is there any need for these cyclist down threads?

[rootes]

do you work for the ES?

No. It's a crap paper. My question was whether an experienced cyclist doing nothing wrong who is killed by a lorry driver rummaging for papers on the floor of his cab was well served by an inquest that decided a £300 fine and no ban was appropriate.

now you change tack.... you made out that such ES articles were a full presentation of the facts of a case... they are not..

we were not even discussing the outcome of a case and whether it was justifed..

 

[sternwood]

erm like the FULL coroners report, police incident report etc you know formal stuff

Like this:

http://www.britishcycling.org.uk/web/site/BC/bcf/News2007/20070629_rhyl_inquest.asp

Which you would have found had you followed the suggestion I've made three times now.

What's your opinion of the piunishment doled out to Emma's killer and the Rhyl cyclists?

 

[John the Monkey]

erm like the FULL coroners report, police incident report etc you know formal stuff not quoted bits of text in a newspaper edited for sales and news impact

which differs from the précis given by sternwood how? Enquiring minds, and all that.

 

[sternwood]

you made out that such ES articles were a full presentation of the facts of a case.

No. please don't put words in my mouth. I explained that they carry more relevance to a report none of us have seen that you described as "cool".

 

[rootes]

and why you placed your faith in a "formal report" none of us have seen yet.

A partial report and evidence from the court is better than nothing.

quotes in a newspaper are worse than nothing as they are the skewed presentation of information done for journalistic reasons..


as for seeing a report - you have answered the point yourself if you don't know all of the facts you should not comment on an incident. end of

 

[LLB]

Cool now that is more like it - proper facts!

Unsunstantaited claims with no evidence, citing an incident that never happened you mean?

It was in the thread which you started under the member name of waveydaveygravy on C+ in August of 2005 and called 'Dead cyclists have themselves to blame- Telegraph'

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/gloucestershire/4200154.stm

And the inquest report followed a few months later. Do you really want me to get the relevant reports from my local paper to shut you up Spindrift as this was discussed at length at the time as many will remember on here ?

Posting under multiple persona's is a good sign of trolling

 

[sternwood]

quotes in a newspaper are worse than nothing as they are the skewed presentation of information done for journalistic reasons..


Your evidence that the report is flawed please.

you have answered the point yourself if you don't know all of the facts you should not comment on an incident. end of

I've posted the evidence with regard to Rhyl, together with extensive quotes.

You are reading my posts?

 

[sternwood]

It was in the thread which you started under the member name of waveydaveygravy on C+ in August of 2005 and called 'Dead cyclists have themselves to blame- Telegraph'

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/gloucestershire/4200154.stm

And the inquest report followed a few months later. Do you really want me to get the relevant reports from my local paper to shut you up Spindrift as this was discussed at length at the time as many will remember on here ?

Posting under multiple persona's is a good sign of trolling

The original thread cannot be read, the second link makes no mention of heroin or liability.

Lying about dead cyclists is jolly strange, if your post was directed toward me.

 

[sternwood]

rootes, I agree suppositions ought not be made till the facts are known.

I've posted two clear links to full inquests where the punishment is laughably mild for a driver who kills through reckless stupidity.

The evidence you asked for has been posted.

 

[John the Monkey]

no one can actually learn from the threads...

I disagree.

You can learn that the inside of large vehicles is a bad place to be.

You can learn that drivers using their vehicles as mobile offices/homes rather than fast moving bits of heavy machinery will generally get away with doing so.

You can learn that no one else really thinks this is bad.

It's kind of depressing, but it does reinforce the need to ride as though the people around you are complete idiots with no fear of the consequences of their actions.

 

[rootes]

you made out that such ES articles were a full presentation of the facts of a case.

No. please don't put words in my mouth. I explained that they carry more relevance to a report none of us have seen that you described as "cool".

can you read? I said cool as it appeared someone had in the past actually posted up a full inquest report on a thread - i.e. cool as is in cool for doing that... the seach just seems to throw up newspaper articles quoting from inquest, coroner, police reports etc ut not the actual reports themselves...


formal reports are mor elike this:

for example rule 43 report following a inquest

http://www.innerlondonnorth.co.uk/iln/uploads/rule43s/R43_Foa.pdf

a reply here:
http://www.innerlondonnorth.co.uk/iln/uploads/rule43s/R43_FoaR.pdf


you can (if you want) get full inquest report text from the relevant coroner's office

or where a trial has taken place from formal court records..


thing is formal reports are not as snappy and news worth as a paper article..

 

[sternwood]

can you read? I said cool as it appeared someone had in the past actually posted up a full inquest report on a thread

Can you read? It wasn't a full inquest report at all, it was first a telegraph article that's archived and can't be read, then a claim the dead cyclist was on heroin. There's nothing about that in the report, from the BBC either.

You seem to insist on the entire transcript of the inquest if the cyclists's innocent and rely on hearsay and false claims if the cyclist may have been at fault.

Duplicitous, rather.

 

[rootes]

can you read? I said cool as it appeared someone had in the past actually posted up a full inquest report on a thread

Can you read? It wasn't a full inquest report at all, it was first a telegraph article that's archived and can't be read, then a claim the dead cyclist was on heroin. There's nothing about that in the report, from the BBC either.

You seem to insist on the entire transcript of the inquest if the cyclists's innocent and rely on hearsay and false claims if the cyclist may have been at fault.

Duplicitous, rather.

I think you may be mixing quotes up as it was not i that posted up the heroin info

all have been saying is that either way people should only comment if they have all the facts... I have not at any point made any judgment on a particualr case - merely on your reliance on the press for your information..

anyway safe cycling