Cyclist killed in road rage incident

[John the Monkey]

CPS are (anecdotally, I don't work in this area) notoriously risk averse - I would think that if they're going to court with murder, they think they have a reasonable chance of a guilty verdict.

 

[Arch]

This line annoyed me

Also:

"The victim was wearing a red jacket and the car he collided with was silver in colour."

Which rather implies that the action of colliding was the fault of the cyclist, not the action of a car mounting the pavement to deliberately hit him...

 

[John the Monkey]

Also:

"The victim was wearing a red jacket and the car he collided with was silver in colour."

Which rather implies that the action of colliding was the fault of the cyclist, not the action of a car mounting the pavement to deliberately hit him...

It's not the action of a car at all, in point of fact, it's the action of the murderous driver in control of it.

Tom Vanderbilt has written a few pieces on the use of the passive voice in reporting of "accident" and the tendency to assign agency to the vehicle involved, e.g. http://www.howwedrive.com/2009/03/28/the-passive-voice-is-killing-me/

 

[J4CKO]

What a sad little angry cock, I would be upset if someone knocked my mirror off but killing them wouldnt be my main course of action, catching up with them and askign them to pay for the damage would be more effective and avoid a murder charge.


My uncle knocked a mirror off whilst out riding, deliberately, having been nearly been knocked off by an unrepentant and aggressive BMW driver on the motorway, he went past, slowed down and twatted the mirror which parted company nicely, key difference was having a four cyclinger 140 bhp engine to make good his escape, on a bike you have little chance of getting away from even the weediest car so not woth trying, plus there is always the chance you get recognised or the prick just takes revenge on the nearest hapless cyclist, so if you do damage a car and its your fault, apologise and pay for it, £150 for a mittor is better than death by angry driver. We cannot expect tolerance if we damage cars but neither do we expect a brutal death if we do, this guy needs to go to prison, for a long long time and it made clear to the driving public how callous and unnecessary this was and the fact his kids wont see him for the loss of a wing mirror, probably ten lives or more ruined by one fit of pique.

 

[Arch]

It's not the action of a car at all, in point of fact, it's the action of the murderous driver in control of it.

Tom Vanderbilt has written a few pieces on the use of the passive voice in reporting of "accident" and the tendency to assign agency to the vehicle involved, e.g. http://www.howwedrive.com/2009/03/28/the-passive-voice-is-killing-me/

True, that was sloppy wording on my part.

 

[TimP]

OK, I'm relatively new here, but is this the way these threads usually go?

If so you might want to consider not even starting them as most people on this thread are looking in very poor form and the thread makes for a very poor advert for the quality of posting here.

 

[goo_mason]

OK, I'm relatively new here, but is this the way these threads usually go?

If so you might want to consider not even starting them as most people on this thread are looking in very poor form and the thread makes for a very poor advert for the quality of posting here.

I don't quite see what you're complaining about, Tim. Can you be a bit more specific ?

 

[Arch]

OK, I'm relatively new here, but is this the way these threads usually go?

If so you might want to consider not even starting them as most people on this thread are looking in very poor form and the thread makes for a very poor advert for the quality of posting here.

It's always hard for a relatively new person to work out the dynamics - I've read most of this as "the usual suspects" having their say...

Trouble is, opinion is rarely as simple as it might be, and that gets reflected in threads which maybe stray off-topic.

I don't think anyone has condoned the actions of the driver.

For me, it's another reason to berate the RLJ crowd. IF (and we don't know for sure) this cyclist turned out to be not the same one that hit the mirror, it shows how indiscriminate people can be in dishing out retribution. I don't fancy being mown down because someone in a yellow coat and jeans pisses off someone like that.

 

[very-near]

OK, I'm relatively new here, but is this the way these threads usually go?

If so you might want to consider not even starting them as most people on this thread are looking in very poor form and the thread makes for a very poor advert for the quality of posting here.

The problem you are probably seeing is that virtually all the subjects have already been done to death on here already. Views have been set and defences are entrenched.

It is not easy to sway views as personalities and egos get in the way of reason after a few years at 'the front'

Wait for the whistle before going over the top lads - where is my hard hat

 

[Crankarm]

OK, I'm relatively new here, but is this the way these threads usually go?

If so you might want to consider not even starting them as most people on this thread are looking in very poor form and the thread makes for a very poor advert for the quality of posting here.

Hang on........you cannot be serious! What exactly is bad form here? Some one has lost their life and the alleged perpetrator is facing a charge of murder and you are worried about bad form! Take out the cycling aspect and the car aspect and you have two people who have come into contact one of whom has major issues with anger management and aggression who has allegedly killed some one who has tried to get away. This person could be some one who regularly intimidates or bullies people when he can't get his own way. In this case he went way too far. Do you recall the recent case of the supermarket shopper who was punched in the head by a psychopath Verisamy and fell to the floor and died all because Verisamy's GF had told him that another shopper had allegedly pushed in front of her in a queue so he thought he would sort him out.

As a previous poster has requested please explain yourself. You wouldn't be connected or related to the defendant by any chance?

 

[Arch]

I got the feeling Tim was simply referring to the punch and judy style of the postings, not the story, or any criticism of the driver....

 

[tdr1nka]

Murder infers the driver took the vehicle onto the road with intent to take a life. The most he could be charged with is manslaughter as he will argue that his actions were purely a reaction to the cyclist taking his mirror off IMO.

What appears to be missing here is the fact that the driver was arrested on a charge of Murder.

Maybe that's why they are using the word?

 

[swee'pea99]

For me, it's another reason to berate the RLJ crowd. IF (and we don't know for sure) this cyclist turned out to be not the same one that hit the mirror, it shows how indiscriminate people can be in dishing out retribution. I don't fancy being mown down because someone in a yellow coat and jeans pisses off someone like that.

Well, who would? It's a slippery slope tho', to imply as you seem to be doing that RLJing justifies or excuses 'retribution'.

 

[very-near]

What appears to be missing here is the fact that the driver was arrested on a charge of Murder.

Maybe that's why they are using the word?

It will come out in court - nasty piece of work anyway

 

[MacB]

OK, I'm relatively new here, but is this the way these threads usually go?

If so you might want to consider not even starting them as most people on this thread are looking in very poor form and the thread makes for a very poor advert for the quality of posting here.

You can't have frequented much in the way of forums then, this is positively gentile and highbrow compared to many.