Cyclist mown down by raging man in a camper van

[albion]

GBH then, just with a far higher likelihood of death.


I wonder if shooting someone is GBH too.

 

[CopperCyclist]

I see your point. No point wasting time and effort if there is not a large chance of a conviction. I would have seen driving at the cyclist in an attempt to knock him off would be enough intent for me if not GBH the lesser one of which its name has left me. Naturally if you knock someone off their bike their is a huge chance of them getting hurt of which would have been considered at the time I would have thought and he chose to continue. Just my viewpoint.

A defence solicitor could have easily used this to negate the 'intent': "My client was driving a camper van at a cyclist. If he had truly intended to inflict harm, there is no doubt that he would have been able to do so. The very fact that he did not, and merely knocked the gentleman off his bike, stopping his vehicle before any further harm was caused, proves that there was no true intent to harm him. It was a moment of madness, and my client is an upstanding and respected.... and so on"

I can see why they didn't run it, because they don't like the prospect of losing - it affects their figures. That said, I would have thought it was worth a punt (as long as the other charge could be run concurrently) and see who the jury went with on the day.

 

[SomethingLikeThat]

Not that I am being judgemental.....

but one look at that photo says "nutter"

Perhaps deliberately chosen? Maybe they combed through his Facebook or something.

 

[Cyclopathic]

If I was the judge I think the custodial part would have relied on the defendants attitude. If he seemed genuinely remorseful and if he really looked like he knew what he did was completely out of order then I would have suspended the sentence. If he was a cocky sod I'd lock him up and throw some books at him. The book...Whatever was handy.
After reading some of the more measured posts here I changed my initial view that he should have gone to prison and that the punishment was about right. The reactionary in me still wants his car crushed though or sold and the money donated to an apropriate charity.

 

[Hip Priest]

I think they should've set fire to the campervan with him in it, but in the absence of such draconian punishments I think the judge done good.

 

[Amanda P]

A sudden outbreak of judiciary sanity!

 

[Saluki]

Some of the comments under the article are quite shocking. One bloke said that the cyclist started it by banging on the van. Another said that he should have pulled over further to make himself safe.
I reckon that some of the posters are just numpties, if they doubled their brainpower they would still only have one braincell between them.

Glad the cyclist is OK though and the judge seemed fairly sensible.

 

[glasgowcyclist]

You would have to show the intent was to kill for it to be attempted murder.

In Scots law we have another option in the prosecution of homicide and attemtped homicide whereby the jury may convict if it can be shown that the accused acted with such a degree of wilful recklessness as to show utter disregard for the consequences.

Doesn't a similar thing exist in English law?


GC

 

[Binka]

He must have been really wound up to risk denting a lovely campervan!