recumbent cycle? Not all bikes are mountain bikes, town bikes, or racers. Also many bicycles have saddlebags, rear racks with bags and panniers which would obscure a number plate.

"5. Compulsory third party insurance, via household or separate cycle policy."

Many cyclists already have this, but again the question arises: at what age will this begin? The toddler on a pushalong? The five year old on a trike? The eight year old on a BMX?


Personally I think we should introduce Strict Liability into road law in Britain. Strict Liability means that if a car hits a cyclist (or motorcyclist), then no matter what the circumstances, as the person in charge of the more dangerous vehicle, the driver is responsible. The same goes for cyclists, if they hit a pedestrians, then no matter what, the cyclist is responsible.
It works on the continent and makes walking, cycling, and driving safer for all.

We should also follow the lead of Portsmouth and introduce a blanket 20mph speed limit on all non-arterial roads in towns.
nebs said: "3. Age limit and bicycle size limit for riding on the pavement." That law already exists, anyone over the age of 16 who cycles on a pavement is breaking the law, unless there is no bylaw prohibiting cycling on the path, for example on footpaths where there is no road. "4. Bicycle number plates to catch the numerous idiots who can't afford batteries or can't tell red from green, and 3 yearly MOT type test for those who think tyres chains and brakes never wear out. " Who will this apply to, at what age will it start? What size of bicycle? Adults only or children as well? How big will they be? Who will finance the cameras that can read them? Where will number plates be put on the bicycles? For example on a small folding bicycle or on a recumbent cycle? Not all bikes are mountain bikes, town bikes, or racers. Also many bicycles have saddlebags, rear racks with bags and panniers which would obscure a number plate. "5. Compulsory third party insurance, via household or separate cycle policy." Many cyclists already have this, but again the question arises: at what age will this begin? The toddler on a pushalong? The five year old on a trike? The eight year old on a BMX? Personally I think we should introduce Strict Liability into road law in Britain. Strict Liability means that if a car hits a cyclist (or motorcyclist), then no matter what the circumstances, as the person in charge of the more dangerous vehicle, the driver is responsible. The same goes for cyclists, if they hit a pedestrians, then no matter what, the cyclist is responsible. It works on the continent and makes walking, cycling, and driving safer for all. We should also follow the lead of Portsmouth and introduce a blanket 20mph speed limit on all non-arterial roads in towns. ShoeburyCyclist
  • Score: 0

10:01pm Tue 8 Jun 10

perini says...

ShoeburyCyclist wrote:
nebs said: "3. Age limit and bicycle size limit for riding on the pavement." That law already exists, anyone over the age of 16 who cycles on a pavement is breaking the law, unless there is no bylaw prohibiting cycling on the path, for example on footpaths where there is no road. "4. Bicycle number plates to catch the numerous idiots who can't afford batteries or can't tell red from green, and 3 yearly MOT type test for those who think tyres chains and brakes never wear out. " Who will this apply to, at what age will it start? What size of bicycle? Adults only or children as well? How big will they be? Who will finance the cameras that can read them? Where will number plates be put on the bicycles? For example on a small folding bicycle or on a recumbent cycle? Not all bikes are mountain bikes, town bikes, or racers. Also many bicycles have saddlebags, rear racks with bags and panniers which would obscure a number plate. "5. Compulsory third party insurance, via household or separate cycle policy." Many cyclists already have this, but again the question arises: at what age will this begin? The toddler on a pushalong? The five year old on a trike? The eight year old on a BMX? Personally I think we should introduce Strict Liability into road law in Britain. Strict Liability means that if a car hits a cyclist (or motorcyclist), then no matter what the circumstances, as the person in charge of the more dangerous vehicle, the driver is responsible. The same goes for cyclists, if they hit a pedestrians, then no matter what, the cyclist is responsible. It works on the continent and makes walking, cycling, and driving safer for all. We should also follow the lead of Portsmouth and introduce a blanket 20mph speed limit on all non-arterial roads in towns.
I was agreeing with you until you stated that if a car hit a cyclist it was automatically the car drivers fault. Not so - there is a small element of cyclists out there that weave all over the road, causing accidents leaving car drivers nowhere to go. Leave the law as it is!
Why are you so against bike registration though? No argument - all bikes, be it a toddlers or an adults bike!
[quote][p][bold]ShoeburyCyclist[/bold] wrote: nebs said: "3. Age limit and bicycle size limit for riding on the pavement." That law already exists, anyone over the age of 16 who cycles on a pavement is breaking the law, unless there is no bylaw prohibiting cycling on the path, for example on footpaths where there is no road. "4. Bicycle number plates to catch the numerous idiots who can't afford batteries or can't tell red from green, and 3 yearly MOT type test for those who think tyres chains and brakes never wear out. " Who will this apply to, at what age will it start? What size of bicycle? Adults only or children as well? How big will they be? Who will finance the cameras that can read them? Where will number plates be put on the bicycles? For example on a small folding bicycle or on a recumbent cycle? Not all bikes are mountain bikes, town bikes, or racers. Also many bicycles have saddlebags, rear racks with bags and panniers which would obscure a number plate. "5. Compulsory third party insurance, via household or separate cycle policy." Many cyclists already have this, but again the question arises: at what age will this begin? The toddler on a pushalong? The five year old on a trike? The eight year old on a BMX? Personally I think we should introduce Strict Liability into road law in Britain. Strict Liability means that if a car hits a cyclist (or motorcyclist), then no matter what the circumstances, as the person in charge of the more dangerous vehicle, the driver is responsible. The same goes for cyclists, if they hit a pedestrians, then no matter what, the cyclist is responsible. It works on the continent and makes walking, cycling, and driving safer for all. We should also follow the lead of Portsmouth and introduce a blanket 20mph speed limit on all non-arterial roads in towns.[/p][/quote]I was agreeing with you until you stated that if a car hit a cyclist it was automatically the car drivers fault. Not so - there is a small element of cyclists out there that weave all over the road, causing accidents leaving car drivers nowhere to go. Leave the law as it is! Why are you so against bike registration though? No argument - all bikes, be it a toddlers or an adults bike! perini
  • Score: 0

10:19pm Tue 8 Jun 10

ShoeburyCyclist says...

perini wrote:
ShoeburyCyclist wrote:
nebs said: "3. Age limit and bicycle size limit for riding on the pavement." That law already exists, anyone over the age of 16 who cycles on a pavement is breaking the law, unless there is no bylaw prohibiting cycling on the path, for example on footpaths where there is no road. "4. Bicycle number plates to catch the numerous idiots who can't afford batteries or can't tell red from green, and 3 yearly MOT type test for those who think tyres chains and brakes never wear out. " Who will this apply to, at what age will it start? What size of bicycle? Adults only or children as well? How big will they be? Who will finance the cameras that can read them? Where will number plates be put on the bicycles? For example on a small folding bicycle or on a recumbent cycle? Not all bikes are mountain bikes, town bikes, or racers. Also many bicycles have saddlebags, rear racks with bags and panniers which would obscure a number plate. "5. Compulsory third party insurance, via household or separate cycle policy." Many cyclists already have this, but again the question arises: at what age will this begin? The toddler on a pushalong? The five year old on a trike? The eight year old on a BMX? Personally I think we should introduce Strict Liability into road law in Britain. Strict Liability means that if a car hits a cyclist (or motorcyclist), then no matter what the circumstances, as the person in charge of the more dangerous vehicle, the driver is responsible. The same goes for cyclists, if they hit a pedestrians, then no matter what, the cyclist is responsible. It works on the continent and makes walking, cycling, and driving safer for all. We should also follow the lead of Portsmouth and introduce a blanket 20mph speed limit on all non-arterial roads in towns.
I was agreeing with you until you stated that if a car hit a cyclist it was automatically the car drivers fault. Not so - there is a small element of cyclists out there that weave all over the road, causing accidents leaving car drivers nowhere to go. Leave the law as it is!
Why are you so against bike registration though? No argument - all bikes, be it a toddlers or an adults bike!
As the operators of the more dangerous vehicle with the capability to kill vulnerable road users such as cyclists, under Strict Liability drivers are held to be aware that cyclists, and pedestrians, may move unpredictably, and are therefore expected to drive accordingly.

That is how Strict Liability works. The only time a driver is not responsible is if they are stationary (in a place where it is legal to be stationary) and a cyclist rides into them.

It works like that down the chain, cyclist are held responsible if they collide with pedestrians.
[quote][p][bold]perini[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ShoeburyCyclist[/bold] wrote: nebs said: "3. Age limit and bicycle size limit for riding on the pavement." That law already exists, anyone over the age of 16 who cycles on a pavement is breaking the law, unless there is no bylaw prohibiting cycling on the path, for example on footpaths where there is no road. "4. Bicycle number plates to catch the numerous idiots who can't afford batteries or can't tell red from green, and 3 yearly MOT type test for those who think tyres chains and brakes never wear out. " Who will this apply to, at what age will it start? What size of bicycle? Adults only or children as well? How big will they be? Who will finance the cameras that can read them? Where will number plates be put on the bicycles? For example on a small folding bicycle or on a recumbent cycle? Not all bikes are mountain bikes, town bikes, or racers. Also many bicycles have saddlebags, rear racks with bags and panniers which would obscure a number plate. "5. Compulsory third party insurance, via household or separate cycle policy." Many cyclists already have this, but again the question arises: at what age will this begin? The toddler on a pushalong? The five year old on a trike? The eight year old on a BMX? Personally I think we should introduce Strict Liability into road law in Britain. Strict Liability means that if a car hits a cyclist (or motorcyclist), then no matter what the circumstances, as the person in charge of the more dangerous vehicle, the driver is responsible. The same goes for cyclists, if they hit a pedestrians, then no matter what, the cyclist is responsible. It works on the continent and makes walking, cycling, and driving safer for all. We should also follow the lead of Portsmouth and introduce a blanket 20mph speed limit on all non-arterial roads in towns.[/p][/quote]I was agreeing with you until you stated that if a car hit a cyclist it was automatically the car drivers fault. Not so - there is a small element of cyclists out there that weave all over the road, causing accidents leaving car drivers nowhere to go. Leave the law as it is! Why are you so against bike registration though? No argument - all bikes, be it a toddlers or an adults bike![/p][/quote]As the operators of the more dangerous vehicle with the capability to kill vulnerable road users such as cyclists, under Strict Liability drivers are held to be aware that cyclists, and pedestrians, may move unpredictably, and are therefore expected to drive accordingly. That is how Strict Liability works. The only time a driver is not responsible is if they are stationary (in a place where it is legal to be stationary) and a cyclist rides into them. It works like that down the chain, cyclist are held responsible if they collide with pedestrians. ShoeburyCyclist
  • Score: 0

12:19am Wed 9 Jun 10

ShoeburyCyclist says...

perini wrote:
ShoeburyCyclist wrote:
nebs said: "3. Age limit and bicycle size limit for riding on the pavement." That law already exists, anyone over the age of 16 who cycles on a pavement is breaking the law, unless there is no bylaw prohibiting cycling on the path, for example on footpaths where there is no road. "4. Bicycle number plates to catch the numerous idiots who can't afford batteries or can't tell red from green, and 3 yearly MOT type test for those who think tyres chains and brakes never wear out. " Who will this apply to, at what age will it start? What size of bicycle? Adults only or children as well? How big will they be? Who will finance the cameras that can read them? Where will number plates be put on the bicycles? For example on a small folding bicycle or on a recumbent cycle? Not all bikes are mountain bikes, town bikes, or racers. Also many bicycles have saddlebags, rear racks with bags and panniers which would obscure a number plate. "5. Compulsory third party insurance, via household or separate cycle policy." Many cyclists already have this, but again the question arises: at what age will this begin? The toddler on a pushalong? The five year old on a trike? The eight year old on a BMX? Personally I think we should introduce Strict Liability into road law in Britain. Strict Liability means that if a car hits a cyclist (or motorcyclist), then no matter what the circumstances, as the person in charge of the more dangerous vehicle, the driver is responsible. The same goes for cyclists, if they hit a pedestrians, then no matter what, the cyclist is responsible. It works on the continent and makes walking, cycling, and driving safer for all. We should also follow the lead of Portsmouth and introduce a blanket 20mph speed limit on all non-arterial roads in towns.
I was agreeing with you until you stated that if a car hit a cyclist it was automatically the car drivers fault. Not so - there is a small element of cyclists out there that weave all over the road, causing accidents leaving car drivers nowhere to go. Leave the law as it is!
Why are you so against bike registration though? No argument - all bikes, be it a toddlers or an adults bike!
Ps. How will registering bicycles stop drivers killing cyclists on a regular basis?
Let's not forget what this story is about: a driver deliberately used their car as a weapon in an attempt to kill a vulnerable road user.

In 2008, 28,572 people were killed or seriously injured on Britain's roads.
So I would have even harsher penalties for bad driving, much, much lower speed limits, satellite tracking of all motorised vehicles recording their speed and whereabouts at all times, and also tachographs in ALL motor vehicles.
It is drivers who are killing people every day, it is motor vehicle drivers who should be regulated and controlled much more strictly.
[quote][p][bold]perini[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ShoeburyCyclist[/bold] wrote: nebs said: "3. Age limit and bicycle size limit for riding on the pavement." That law already exists, anyone over the age of 16 who cycles on a pavement is breaking the law, unless there is no bylaw prohibiting cycling on the path, for example on footpaths where there is no road. "4. Bicycle number plates to catch the numerous idiots who can't afford batteries or can't tell red from green, and 3 yearly MOT type test for those who think tyres chains and brakes never wear out. " Who will this apply to, at what age will it start? What size of bicycle? Adults only or children as well? How big will they be? Who will finance the cameras that can read them? Where will number plates be put on the bicycles? For example on a small folding bicycle or on a recumbent cycle? Not all bikes are mountain bikes, town bikes, or racers. Also many bicycles have saddlebags, rear racks with bags and panniers which would obscure a number plate. "5. Compulsory third party insurance, via household or separate cycle policy." Many cyclists already have this, but again the question arises: at what age will this begin? The toddler on a pushalong? The five year old on a trike? The eight year old on a BMX? Personally I think we should introduce Strict Liability into road law in Britain. Strict Liability means that if a car hits a cyclist (or motorcyclist), then no matter what the circumstances, as the person in charge of the more dangerous vehicle, the driver is responsible. The same goes for cyclists, if they hit a pedestrians, then no matter what, the cyclist is responsible. It works on the continent and makes walking, cycling, and driving safer for all. We should also follow the lead of Portsmouth and introduce a blanket 20mph speed limit on all non-arterial roads in towns.[/p][/quote]I was agreeing with you until you stated that if a car hit a cyclist it was automatically the car drivers fault. Not so - there is a small element of cyclists out there that weave all over the road, causing accidents leaving car drivers nowhere to go. Leave the law as it is! Why are you so against bike registration though? No argument - all bikes, be it a toddlers or an adults bike![/p][/quote]Ps. How will registering bicycles stop drivers killing cyclists on a regular basis? Let's not forget what this story is about: a driver deliberately used their car as a weapon in an attempt to kill a vulnerable road user. In 2008, 28,572 people were killed or seriously injured on Britain's roads. So I would have even harsher penalties for bad driving, much, much lower speed limits, satellite tracking of all motorised vehicles recording their speed and whereabouts at all times, and also tachographs in ALL motor vehicles. It is drivers who are killing people every day, it is motor vehicle drivers who should be regulated and controlled much more strictly. ShoeburyCyclist
  • Score: 0

12:41am Wed 9 Jun 10

Miss D Meaner says...

ShoeburyCyclist wrote:
perini wrote:
ShoeburyCyclist wrote: nebs said: "3. Age limit and bicycle size limit for riding on the pavement." That law already exists, anyone over the age of 16 who cycles on a pavement is breaking the law, unless there is no bylaw prohibiting cycling on the path, for example on footpaths where there is no road. "4. Bicycle number plates to catch the numerous idiots who can't afford batteries or can't tell red from green, and 3 yearly MOT type test for those who think tyres chains and brakes never wear out. " Who will this apply to, at what age will it start? What size of bicycle? Adults only or children as well? How big will they be? Who will finance the cameras that can read them? Where will number plates be put on the bicycles? For example on a small folding bicycle or on a recumbent cycle? Not all bikes are mountain bikes, town bikes, or racers. Also many bicycles have saddlebags, rear racks with bags and panniers which would obscure a number plate. "5. Compulsory third party insurance, via household or separate cycle policy." Many cyclists already have this, but again the question arises: at what age will this begin? The toddler on a pushalong? The five year old on a trike? The eight year old on a BMX? Personally I think we should introduce Strict Liability into road law in Britain. Strict Liability means that if a car hits a cyclist (or motorcyclist), then no matter what the circumstances, as the person in charge of the more dangerous vehicle, the driver is responsible. The same goes for cyclists, if they hit a pedestrians, then no matter what, the cyclist is responsible. It works on the continent and makes walking, cycling, and driving safer for all. We should also follow the lead of Portsmouth and introduce a blanket 20mph speed limit on all non-arterial roads in towns.
I was agreeing with you until you stated that if a car hit a cyclist it was automatically the car drivers fault. Not so - there is a small element of cyclists out there that weave all over the road, causing accidents leaving car drivers nowhere to go. Leave the law as it is! Why are you so against bike registration though? No argument - all bikes, be it a toddlers or an adults bike!
Ps. How will registering bicycles stop drivers killing cyclists on a regular basis? Let's not forget what this story is about: a driver deliberately used their car as a weapon in an attempt to kill a vulnerable road user. In 2008, 28,572 people were killed or seriously injured on Britain's roads. So I would have even harsher penalties for bad driving, much, much lower speed limits, satellite tracking of all motorised vehicles recording their speed and whereabouts at all times, and also tachographs in ALL motor vehicles. It is drivers who are killing people every day, it is motor vehicle drivers who should be regulated and controlled much more strictly.
All for cycles and more Big Brother? Sounds a tad Maoish! Cyclists, never do anything wrong, do they? Not in your blinkered world, at least.

As for the maniac driver, I sincerely hope this raving lunatic is quickly caught - people like him are a danger to ALL road users.
[quote][p][bold]ShoeburyCyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]perini[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ShoeburyCyclist[/bold] wrote: nebs said: "3. Age limit and bicycle size limit for riding on the pavement." That law already exists, anyone over the age of 16 who cycles on a pavement is breaking the law, unless there is no bylaw prohibiting cycling on the path, for example on footpaths where there is no road. "4. Bicycle number plates to catch the numerous idiots who can't afford batteries or can't tell red from green, and 3 yearly MOT type test for those who think tyres chains and brakes never wear out. " Who will this apply to, at what age will it start? What size of bicycle? Adults only or children as well? How big will they be? Who will finance the cameras that can read them? Where will number plates be put on the bicycles? For example on a small folding bicycle or on a recumbent cycle? Not all bikes are mountain bikes, town bikes, or racers. Also many bicycles have saddlebags, rear racks with bags and panniers which would obscure a number plate. "5. Compulsory third party insurance, via household or separate cycle policy." Many cyclists already have this, but again the question arises: at what age will this begin? The toddler on a pushalong? The five year old on a trike? The eight year old on a BMX? Personally I think we should introduce Strict Liability into road law in Britain. Strict Liability means that if a car hits a cyclist (or motorcyclist), then no matter what the circumstances, as the person in charge of the more dangerous vehicle, the driver is responsible. The same goes for cyclists, if they hit a pedestrians, then no matter what, the cyclist is responsible. It works on the continent and makes walking, cycling, and driving safer for all. We should also follow the lead of Portsmouth and introduce a blanket 20mph speed limit on all non-arterial roads in towns.[/p][/quote]I was agreeing with you until you stated that if a car hit a cyclist it was automatically the car drivers fault. Not so - there is a small element of cyclists out there that weave all over the road, causing accidents leaving car drivers nowhere to go. Leave the law as it is! Why are you so against bike registration though? No argument - all bikes, be it a toddlers or an adults bike![/p][/quote]Ps. How will registering bicycles stop drivers killing cyclists on a regular basis? Let's not forget what this story is about: a driver deliberately used their car as a weapon in an attempt to kill a vulnerable road user. In 2008, 28,572 people were killed or seriously injured on Britain's roads. So I would have even harsher penalties for bad driving, much, much lower speed limits, satellite tracking of all motorised vehicles recording their speed and whereabouts at all times, and also tachographs in ALL motor vehicles. It is drivers who are killing people every day, it is motor vehicle drivers who should be regulated and controlled much more strictly.[/p][/quote]All for cycles and more Big Brother? Sounds a tad Maoish! Cyclists, never do anything wrong, do they? Not in your blinkered world, at least. As for the maniac driver, I sincerely hope this raving lunatic is quickly caught - people like him are a danger to ALL road users. Miss D Meaner
  • Score: 0

7:54am Wed 9 Jun 10

Jose El Mezclador says...

Hope the cyclist is OK and the car driver caught but the plain truth of the matter in todays world is that cyclists and cars do not mix and should have their own separate routes for 100% of the time. The cycle paths created in Southend recently are to be applauded but they only do half the job. I’m a cyclist and a car driver and use both in equal measure. We no longer live in the halcyon days of the 50’s when cars were few and could only manage 40mph flat out and took and age to get there. There is no way cyclists should be expected to share the road with the volume and performance of the cars of today and as for the huge lorries we see everywhere. Have you seen the two old guys who cycle on the 1950’s bikes with their raincoats on holding up the traffic along the Eastern Avenue. Some people need saving from themselves.

To pay for the extra cycle paths there should be some type of registration, tax and insurance. But for this we must get a decent service with associated police cyclists showing a decent presence and doing a decent job.
Hope the cyclist is OK and the car driver caught but the plain truth of the matter in todays world is that cyclists and cars do not mix and should have their own separate routes for 100% of the time. The cycle paths created in Southend recently are to be applauded but they only do half the job. I’m a cyclist and a car driver and use both in equal measure. We no longer live in the halcyon days of the 50’s when cars were few and could only manage 40mph flat out and took and age to get there. There is no way cyclists should be expected to share the road with the volume and performance of the cars of today and as for the huge lorries we see everywhere. Have you seen the two old guys who cycle on the 1950’s bikes with their raincoats on holding up the traffic along the Eastern Avenue. Some people need saving from themselves. To pay for the extra cycle paths there should be some type of registration, tax and insurance. But for this we must get a decent service with associated police cyclists showing a decent presence and doing a decent job. Jose El Mezclador
  • Score: 0

8:35am Wed 9 Jun 10

Horace Wimpole says...

ShoeburyCyclist sounds as mad as a box of frogs.

Good wishes to the cyclist involved, hope they catch the driver.
ShoeburyCyclist sounds as mad as a box of frogs. Good wishes to the cyclist involved, hope they catch the driver. Horace Wimpole
  • Score: 0

10:55am Wed 9 Jun 10

ShoeburyCyclist says...

Jose El Mezclador wrote:
Hope the cyclist is OK and the car driver caught but the plain truth of the matter in todays world is that cyclists and cars do not mix and should have their own separate routes for 100% of the time. The cycle paths created in Southend recently are to be applauded but they only do half the job. I’m a cyclist and a car driver and use both in equal measure. We no longer live in the halcyon days of the 50’s when cars were few and could only manage 40mph flat out and took and age to get there. There is no way cyclists should be expected to share the road with the volume and performance of the cars of today and as for the huge lorries we see everywhere. Have you seen the two old guys who cycle on the 1950’s bikes with their raincoats on holding up the traffic along the Eastern Avenue. Some people need saving from themselves.

To pay for the extra cycle paths there should be some type of registration, tax and insurance. But for this we must get a decent service with associated police cyclists showing a decent presence and doing a decent job.
So because motor vehicles are killing thousands of people every year, you propose clamping down on cycling?

It would be far better, and a lot cheaper, to educate drivers that they do not have sole right to use the roads, other than on motorways, and that because they are controlling a vehicle capable of killing they have a responsibility to be aware of, and be careful around, vulnerable road users.
[quote][p][bold]Jose El Mezclador[/bold] wrote: Hope the cyclist is OK and the car driver caught but the plain truth of the matter in todays world is that cyclists and cars do not mix and should have their own separate routes for 100% of the time. The cycle paths created in Southend recently are to be applauded but they only do half the job. I’m a cyclist and a car driver and use both in equal measure. We no longer live in the halcyon days of the 50’s when cars were few and could only manage 40mph flat out and took and age to get there. There is no way cyclists should be expected to share the road with the volume and performance of the cars of today and as for the huge lorries we see everywhere. Have you seen the two old guys who cycle on the 1950’s bikes with their raincoats on holding up the traffic along the Eastern Avenue. Some people need saving from themselves. To pay for the extra cycle paths there should be some type of registration, tax and insurance. But for this we must get a decent service with associated police cyclists showing a decent presence and doing a decent job.[/p][/quote]So because motor vehicles are killing thousands of people every year, you propose clamping down on cycling? It would be far better, and a lot cheaper, to educate drivers that they do not have sole right to use the roads, other than on motorways, and that because they are controlling a vehicle capable of killing they have a responsibility to be aware of, and be careful around, vulnerable road users. ShoeburyCyclist
  • Score: 0

11:23am Wed 9 Jun 10

keptquietillnow says...

Bicycles are the solution, not the problem!
Bicycles are the solution, not the problem! keptquietillnow
  • Score: 0

11:30am Wed 9 Jun 10

PJR says...

While I agree that car drivers need to be careful of cyclists, I do believe there needs to be some form of cycle registration, or something.
...
My pregnant (at the time) wife was very nearly knocked over by a cyclist, who jumped a red light at a pedrestrian crossing. In fact, if it wasn't for the man behind her literally grabbing her shoulder and pulling her back hard, she would have been hit.
...
Now tell me that the cyclist was right to jump a red light, and potentially cause harm to my wife and unborn child?
...
I'm not against cyclists, I am one myself. But a lot of cyclists out there do not respect the rules of the road either, and they can also lead to dangerous, potentially life threatening accidents.
While I agree that car drivers need to be careful of cyclists, I do believe there needs to be some form of cycle registration, or something. ... My pregnant (at the time) wife was very nearly knocked over by a cyclist, who jumped a red light at a pedrestrian crossing. In fact, if it wasn't for the man behind her literally grabbing her shoulder and pulling her back hard, she would have been hit. ... Now tell me that the cyclist was right to jump a red light, and potentially cause harm to my wife and unborn child? ... I'm not against cyclists, I am one myself. But a lot of cyclists out there do not respect the rules of the road either, and they can also lead to dangerous, potentially life threatening accidents. PJR
  • Score: 0

11:40am Wed 9 Jun 10

Nebs says...

ShoeburyCyclist - The registration bit is easy, especially as you have helpfully pointed out the law regarding 16 year olds. Bikes on the pavement, no registration needed, but as soon as you want to drive on the road you need registration. What could be easier.
ShoeburyCyclist - The registration bit is easy, especially as you have helpfully pointed out the law regarding 16 year olds. Bikes on the pavement, no registration needed, but as soon as you want to drive on the road you need registration. What could be easier. Nebs
  • Score: 0

12:17pm Wed 9 Jun 10

ShoeburyCyclist says...

Nebs wrote:
ShoeburyCyclist - The registration bit is easy, especially as you have helpfully pointed out the law regarding 16 year olds. Bikes on the pavement, no registration needed, but as soon as you want to drive on the road you need registration. What could be easier.
Would this also apply to horses? People walking in roads where there are no footpaths, i.e. country lanes?

Other countries have tried registration plates on bicycles and scrapped the idea because it was not cost effective. There are simply too many criteria. Some children younger than sixteen are perfectly able to cycle on roads.

Also number plates don't stop motorists from speeding, running red lights, driving dangerously etc. what makes you think the minority of cyclists who break the law would behave any differently?
Another point, see a cyclist run a red light, take their 'registration', phone the police and report it. What do you think will happen? Precisely the same thing that happens if you report a motorist who has run a red light or driven on the pavement: nothing. Try it next time you see a driver do something illegal on the road.

One last point, where on a bicycle do we put a number plate big enough to be read by a roadside camera?

Here's a quote from a website on the subject of cycle registration:

"To drive a car in the UK you must be licensed, must pass a test and be 17 or over. To ride a bike you merely have to balance. Children aren’t allowed to drive cars, but they are allowed to ride bikes for the simple reason that bicycles are not killing machines. No-one in their right mind would allow an eight year old to drive a car on the public highway, but children, quite rightly, are allowed to ride bicycles on the public highway.

If a licensing system were brought in, would children have to have ‘child cycling licences’? At what age would the cut off be? 16, 8, 4? If children were exempt from licensing, would that preclude them from using roads on their bicycles?"

See more here:

http://ipayroadtax.c
om/?p=85
[quote][p][bold]Nebs[/bold] wrote: ShoeburyCyclist - The registration bit is easy, especially as you have helpfully pointed out the law regarding 16 year olds. Bikes on the pavement, no registration needed, but as soon as you want to drive on the road you need registration. What could be easier.[/p][/quote]Would this also apply to horses? People walking in roads where there are no footpaths, i.e. country lanes? Other countries have tried registration plates on bicycles and scrapped the idea because it was not cost effective. There are simply too many criteria. Some children younger than sixteen are perfectly able to cycle on roads. Also number plates don't stop motorists from speeding, running red lights, driving dangerously etc. what makes you think the minority of cyclists who break the law would behave any differently? Another point, see a cyclist run a red light, take their 'registration', phone the police and report it. What do you think will happen? Precisely the same thing that happens if you report a motorist who has run a red light or driven on the pavement: nothing. Try it next time you see a driver do something illegal on the road. One last point, where on a bicycle do we put a number plate big enough to be read by a roadside camera? Here's a quote from a website on the subject of cycle registration: "To drive a car in the UK you must be licensed, must pass a test and be 17 or over. To ride a bike you merely have to balance. Children aren’t allowed to drive cars, but they are allowed to ride bikes for the simple reason that bicycles are not killing machines. No-one in their right mind would allow an eight year old to drive a car on the public highway, but children, quite rightly, are allowed to ride bicycles on the public highway. If a licensing system were brought in, would children have to have ‘child cycling licences’? At what age would the cut off be? 16, 8, 4? If children were exempt from licensing, would that preclude them from using roads on their bicycles?" See more here: http://ipayroadtax.c om/?p=85 ShoeburyCyclist
  • Score: 0

1:30pm Wed 9 Jun 10

BD says...

as usual a story on a cyclist deliberately being hit by a car gets turned around and all cyclists are now responsible for all the ills in the world...

Yep some cyclists jump red lights, some ride on the pavement, it is wrong, but Im assuming everyone on here commenting about them drives below all speed limits in their car, always wears their seatbelt and never uses or looks at a phone whilst driving. Its amazes me that some people seem to think only some of the rules apply to them but all the rules apply to others.

10 deaths a day are attributed to cars and car accidents, in the last few years there has been one or two deaths a year attributed to cycling, and yet car drivers seem to think the cyclists are the bad guys, how odd...
as usual a story on a cyclist deliberately being hit by a car gets turned around and all cyclists are now responsible for all the ills in the world... Yep some cyclists jump red lights, some ride on the pavement, it is wrong, but Im assuming everyone on here commenting about them drives below all speed limits in their car, always wears their seatbelt and never uses or looks at a phone whilst driving. Its amazes me that some people seem to think only some of the rules apply to them but all the rules apply to others. 10 deaths a day are attributed to cars and car accidents, in the last few years there has been one or two deaths a year attributed to cycling, and yet car drivers seem to think the cyclists are the bad guys, how odd... BD
  • Score: 0

4:33pm Wed 9 Jun 10

Ivanna Goodhump says...

Whilst this one incident is the extreme - people need to get used to the idea that life is not risk free and you cannot legislate against human nature. Everyone, both drivers and cyclists have lapses of attention (anyone who says they don't is just lying) which can lead to incidents occuring - it's just the way people are.

The only minor change that is required is that where a road has been narrowed to allow a cycle lane to be constructed the cyclists should be compelled to use the cycle lane.

For one it would be safer and why should drivers be stuck behind a slow moving cyclist, with no chance to pass because of narrow lanes when a dedicated and often empty cycle lane runs down the side of the same road.
Whilst this one incident is the extreme - people need to get used to the idea that life is not risk free and you cannot legislate against human nature. Everyone, both drivers and cyclists have lapses of attention (anyone who says they don't is just lying) which can lead to incidents occuring - it's just the way people are. The only minor change that is required is that where a road has been narrowed to allow a cycle lane to be constructed the cyclists should be compelled to use the cycle lane. For one it would be safer and why should drivers be stuck behind a slow moving cyclist, with no chance to pass because of narrow lanes when a dedicated and often empty cycle lane runs down the side of the same road. Ivanna Goodhump
  • Score: 0

4:49pm Wed 9 Jun 10

Mark D says...

Ivanna Goodhump wrote:
Whilst this one incident is the extreme - people need to get used to the idea that life is not risk free and you cannot legislate against human nature. Everyone, both drivers and cyclists have lapses of attention (anyone who says they don't is just lying) which can lead to incidents occuring - it's just the way people are. The only minor change that is required is that where a road has been narrowed to allow a cycle lane to be constructed the cyclists should be compelled to use the cycle lane. For one it would be safer and why should drivers be stuck behind a slow moving cyclist, with no chance to pass because of narrow lanes when a dedicated and often empty cycle lane runs down the side of the same road.
The trouble with cycling lanes is that they are often clogged up by pedestrians, people unloading their cars etc etc, and so aren't very safe except at extremely slow speeds. Personally, I try and avoid areas with cycle lanes when I am on my bike, unless I am just pootling along with my girlfriend.
[quote][p][bold]Ivanna Goodhump[/bold] wrote: Whilst this one incident is the extreme - people need to get used to the idea that life is not risk free and you cannot legislate against human nature. Everyone, both drivers and cyclists have lapses of attention (anyone who says they don't is just lying) which can lead to incidents occuring - it's just the way people are. The only minor change that is required is that where a road has been narrowed to allow a cycle lane to be constructed the cyclists should be compelled to use the cycle lane. For one it would be safer and why should drivers be stuck behind a slow moving cyclist, with no chance to pass because of narrow lanes when a dedicated and often empty cycle lane runs down the side of the same road.[/p][/quote]The trouble with cycling lanes is that they are often clogged up by pedestrians, people unloading their cars etc etc, and so aren't very safe except at extremely slow speeds. Personally, I try and avoid areas with cycle lanes when I am on my bike, unless I am just pootling along with my girlfriend. Mark D
  • Score: 0

4:52pm Wed 9 Jun 10

Horace Wimpole says...

Personally, I try and avoid areas with cycle lanes when I am on my bike
Great, that's just great.
[quote]Personally, I try and avoid areas with cycle lanes when I am on my bike[/quote] Great, that's just great. Horace Wimpole
  • Score: 0

4:57pm Wed 9 Jun 10

Mark D says...

Horace Wimpole wrote:
Personally, I try and avoid areas with cycle lanes when I am on my bike
Great, that's just great.
Am afraid it's the only option for a committed cyclist who wants to go at a reasonable speed rather than pootling along (can you imagine members of Southend Wheelers going on training rides using a cycle path?). In addition to the drawbacks I've mentioned already, the other thing about cycle paths (at least the ones that I have used) is that you normally have to give way at frequent intervals to all the side roads that come out on to the path that you are using.
[quote][p][bold]Horace Wimpole[/bold] wrote: [quote]Personally, I try and avoid areas with cycle lanes when I am on my bike[/quote] Great, that's just great.[/p][/quote]Am afraid it's the only option for a committed cyclist who wants to go at a reasonable speed rather than pootling along (can you imagine members of Southend Wheelers going on training rides using a cycle path?). In addition to the drawbacks I've mentioned already, the other thing about cycle paths (at least the ones that I have used) is that you normally have to give way at frequent intervals to all the side roads that come out on to the path that you are using. Mark D
  • Score: 0

6:16pm Wed 9 Jun 10

AliciaSS says...

I MUST ALSO ADD THAT THE PERSON DRIVING THE CAR HAD A GIRL AGED ABOUT 10/11 IN A GREENWAYS UNIFORM IN THE PASSENGER SEAT.

Why are people talking about cyclists paying road tax? Honestly? This person involved in the accident could have been killed, all for nothing! I know what happened, you people don't. Clearly!
First things first, the car is NOT an M-reg Mercedes. It is indeed a Mercedes, a burgundy/maroon coloured older shape but NOT M reg.
Secondly, the car did NOT speed off towards Shoebury. They did indeed drive towards Thorpe Bay after purposefully hitting the cyclist.

It is against the law to ride on the pavement, and the cyclist did actually get up on the pavement from the road because of this CRIMINAL was following him, f'ing and blinding out of his car window. The cyclist then had to get back on the road as there were pedestrians on the pavement... of course.

You people do understand how serious this crime is, yes? The cyclist did not do anything wrong, if he did he would of admitted it and wouldn't have to keep going to see his doctor and going to the hospital because over 2 weeks later the concussion is still not much better from when the accident happened and he seriously hurt his elbow and ankle and also has friction burn across the whole of the right side of his body.

THIS PERSON NEEDS TO BE CAUGHT, YOU BUNCH NEED TO STOP TALKING ABOUT HOW MUCH CYCLISTS SHOULD PAY AND GET OUT THERE AND FIND THIS VILE, MALICIOUS CRIMINAL AND GET HIM OFF THE ROAD AND LOCKED UP!!!!!!!!!
I MUST ALSO ADD THAT THE PERSON DRIVING THE CAR HAD A GIRL AGED ABOUT 10/11 IN A GREENWAYS UNIFORM IN THE PASSENGER SEAT. Why are people talking about cyclists paying road tax? Honestly? This person involved in the accident could have been killed, all for nothing! I know what happened, you people don't. Clearly! First things first, the car is NOT an M-reg Mercedes. It is indeed a Mercedes, a burgundy/maroon coloured older shape but NOT M reg. Secondly, the car did NOT speed off towards Shoebury. They did indeed drive towards Thorpe Bay after purposefully hitting the cyclist. It is against the law to ride on the pavement, and the cyclist did actually get up on the pavement from the road because of this CRIMINAL was following him, f'ing and blinding out of his car window. The cyclist then had to get back on the road as there were pedestrians on the pavement... of course. You people do understand how serious this crime is, yes? The cyclist did not do anything wrong, if he did he would of admitted it and wouldn't have to keep going to see his doctor and going to the hospital because over 2 weeks later the concussion is still not much better from when the accident happened and he seriously hurt his elbow and ankle and also has friction burn across the whole of the right side of his body. THIS PERSON NEEDS TO BE CAUGHT, YOU BUNCH NEED TO STOP TALKING ABOUT HOW MUCH CYCLISTS SHOULD PAY AND GET OUT THERE AND FIND THIS VILE, MALICIOUS CRIMINAL AND GET HIM OFF THE ROAD AND LOCKED UP!!!!!!!!! AliciaSS
  • Score: 0

7:20pm Wed 9 Jun 10

ShoeburyCyclist says...

Someone at the school must know who this maniac in a car is. Parents, teachers etc.
Someone at the school must know who this maniac in a car is. Parents, teachers etc. ShoeburyCyclist
  • Score: 0

7:35pm Wed 9 Jun 10

ShoeburyCyclist says...

So what about slow moving motor vehicles? Slow caravans? Slow scooters, slow drivers? Force them off the road too, just so impatient people can drive a bit faster?

In my experience it is rarely cyclists holding up traffic, it is traffic holding up traffic.
So what about slow moving motor vehicles? Slow caravans? Slow scooters, slow drivers? Force them off the road too, just so impatient people can drive a bit faster? In my experience it is rarely cyclists holding up traffic, it is traffic holding up traffic. ShoeburyCyclist
  • Score: 0

9:04pm Wed 9 Jun 10

Horace Wimpole says...

Mark D wrote:
Horace Wimpole wrote:
Personally, I try and avoid areas with cycle lanes when I am on my bike
Great, that's just great.
Am afraid it's the only option for a committed cyclist who wants to go at a reasonable speed rather than pootling along (can you imagine members of Southend Wheelers going on training rides using a cycle path?). In addition to the drawbacks I've mentioned already, the other thing about cycle paths (at least the ones that I have used) is that you normally have to give way at frequent intervals to all the side roads that come out on to the path that you are using.
You have to -- gasp -- give way? Like pedestrians and motorists? Oh the humanity.
[quote][p][bold]Mark D[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Horace Wimpole[/bold] wrote: [quote]Personally, I try and avoid areas with cycle lanes when I am on my bike[/quote] Great, that's just great.[/p][/quote]Am afraid it's the only option for a committed cyclist who wants to go at a reasonable speed rather than pootling along (can you imagine members of Southend Wheelers going on training rides using a cycle path?). In addition to the drawbacks I've mentioned already, the other thing about cycle paths (at least the ones that I have used) is that you normally have to give way at frequent intervals to all the side roads that come out on to the path that you are using.[/p][/quote]You have to -- gasp -- give way? Like pedestrians and motorists? Oh the humanity. Horace Wimpole
  • Score: 0

9:12pm Wed 9 Jun 10

ShoeburyCyclist says...

Horace Wimpole wrote:
Mark D wrote:
Horace Wimpole wrote:
Personally, I try and avoid areas with cycle lanes when I am on my bike
Great, that's just great.
Am afraid it's the only option for a committed cyclist who wants to go at a reasonable speed rather than pootling along (can you imagine members of Southend Wheelers going on training rides using a cycle path?). In addition to the drawbacks I've mentioned already, the other thing about cycle paths (at least the ones that I have used) is that you normally have to give way at frequent intervals to all the side roads that come out on to the path that you are using.
You have to -- gasp -- give way? Like pedestrians and motorists? Oh the humanity.
No. If you are on the road, you do not have to give way for every side turning. If you are on an off road cycle lane painted on a pavement you DO have to stop for EVERY side turning. That is why most cyclists will not use off road cycle lanes.
[quote][p][bold]Horace Wimpole[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mark D[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Horace Wimpole[/bold] wrote: [quote]Personally, I try and avoid areas with cycle lanes when I am on my bike[/quote] Great, that's just great.[/p][/quote]Am afraid it's the only option for a committed cyclist who wants to go at a reasonable speed rather than pootling along (can you imagine members of Southend Wheelers going on training rides using a cycle path?). In addition to the drawbacks I've mentioned already, the other thing about cycle paths (at least the ones that I have used) is that you normally have to give way at frequent intervals to all the side roads that come out on to the path that you are using.[/p][/quote]You have to -- gasp -- give way? Like pedestrians and motorists? Oh the humanity.[/p][/quote]No. If you are on the road, you do not have to give way for every side turning. If you are on an off road cycle lane painted on a pavement you DO have to stop for EVERY side turning. That is why most cyclists will not use off road cycle lanes. ShoeburyCyclist
  • Score: 0

9:39pm Wed 9 Jun 10

Mary Lou says...

AliciaSS wrote:
I MUST ALSO ADD THAT THE PERSON DRIVING THE CAR HAD A GIRL AGED ABOUT 10/11 IN A GREENWAYS UNIFORM IN THE PASSENGER SEAT. Why are people talking about cyclists paying road tax? Honestly? This person involved in the accident could have been killed, all for nothing! I know what happened, you people don't. Clearly! First things first, the car is NOT an M-reg Mercedes. It is indeed a Mercedes, a burgundy/maroon coloured older shape but NOT M reg. Secondly, the car did NOT speed off towards Shoebury. They did indeed drive towards Thorpe Bay after purposefully hitting the cyclist. It is against the law to ride on the pavement, and the cyclist did actually get up on the pavement from the road because of this CRIMINAL was following him, f'ing and blinding out of his car window. The cyclist then had to get back on the road as there were pedestrians on the pavement... of course. You people do understand how serious this crime is, yes? The cyclist did not do anything wrong, if he did he would of admitted it and wouldn't have to keep going to see his doctor and going to the hospital because over 2 weeks later the concussion is still not much better from when the accident happened and he seriously hurt his elbow and ankle and also has friction burn across the whole of the right side of his body. THIS PERSON NEEDS TO BE CAUGHT, YOU BUNCH NEED TO STOP TALKING ABOUT HOW MUCH CYCLISTS SHOULD PAY AND GET OUT THERE AND FIND THIS VILE, MALICIOUS CRIMINAL AND GET HIM OFF THE ROAD AND LOCKED UP!!!!!!!!!
And how do you sugest this comes about. Arrest every Mercedes (possibly, maybe a redish sort of something, Mor somethin else reg) owner in the country and beat a confession out of them.
.
Unless the driver volunteers himself to the police I will be very suprised if something happens.
[quote][p][bold]AliciaSS[/bold] wrote: I MUST ALSO ADD THAT THE PERSON DRIVING THE CAR HAD A GIRL AGED ABOUT 10/11 IN A GREENWAYS UNIFORM IN THE PASSENGER SEAT. Why are people talking about cyclists paying road tax? Honestly? This person involved in the accident could have been killed, all for nothing! I know what happened, you people don't. Clearly! First things first, the car is NOT an M-reg Mercedes. It is indeed a Mercedes, a burgundy/maroon coloured older shape but NOT M reg. Secondly, the car did NOT speed off towards Shoebury. They did indeed drive towards Thorpe Bay after purposefully hitting the cyclist. It is against the law to ride on the pavement, and the cyclist did actually get up on the pavement from the road because of this CRIMINAL was following him, f'ing and blinding out of his car window. The cyclist then had to get back on the road as there were pedestrians on the pavement... of course. You people do understand how serious this crime is, yes? The cyclist did not do anything wrong, if he did he would of admitted it and wouldn't have to keep going to see his doctor and going to the hospital because over 2 weeks later the concussion is still not much better from when the accident happened and he seriously hurt his elbow and ankle and also has friction burn across the whole of the right side of his body. THIS PERSON NEEDS TO BE CAUGHT, YOU BUNCH NEED TO STOP TALKING ABOUT HOW MUCH CYCLISTS SHOULD PAY AND GET OUT THERE AND FIND THIS VILE, MALICIOUS CRIMINAL AND GET HIM OFF THE ROAD AND LOCKED UP!!!!!!!!![/p][/quote]And how do you sugest this comes about. Arrest every Mercedes (possibly, maybe a redish sort of something, Mor somethin else reg) owner in the country and beat a confession out of them. . Unless the driver volunteers himself to the police I will be very suprised if something happens. Mary Lou
  • Score: 0

9:47pm Wed 9 Jun 10

'V' says...

Mary Lou wrote:
AliciaSS wrote:
I MUST ALSO ADD THAT THE PERSON DRIVING THE CAR HAD A GIRL AGED ABOUT 10/11 IN A GREENWAYS UNIFORM IN THE PASSENGER SEAT. Why are people talking about cyclists paying road tax? Honestly? This person involved in the accident could have been killed, all for nothing! I know what happened, you people don't. Clearly! First things first, the car is NOT an M-reg Mercedes. It is indeed a Mercedes, a burgundy/maroon coloured older shape but NOT M reg. Secondly, the car did NOT speed off towards Shoebury. They did indeed drive towards Thorpe Bay after purposefully hitting the cyclist. It is against the law to ride on the pavement, and the cyclist did actually get up on the pavement from the road because of this CRIMINAL was following him, f'ing and blinding out of his car window. The cyclist then had to get back on the road as there were pedestrians on the pavement... of course. You people do understand how serious this crime is, yes? The cyclist did not do anything wrong, if he did he would of admitted it and wouldn't have to keep going to see his doctor and going to the hospital because over 2 weeks later the concussion is still not much better from when the accident happened and he seriously hurt his elbow and ankle and also has friction burn across the whole of the right side of his body. THIS PERSON NEEDS TO BE CAUGHT, YOU BUNCH NEED TO STOP TALKING ABOUT HOW MUCH CYCLISTS SHOULD PAY AND GET OUT THERE AND FIND THIS VILE, MALICIOUS CRIMINAL AND GET HIM OFF THE ROAD AND LOCKED UP!!!!!!!!!
And how do you sugest this comes about. Arrest every Mercedes (possibly, maybe a redish sort of something, Mor somethin else reg) owner in the country and beat a confession out of them.
.
Unless the driver volunteers himself to the police I will be very suprised if something happens.
Seems to me it should be pretty easy to keep a presence outside the school at home time and watch for the Merc.
[quote][p][bold]Mary Lou[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]AliciaSS[/bold] wrote: I MUST ALSO ADD THAT THE PERSON DRIVING THE CAR HAD A GIRL AGED ABOUT 10/11 IN A GREENWAYS UNIFORM IN THE PASSENGER SEAT. Why are people talking about cyclists paying road tax? Honestly? This person involved in the accident could have been killed, all for nothing! I know what happened, you people don't. Clearly! First things first, the car is NOT an M-reg Mercedes. It is indeed a Mercedes, a burgundy/maroon coloured older shape but NOT M reg. Secondly, the car did NOT speed off towards Shoebury. They did indeed drive towards Thorpe Bay after purposefully hitting the cyclist. It is against the law to ride on the pavement, and the cyclist did actually get up on the pavement from the road because of this CRIMINAL was following him, f'ing and blinding out of his car window. The cyclist then had to get back on the road as there were pedestrians on the pavement... of course. You people do understand how serious this crime is, yes? The cyclist did not do anything wrong, if he did he would of admitted it and wouldn't have to keep going to see his doctor and going to the hospital because over 2 weeks later the concussion is still not much better from when the accident happened and he seriously hurt his elbow and ankle and also has friction burn across the whole of the right side of his body. THIS PERSON NEEDS TO BE CAUGHT, YOU BUNCH NEED TO STOP TALKING ABOUT HOW MUCH CYCLISTS SHOULD PAY AND GET OUT THERE AND FIND THIS VILE, MALICIOUS CRIMINAL AND GET HIM OFF THE ROAD AND LOCKED UP!!!!!!!!![/p][/quote]And how do you sugest this comes about. Arrest every Mercedes (possibly, maybe a redish sort of something, Mor somethin else reg) owner in the country and beat a confession out of them. . Unless the driver volunteers himself to the police I will be very suprised if something happens.[/p][/quote]Seems to me it should be pretty easy to keep a presence outside the school at home time and watch for the Merc. 'V'
  • Score: 0

5:11pm Thu 10 Jun 10

Mary Lou says...

So one person thinks it was Greenways.
.
Police - excuse me sir you are driving a Merc and did you knock down a cyclist.
.
Motorist- What proof have you that will stand up in a court of law as to who committed this vile act.
.
Police- well a couple of witnesses who can't agree on the registration or the colour of the car and who a defending barrister would pull to pieces under cross examination.
.
Motorist - Goodbye.
So one person thinks it was Greenways. . Police - excuse me sir you are driving a Merc and did you knock down a cyclist. . Motorist- What proof have you that will stand up in a court of law as to who committed this vile act. . Police- well a couple of witnesses who can't agree on the registration or the colour of the car and who a defending barrister would pull to pieces under cross examination. . Motorist - Goodbye. Mary Lou
  • Score: 0

1:52am Fri 11 Jun 10

Horace Wimpole says...

Mary Lou has it, in a nutshell.
Mary Lou has it, in a nutshell. Horace Wimpole
  • Score: 0

7:30am Fri 11 Jun 10

'V' says...

Witness: "I saw that car, with that person driving it, deliberately knock down the cyclist…"
Witness: "I saw that car, with that person driving it, deliberately knock down the cyclist…" 'V'
  • Score: 0

11:37am Fri 11 Jun 10

AliciaSS says...

Mary Lou wrote:
So one person thinks it was Greenways.
.
Police - excuse me sir you are driving a Merc and did you knock down a cyclist.
.
Motorist- What proof have you that will stand up in a court of law as to who committed this vile act.
.
Police- well a couple of witnesses who can't agree on the registration or the colour of the car and who a defending barrister would pull to pieces under cross examination.
.
Motorist - Goodbye.
You haven't got it in a nutshell, clearly. Moron.
[quote][p][bold]Mary Lou[/bold] wrote: So one person thinks it was Greenways. . Police - excuse me sir you are driving a Merc and did you knock down a cyclist. . Motorist- What proof have you that will stand up in a court of law as to who committed this vile act. . Police- well a couple of witnesses who can't agree on the registration or the colour of the car and who a defending barrister would pull to pieces under cross examination. . Motorist - Goodbye.[/p][/quote]You haven't got it in a nutshell, clearly. Moron. AliciaSS
  • Score: 0

11:43am Fri 11 Jun 10

AliciaSS says...

no1sawus wrote:
I don't know why the Police are interested. it's only a cyclist. Being driven at, knocked or abused is part of cycling.
Absolute ****.... this person could have killed my father!!!!!!!!
[quote][p][bold]no1sawus[/bold] wrote: I don't know why the Police are interested. it's only a cyclist. Being driven at, knocked or abused is part of cycling.[/p][/quote]Absolute ****.... this person could have killed my father!!!!!!!! AliciaSS
  • Score: 0

3:50pm Fri 11 Jun 10

Mary Lou says...

I am not disputing that the driver "ought " to be punished.
.
What I am trying to get over is that under the current policing and justice sytem the likelyhood of that happening is probably zero.
.
And V as to your witness when they stand up in court in 6,9 maybe 12 months time and a barrister totaly detroys their credibility as to memory, then it will be case dismissed,
I am not disputing that the driver "ought " to be punished. . What I am trying to get over is that under the current policing and justice sytem the likelyhood of that happening is probably zero. . And V as to your witness when they stand up in court in 6,9 maybe 12 months time and a barrister totaly detroys their credibility as to memory, then it will be case dismissed, Mary Lou
  • Score: 0

9:58pm Sun 13 Jun 10

Miss D Meaner says...

Mary Lou wrote:
I am not disputing that the driver "ought " to be punished. . What I am trying to get over is that under the current policing and justice sytem the likelyhood of that happening is probably zero. . And V as to your witness when they stand up in court in 6,9 maybe 12 months time and a barrister totaly detroys their credibility as to memory, then it will be case dismissed,
Sadly, I fear you're right...I've seen many barristers all but leave a witness, naked, and its not pretty to watch. George Carmen QC was a charming man, but that quiet voice, hid a precise ruthlessness that few could imagine.

None-the-less, any information that could be of use to the Police, should be given to them - no matter how insignificant it may seem. This person is a danger to ALL road users and needs to be caught. They are a danger to people. Who knows, what a maniac like that will do next?!
[quote][p][bold]Mary Lou[/bold] wrote: I am not disputing that the driver "ought " to be punished. . What I am trying to get over is that under the current policing and justice sytem the likelyhood of that happening is probably zero. . And V as to your witness when they stand up in court in 6,9 maybe 12 months time and a barrister totaly detroys their credibility as to memory, then it will be case dismissed,[/p][/quote]Sadly, I fear you're right...I've seen many barristers all but leave a witness, naked, and its not pretty to watch. George Carmen QC was a charming man, but that quiet voice, hid a precise ruthlessness that few could imagine. None-the-less, any information that could be of use to the Police, should be given to them - no matter how insignificant it may seem. This person is a danger to ALL road users and needs to be caught. They are a danger to people. Who knows, what a maniac like that will do next?! Miss D Meaner
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree