Attempted Murder!

[Crankarm]

CCTV and witness statements can not give an indication of 'intent'. I'm not defending it or saying its right, but the sole thing that seperates a crime from a non-crime, or one category of crine from another is 'intent', or mens rea.

CCTV might show what occurred but it can not demonstrate what the intent was. If, say, I ran you over and killed you the difference between murder and death by dangerous would come down solely to my men's rea. If id intended to kill you it would be murder. If I'd intended to simply frighten you but it went wrong it can never in a month of Sundays be murder as I did not have the intent. Never, ever, infinity with knobs on. And this is where the CPS have a headache - it might be a cut and dried certainty that I'd run you over, but what was my mens rea? Its not the act alone, but the motivation behind it that is the determining factor. It's often simply impossible to say in many cases, and this is why many get charged with "death by" driving offences instead of murder, not because the CPS don't care or want an easy life. It ain't good, it ain't right, it's simply the way it is.

I'm a copper with a law degree and was only commenting on the OPs account. If anyone wants my thoughts as a solicitor on any other incident I'd be happy to for £100 per hour + VAT... If you can wait the 4 years for me to retire

Are you actually a solicitor?

Hang on a minute the OP's title states ATTEMPTED murder, not murder. There are also other OAPs such as s.18 (inflicting grievous bodily harm) with intent. But if the OP wasn't injured then this or similar lesser assault offences are not going to be successful. If you are a solicitor who specialises in criminal law then you will be aware of the Criminal Attempts Act 1967 I think it is still in force. In addition all offences have provision for aggravating aspects to be considered. A charge of Dangerous Driving is not a trivial offence. The motoring offences dangerous, reckless and careless driving are based on negligence which means that the activity "driving" is lawful until such time as it can be proved it was done negligently. And of course you will be familiar with the legal concept of negligence.

If some one DELIBERATELY swerves their vehicle at you, several times, sufficient to put you in fear of your life or your safety, is aggressive and demonstrates the capacity for violence, shouts abuse I would contend this does indicate a state of mind intent on violence toward you, the likely outcome causing injury or death, or is reckless is to the consequences of their conduct which is sufficient to satisfy the requirement for mens rea. But as I say the OP was not injured so a prosecution under the offences against the person act might be challenging.

Some practical advice - the next time the OP or any one else for that matter encounters similar extreme aggressive behaviour while out cycling, get off the road or to a place of safety ASAP. Don't try to be a hero or in any way do anything that might escalate the situation as you are extremely vulnerable as a cyclist. When the red mist comes down for nutters like this it is so easy to end up breathing or eating through a straw or dead. The driver of this car clearly has issues.