Manchester - Female cyclist pushed into canal by man

[ebikeerwidnes]

Apparently he is denying it was his fault

I know - I was shocked too!!!

anyway - he says she just fell in due to being clipped in

which is strange when she stopped and seemed to balance - presumably by magic - before she went into the canal


anyway - here is the evidence

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/36215004/dog-walker-pushes-cyclist-canal/

OK - when I say evidence - I mean the Scum (as it is generally called round here) so only slightly more well regarded for well researched and thought out journalism that Facebook

but anyway

 

[Alex321]

Apparently he is denying it was his fault

I know - I was shocked too!!!

anyway - he says she just fell in due to being clipped in

which is strange when she stopped and seemed to balance - presumably by magic - before she went into the canal

No, I think you misread it. He said she clipped him with her handlebars, not that she was clipped in.

 

[ebikeerwidnes]

The bloke does say that when he looked back she was standing up

which makes sense as canals are not normally all that deep

but a lot of what else he is quoted as saying does not seem right

Still nothing like proper evidence available - I presume his wife/girlfriend will back him up rather than her

so all in all it's a bit he says / she says

but her story makes more sense

 

[ebikeerwidnes]

Which begs the question why he didn't go back and help if she had fallen in accidently?

Sure theres no crime for not doing so, but it doesn't look good for him.

Morally I think he is pretty much guilty

OK she could have done better but that is pretty irrelevant compared to the assault and the rest

but legally I think he is clear because there is no evidence - and his wife/girlfriend would back him up and she has nothing except her word
and the bits of his version that sounds dodgy
but overall no-one is going to arrest him over that

 

[Drago]

He needs questioning by plod to get his story on record, and she does too.

Show some respect.

It's not "plod". They're the dibble.

 

[Animo]

It's not the case that there is no evidence. The account of the alleged victim is evidence (corroborated to some extent by the video which shows at very least that she ends up in the canal).

A sizeable proportion of the rape/sex cases that are prosecuted in this country are founded on the evidence of the complainant alone.

 

[ebikeerwidnes]

Show some respect.

It's not "plod". They're the dibble.

not "The Scuffers" then????

 

[Drago]

A sizeable proportion of the rape/sex cases that are prosecuted in this country are founded on the evidence of the complainant alone.

But this isn't a serious indictable offence. This is a common assault, and should it come to one persons word against another it is neither in the public interest or likely to result in a conviction.

In the the typep of cases you cite there is quite often evidence of the act itself having occurred, but rather a question of consent or circumstances.

In the case of historic sex claims the evidence of the aggrieved is corroborated in other ways, confirmation of their attendance at that school at the same time as the accused, etc etc.

In this case at face value (there may be evidence not in the public domain) we have one persons word against another, and that in and if itself is not sufficient to meet the threshold test for charging. The video shows the lady going in the water, but does not show the mechanism that brought this about.

It'll come down to the witness, the third person present, whether theyre willing to give any evidence, and what they may say if they do. They were in the company of the suspect so I expect they either won't want to get involved or will say the rider fell in. My gut call from decades of first hand experience is they won't want to get involved.

 

[Animo]

But this isn't a serious indictable offence. This is a common assault, and should it come to one persons word against another it is neither in the public interest or likely to result in a conviction.

In the the typep of cases you cite there is quite often evidence of the act itself having occurred, but rather a question of consent or circumstances.

In the case of historic sex claims the evidence of the aggrieved is corroborated in other ways, confirmation of their attendance at that school at the same time as the accused, etc etc.

In this case at face value (there may be evidence not in the public domain) we have one persons word against another, and that in and if itself is not sufficient to meet the threshold test for charging. The video shows the lady going in the water, but does not show the mechanism that brought this about.

It'll come down to the witness, the third person present, whether theyre willing to give any evidence, and what they may say if they do. They were in the company of the suspect so I expect they either won't want to get involved or will say the rider fell in. My gut call from decades of first hand experience is they won't want to get involved.

I'm not suggesting the bloke will be charged, just that - assuming the woman makes a complaint and provides a statement - it is incorrect to say there is no evidence.

I agree that a decision maker could well conclude there wouldn't be a realistic prospect of a conviction, although I don't think it's certain they would. I don't think it will come down to what the third party says as they are not independent.

I disagree that it's not in the public interest to prosecute someone who may have pushed a cyclist into a canal.

I'm unsure why evidence of the parties in a historic sex case being at school together at the same time would be more persuasive corroboration than the video evidence of these parties encountering each other at the canal and the woman going into the water.

 

[classic33]

I heard recently of someone’s 80 year old father being told he couldn’t cycle along side the Pocklington canal. He replied with a question about the persons ability to swim.

You can't swim on the towpath!

 

[boydj]

No, I think you misread it. He said she clipped him with her handlebars, not that she was clipped in.

She did say she was clipped in, which made falling in (or being pushed in) a bit scarier as she was attached to the bike. Given she stopped well before she got to him, there was no need for the aggression from him.

 

[IanSmithCSE]

Good morning,

I wonder how we would have reacted if he had posted the video first under the headline Silly cyclist fell into the river pushing past me! and she then said No I didn't, he pushed me in.

Given what appears to be the positions of both sides would you be happy if he were convicted?

• He says she clipped me with her handlebars
• She says he pushed me.
• I have watched the video a number of times and can't see that it proves/disproves either of these statements
• The road cc quote has her as saying “I was strapped to the pedals of the bike......",
  • That she was riding with some form of foot retention makes loss of balance and can't put a foot down to stop falling over a real concern.

Although most, probably everyone, here would say I wouldn't have acted like he did, would anyone be happy if they were convicted on the basis of little evidence but he's a working class lout, so he must be guilty?

Bye

Ian

 

[ebikeerwidnes]

I disagree that it's not in the public interest to prosecute someone who may have pushed a cyclist into a canal.

It is not in the public interest if there is no real supporting evidence

assuming the 3rd party doesn;t want to be involved - as opposed to actively supporter her partner's statement

then all the evidence is that there was a heated discussion
then she started off again and fell into the water

what cause it is not clear
she says he pushed her
he says her handlebar hit him and she fell in

she might have just lost control on a bumpy path edge

any could be true

personally I think she is telling the truth - or something close to it


but I cant prove it beyond reasonable doubt


and you can;t charge someone without evidence that their story is true

basically - if I was passing someone on a canal and they fell in
I would be very annoyed if they then got me arrested just on their says so that I pushed them - no matter what was said

 

[LCpl Boiled Egg]

Sorry



View attachment 782959

Apologies for the thread diversion but I've just realised something. Looking at Officer Dibble's proportions, he's clearly two smaller people, one on the other one's shoulders.

Look at his legs for goodness sakes. It's no wonder he could never catch Top Cat; it would be like a cat being chased by a pantomime horse.

 

[united4ever]

Would a rear camera have likely picked the incident up?