Cyclist assaulted by white van man.

[Hip Priest]

I would consider van slapping a far more dangerous maneuver than applying the brakes.

Especially if the van is piloted by an extra from Lock Stock and Two Smoking Barrels.

 

[400bhp]

Once a few people had suggested that Sue Perb had slapped the van in OP footage, he went very, very quiet. Not a peep since.

Nobody (I hope) would contend that the resulting actions of the motorist were anything better than bestially violent, but for the OP to say (if it is not so) that he was struck by the van and that the resulting injury would be grounds for a claim, would be disgraceful if true.

Humiliating to be caught in a lie... But much more so when it is footage you've posted to support your deceit that proves you a stranger to the truth.

As Sue Perb already had form (for his execrably sardonic and inconsiderate attitude in his MGIF thread), does this mean that he has withdrawn from CC?

I rather hope so. There are enough unprovoked incidents out there.

Miss Perb. You have rendered yourself Perfluous.

Gone quiet because he has lied to the poilce by any chance.

There was a thread on here (not sure if it was in commuting) a while ago where a case had gone to court where the initial reaction by the cyclist was to slap the side of the vehicle (I can't remember the whole story but I think the driver of the car deliberately tried to run the cyclist off the road afterwards). The cyclist's solicitor explained the reasoning for the slap extremely well. It might be worth the OP trying to find this thread.

 

[MarkF]

I feel sorry for the OP, a bit, the thread seems to be about nailing him now. He shouldn't have lied, it was silly and wrong, but going back to the incident, the vanman is a trigger finger temper scumbag thug.

As ever, be sure that you are "capable" before slapping or banging a vehicle, and never pick a fight with blokes who are used to fighting, unless you are too.

 

[glenn forger]

I'd say "I was fending you off, you obviously hadn't seen me so I had to make sure you know I'm there!"

I reckon the cops drew their own conclusions, the load of internet wrongmos on here saw it clear enough, a caution's fair. On the wider point, the publicity will perhaps make drivers think "Best not get out of my car and assault a cyclist, even the provocative ones".

 

[albion]

I never watched the video.

Assault is a separate issue and should be dealt with properly by the police.

 

[glasgowcyclist]

I feel sorry for the OP, a bit, the thread seems to be about nailing him now. He shouldn't have lied, it was silly and wrong, but going back to the incident, the vanman is a trigger finger temper scumbag thug.

As ever, be sure that you are "capable" before slapping or banging a vehicle, and never pick a fight with blokes who are used to fighting, unless you are too.

I feel rather sorry for him too. He found himself in a horrible situation and got thumped for it.

However, the video doesn't tally with the subsequent claims and he has also mentioned pursuing the driver for damages. If by that he means making a claim on the driver's insurance for an injury to his elbow that kept him off work for five weeks then his video evidence and statement(s) will be very closely scrutinised.

I wouldn't want to see him on the wrong side of the law for carrying on with what might be an embellished version of what really happened. It can be tempting to gild the lily but it's not worth the risk.

Sue Perb was the victim in that incident and I'd hate to see him end up as an accused. For my part, I'm not trying to 'nail him', quite the opposite.

GC

 

[jarlrmai]

There really was no reason to say he got knocked if he actually knocked the van, that close pass was reckless and the assault was just that an assault. But I can see a non sympathetic police force making a 50/50 type deal out of it. This should go further than it has.

I think if the OP owned up and came back on here and gave us the full tale it wouldn't be a problem.

 

[Leodis]

I honestly thought he was getting out to see if I was ok, I was shocked when he attacked me. I didn't have the chance to say a word and said If I can touch your van mate you're far too close meaning if you're that close to anyone its too close in reply to his shrieking I was really shaken up.

You could of punched him back if you hadnt damaged your limp hand hitting his property.

 

[Cubist]

There really was no reason to say he got knocked if he actually knocked the van, that close pass was reckless and the assault was just that an assault. But I can see a non sympathetic police force making a 50/50 type deal out of it. This should go further than it has.

I think if the OP owned up and came back on here and gave us the full tale it wouldn't be a problem.

Don't hold your breath!

Would you like a "sympathetic police force" to ignore half of the facts in a case in order to pursue a particular agenda?

By the way, I've kept quiet on this thread to date, not least because I think that under the circumstances the fact that the driver got a caution was well in keeping with what normally happens, according to very strict guidelines set by the Home Office and applied strictly by Evidential Review Officers and the CPS. First offence, no serious injuries from the actual assault (we'll come back to the elbow later) and a caution is in keeping with what was to be expected.

The OP has made a formal complaint because it took 5 weeks to progress to that point. Really?

Now that we have a second perspective thanks to GC's persistent questioning and Boris's more direct approach, we have the suggestion (and some evidence) that the cyclist slapped the van. Still no excuse for what happens next, the assault is absolutely unforgivable, and the assailant now has a record for his actions. However, I can be in no doubt that the driver will have been interviewed and will have advanced the mitigating factor that he was annoyed at having his van slapped.

Faced with this the officers will have been duty bound to make further enquiries around that assertion, and this will have prolonged the decision making process. We don't know (and I doubt if we will ever find out) exactly what that decision making process is or was, but given what we now suspect, a caution for the punch is quite a result.

We also don't know whether the incident was dealt with as a Road Traffic Collision. I suspect that the driver has told the police from the outset that he didn't hit the cyclist, but that the cyclist slapped his van. This is why the police didn't issue a Notice Of Intended Prosecution as sue tells us higher up thread.... because as far as they are concerned no offence has been committed. To confuse matters however, there is no legal need to issue an NIP if the offence in question involves a collision of which the driver is aware.... so legal moot point on that one. Did the police consider the matter to be an RTC? Indeed, did the OP ever report it as such or did he just tell the 101 operator that he had been assaulted?

Either way, sue has posted the incident and invited us to think of the police who dealt with this as lazy, incompetent and unsympathetic. There is a suggestion he has been caught out in a lie, and is even prepared to pervert the course of justice, and I note that he has plenty of time to respond to these accusations, but so far hasn't. As a committed professional whose job is to address and improve public confidence and satisfaction in the service I represent this makes my blood boil. There are enough examples of police idiocy and incompetence for real without someone making stuff up to discredit us FFS.

What's even worse is that he has claimed that the incident has cost him five weeks off work and intends to pursue the matter civilly. Glasgowcyclist has echoed many sentiments here inasmuch as we hope he isn't tempted to make things even worse by being investigated for criminal deception.#

Oh, and a big shout out to @Mugshot 's tenacious detective work and keen observation. Not to mention veloevol's HD slomo.

 

[Boris Bajic]

I wish I could make as much sense and make as lucid a point as the above. A solid, thoughtful and considered post.

 

[jarlrmai]

Let's say he had told the officers he instinctively in the heat of the moment used his hand to fend away the van as it came close to him, what changes? More than a caution?

I understand that telling the police one thing when another thing happened is very much a no no, but does anyone seriously consider tapping a motor vehicle with your hand to in any way be a mitigating circumstance in what the driver did next?

 

[BigonaBianchi]

I haven't read the entire thread just watched the clip...

I hope that guy gets put inside, what a tosser.

 

[Mugshot]

I haven't read the entire thread just watched the clip...

I hope that guy gets put inside, what a tosser.

He certainly is, but I'd suggest you read the whole thread too

 

[Mugshot]

I wish I could make as much sense and make as lucid a point as the above. A solid, thoughtful and considered post.

It certainly is a good post, I shall give it a like, even though I didn't get a mention

 

[Cubist]

Let's say he had told the officers he instinctively in the heat of the moment used his hand to fend away the van as it came close to him, what changes? More than a caution?

I understand that telling the police one thing when another thing happened is very much a no no, but does anyone seriously consider tapping a motor vehicle with your hand to in any way be a mitigating circumstance in what the driver did next?

Not if he initially said that he had been hit by the van. His story has changed. If he had said from the outset that he had slapped the van and then been assaulted then the driver would still have had a caution if he was eligible for one.

If he is eligible for a caution, and there are no real aggravating circumstances, then he will get one.

Being annoyed at having his van slapped is no legal defence to the assault, but it does change the "temperature" of the incident. It will be considered to be a mitigating factor by any reasonable person. In the documented decision making process that leads to a caution the officers are asked to record any defence or mitigation put forward by the suspect. The slap on the van will be one of them.

Note the term mitigate. It doesn't excuse, nor does it provide any defence.