cyclist punched by car passenger but was he asking for it?
Comments
-
Yeh, leave the law enforcement to the cops. Take a video if you must and send it in if you want to take these incidents any further. If you want a longer, happier life just keep clear of idiot drivers, cyclists, pedestrians, dogs, or whatever.Commencal Meta 5.5.1
Scott CR10 -
If you listen carefully , I am sure the cyclist ,"Says you run over my foot" ****8*8"!!!
The cyclist should have had better judgement ,even if he was angry ,just count to ten,,But there is no excuse for the guy to punch the cyclist ,thats assault.0 -
An edited video of this is on the BT home page. It makes the cyclist look a bit more rational.
With a bit of luck it end in a court.0 -
All 3 at fault, Driver for letting someone else fight there battles, Cyclist for chasing down the car then being a girl and then the twat passenger who it had nothing to do with and that's why the guy should take if further.0
-
neilg7777 wrote:All 3 at fault, Driver for letting someone else fight there battles, Cyclist for chasing down the car then being a girl and then the fool passenger who it had nothing to do with and that's why the guy should take if further.
Wtf the cars right hand drive.... This video is now an internet sensatition, that does nothing for the reputation of cyclists. All this chap, and so it would appear Road c.c's Facebook page do is drive a wedge between the two groups of road users.0 -
cyclist is all talk, as soon as a punch gets thrown he bottles it. You would think as hes dressed as batman he could handle himself.0
-
Personally, I'd like to see this footage incorporated into a Sufferfest video.I'm sorry you don't believe in miracles0
-
MrBrightside wrote:neilg7777 wrote:All 3 at fault, Driver for letting someone else fight there battles, Cyclist for chasing down the car then being a girl and then the fool passenger who it had nothing to do with and that's why the guy should take if further.
Wtf the cars right hand drive.... This video is now an internet sensatition, that does nothing for the reputation of cyclists. All this chap, and so it would appear Road c.c's Facebook page do is drive a wedge between the two groups of road users.
Passenger gets out of the back of the car and gets back in the back of the car and when it drives past guess what he is not driving hence title Passenger0 -
Well I'll be in the minority and say it's going nowhere simply because the cyclist causes it all, even the defensive strike. Something has gone on before the footage and it would seem to me that the Audi is pissed off at being stuck behind a bunch of cyclists (did they deliberately block his path before the recording started?) so encroaches to the front of the queue at the lights. The claim was he almost ran over his foot, but hadn't. The cyclist then with his penis envy or reclaim the streets attitude then races after him (clearly his foot wasn't hurting him) to hurl a shed load of abuse which a person present at the scene would believe was to provoke unlawful violence from that person or another. If that cyclist comes forward he can expect a prosecution also for Sect 4 of the POA.
Sec 4 Public Order Act Fear or provocation of violence.
(1)A person is guilty of an offence if he—
(a)uses towards another person threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour, or
(b)distributes or displays to another person any writing, sign or other visible representation which is threatening, abusive or insulting,
with intent to cause that person to believe that immediate unlawful violence will be used against him or another by any person, or to provoke the immediate use of unlawful violence by that person or another, or whereby that person is likely to believe that such violence will be used or it is likely that such violence will be provoked.
(2)An offence under this section may be committed in a public or a private place, except that no offence is committed where the words or behaviour are used, or the writing, sign or other visible representation is distributed or displayed, by a person inside a dwelling and the other person is also inside that or another dwelling.
(3)A constable may arrest without warrant anyone he reasonably suspects is committing an offence under this section.
(4)A person guilty of an offence under this section is liable on summary conviction to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 6 months or a fine not exceeding level 5 on the standard scale or both.
Yes the Audi driver shouldn't have encroached into the cycle box at the head of the lights and maybe the passenger didn't need to twat the cyclist. But, if he believed the car was going to get damaged by this spittle and abuse spewing idiot throwing a tantrum next to the car, he had the right to jump out to defend property. It's one punch and maybe a push which is reasonable force in the circumstances to protect property. A pre-emptive strike is permitted in law and the belief is subjective, so it matters not what anyone else believed was going to happen, just what the punch thrower thought was going to happen. If he thinks the cyclist is about to kick the door panel or knock the wing mirror off, he can use a pre-emptive strike to prevent it.I ride a bike. Doesn't make me green or a tree hugger. I drive a car too.0 -
lesfirth wrote:An edited video of this is on the BT home page. It makes the cyclist look a bit more rational.
With a bit of luck it end in a court.
It's edited so therefore it is inadmissible as evidence. Only the original full footage would be admissible but as it has now been hacked in various forms, none of it is. Who's to say the original didn't have the group of cyclists doing some deed before the shown events that has now been edited out to make them look like the victims?I ride a bike. Doesn't make me green or a tree hugger. I drive a car too.0 -
ohhh conflicted - Im a cyclist AND an audi owner
But I think the cyclist provoked the whole situation. some points to note:
- the cyclist seemed ok until the audi moved into the box, making me think there was no prior incident
- IF the car ran over his foot its because the cyclist put it there. The audi was already in the box when the cyclist moved back and placed his foot in the path of the wheel
- Given the level of ranting he was doing I can imagine the window was getting a thump too at the second meeting
He 90% deserved it imo. He provoked the whole situation from the start, and chased after the car to continue. The Audi made a slight infraction moving into the box but in fairness he didnt put any of the cyclists in harms way and simply wanted to clearr the pack when the lights changed. not unreasonable. Ranting like an idiot in public too. No sympathy whatsoever.0 -
Whatever the actions of the cyclist, the guy who hit him seemed to be an adult, and as I tell my children when they go off on a tantrum, you control how you behave, same here, the adult was not forced to hit for self defense or to protect anyone else, he made the choice to hit another person in the face and should face the consequences of his decision.
The driver deliberately drove into the advanced stop area and then accelerated off at high speed (maybe over the limit) to come to a stop (surprise) at the next set of lights, more irresponsible behaviour.
In London cyclists often fill up the advanced stop area, as often so many cyclists and anyway the traffic is usually so heavy cars will normally have to stop shortly anyway, so the driver wasn't held up, as happened here.
Who knows, maybe the cyclist had someone he knows injured/killed by an irresponsible driver before and hence his reaction to the drivers actions (from the limited footage the incident only kicked off once the driver entered the advanced stop area).0 -
funny as I get older the more I think some people do deserve a slap. everywhere you look someone is being an arsehole.0
-
kieranb wrote:Whatever the actions of the cyclist, the guy who hit him seemed to be an adult, and as I tell my children when they go off on a tantrum, you control how you behave, same here, the adult was not forced to hit for self defense or to protect anyone else, he made the choice to hit another person in the face and should face the consequences of his decision.
The driver deliberately drove into the advanced stop area and then accelerated off at high speed (maybe over the limit) to come to a stop (surprise) at the next set of lights, more irresponsible behaviour.
In London cyclists often fill up the advanced stop area, as often so many cyclists and anyway the traffic is usually so heavy cars will normally have to stop shortly anyway, so the driver wasn't held up, as happened here.
Who knows, maybe the cyclist had someone he knows injured/killed by an irresponsible driver before and hence his reaction to the drivers actions (from the limited footage the incident only kicked off once the driver entered the advanced stop area).
The law thankfully says different.
Reasonable Force
A person may use such force as is reasonable in the circumstances for the purposes of:
self-defence; or
defence of another; or
defence of property; or
prevention of crime; or
lawful arrest.
In assessing the reasonableness of the force used, prosecutors should ask two questions:
was the use of force necessary in the circumstances, i.e. Was there a need for any force at all? and
was the force used reasonable in the circumstances?
The courts have indicated that both questions are to answered on the basis of the facts as the accused honestly believed them to be (R v Williams (G) 78 Cr App R 276), (R. v Oatbridge, 94 Cr App R 367).
To that extent it is a subjective test. There is, however, an objective element to the test. The jury must then go on to ask themselves whether, on the basis of the facts as the accused believed them to be, a reasonable person would regard the force used as reasonable or excessive.
It is important to bear in mind when assessing whether the force used was reasonable the words of Lord Morris in (Palmer v R 1971 AC 814);
"If there has been an attack so that self defence is reasonably necessary, it will be recognised that a person defending himself cannot weigh to a nicety the exact measure of his defensive action. If the jury thought that that in a moment of unexpected anguish a person attacked had only done what he honestly and instinctively thought necessary, that would be the most potent evidence that only reasonable defensive action had been taken ..."
The fact that an act was considered necessary does not mean that the resulting action was reasonable: (R v Clegg 1995 1 AC 482 HL). Where it is alleged that a person acted to defend himself/herself from violence, the extent to which the action taken was necessary will, of course, be integral to the reasonableness of the force used.
The cyclist got what he was looking for.I ride a bike. Doesn't make me green or a tree hugger. I drive a car too.0 -
The thing about riding in big cities is you never know who is in the car. It could be some gangster psycho who'd have no problem knifing you, or some uninsured idiot who wont stop if he runs you down.
Its clear that the reason the Audi driver moved forward is because he didn't want to be held up by the bikes in the ASL when the lights went green. Aggression towards cyclists has always been the unintended consequence of ASLs.
I really think allowing motorbikes in them would make it much less likely for drivers to encroach. While not that different to cycles, motorcycles have the appearance of being more aggressive. Few aggressive drivers will level up against a motorbike to race off the lights due to the humiliation of having their a**e handed to them. A few motorbikes and scooters in the ASL will have the affect of buffering the cycles when the lights changing giving them time to spread out a move back over.0 -
philthy3 wrote:kieranb wrote:Whatever the actions of the cyclist, the guy who hit him seemed to be an adult, and as I tell my children when they go off on a tantrum, you control how you behave, same here, the adult was not forced to hit for self defense or to protect anyone else, he made the choice to hit another person in the face and should face the consequences of his decision.
The law thankfully says different.
No doubt the driver if prosecuted would use a self defence angle if he felt that his property was about to be damaged and there is reasonable grounds to believe that mr angry cyclist would do some damage, however, you wouldn't get away with lamping someone in that situation, particularly if you take account the likely mode of trial. Acceptable force would be a shove to the ground or a push tops. Looking at the way the guy stood, I reckon he has almost certainly been arrested before. What we have is someone who came out of his car fists flying.
Cyclist lied about his foot being run over though. Assuming the guy in the audi didn't live in a house with wheels (and I reckon he might) I would definitely bring a claim privately for the injuries irrelevant of the criminal outcome.0 -
paul_mck wrote:ohhh conflicted - Im a cyclist AND an audi owner
But I think the cyclist provoked the whole situation. some points to note:
- the cyclist seemed ok until the audi moved into the box, making me think there was no prior incident
- IF the car ran over his foot its because the cyclist put it there. The audi was already in the box when the cyclist moved back and placed his foot in the path of the wheel
- Given the level of ranting he was doing I can imagine the window was getting a thump too at the second meeting
He 90% deserved it imo. He provoked the whole situation from the start, and chased after the car to continue. The Audi made a slight infraction moving into the box but in fairness he didnt put any of the cyclists in harms way and simply wanted to clearr the pack when the lights changed. not unreasonable. Ranting like an idiot in public too. No sympathy whatsoever.
I ride at least 5 times a week , I live in London . Audi drivers are the biggest ar$eho$es out there.
That box is for cycles not for some Di5k to go in so he/she can pull away fast. " I have a fast car and no genitalia, look how cool how I am"
If you are going to get into one with a driver kick your cycling shoes off quick so you can plant your feet and then give them not the beating they deserve but the beating they needed.0 -
rayjay wrote:I ride at least 5 times a week , I live in London . Audi drivers are the biggest ar$eho$es out there.
That box is for cycles not for some Di5k to go in so he/she can pull away fast. " I have a fast car and no genitalia, look how cool how I am"
If you are going to get into one with a driver kick your cycling shoes off quick so you can plant your feet and then give them not the beating they deserve but the beating they needed.
Do your parents know you're using the computer?
0 -
philthy3 wrote:Well I'll be in the minority and say it's going nowhere simply because the cyclist causes it all, even the defensive strike. Something has gone on before the footage and it would seem to me that the Audi is pissed off at being stuck behind a bunch of cyclists (did they deliberately block his path before the recording started?) so encroaches to the front of the queue at the lights. The claim was he almost ran over his foot, but hadn't. The cyclist then with his penis envy or reclaim the streets attitude then races after him (clearly his foot wasn't hurting him) to hurl a shed load of abuse which a person present at the scene would believe was to provoke unlawful violence from that person or another. If that cyclist comes forward he can expect a prosecution also for Sect 4 of the POA.
Sec 4 Public Order Act Fear or provocation of violence.
(1)A person is guilty of an offence if he—
(a)uses towards another person threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour, or
(b)distributes or displays to another person any writing, sign or other visible representation which is threatening, abusive or insulting,
with intent to cause that person to believe that immediate unlawful violence will be used against him or another by any person, or to provoke the immediate use of unlawful violence by that person or another, or whereby that person is likely to believe that such violence will be used or it is likely that such violence will be provoked.
(2)An offence under this section may be committed in a public or a private place, except that no offence is committed where the words or behaviour are used, or the writing, sign or other visible representation is distributed or displayed, by a person inside a dwelling and the other person is also inside that or another dwelling.
(3)A constable may arrest without warrant anyone he reasonably suspects is committing an offence under this section.
(4)A person guilty of an offence under this section is liable on summary conviction to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 6 months or a fine not exceeding level 5 on the standard scale or both.
Yes the Audi driver shouldn't have encroached into the cycle box at the head of the lights and maybe the passenger didn't need to fool the cyclist. But, if he believed the car was going to get damaged by this spittle and abuse spewing idiot throwing a tantrum next to the car, he had the right to jump out to defend property. It's one punch and maybe a push which is reasonable force in the circumstances to protect property. A pre-emptive strike is permitted in law and the belief is subjective, so it matters not what anyone else believed was going to happen, just what the punch thrower thought was going to happen. If he thinks the cyclist is about to kick the door panel or knock the wing mirror off, he can use a pre-emptive strike to prevent it.
the bit in red is assault, doesn't have to be any contact, person just has to believe that they are in immediate danger of contact
however as the guy is in a car he shouldn't really think that he is likely to be hit as he has a big metal box around him0 -
its emerging that mr punchy was the passenger, not the driver. severely weakens the self defence argument.
@hibster Assault can be lawful in the protection of property - i.e. the car.0 -
I dont think anyone could argue its self defence.
but if it was your missus driving and someone started ranting like that youd want to whallop them too.0 -
Chunky101 wrote:rayjay wrote:I ride at least 5 times a week , I live in London . Audi drivers are the biggest ar$eho$es out there.
That box is for cycles not for some Di5k to go in so he/she can pull away fast. " I have a fast car and no genitalia, look how cool how I am"
If you are going to get into one with a driver kick your cycling shoes off quick so you can plant your feet and then give them not the beating they deserve but the beating they needed.
Do your parents know you're using the computer?
Do you ride in London? I do.
I can tell you from experience, I ride most days going from north London out towards St Albans or sometimes out towards Essex. Audi drivers consistently drive to fast, to close and have little consideration for anyone else.
It may sound like some kind of generalisation , but I can only judge from experience.
It would be of interest to see what other London cyclist's think about Audi drivers.
There is no excuse for that passenger to hit that cyclist.0 -
paul_mck wrote:I dont think anyone could argue its self defence.
but if it was your missus driving and someone started ranting like that youd want to whallop them too.
My missus teaches Tai Tsung [ kung fu], named martial artist of the year in Tottenham for 2 years on the trot. She can look after herself. I'm very proud and do a lot of washing up
0 -
diy wrote:its emerging that mr punchy was the passenger, not the driver. severely weakens the self defence argument.
@hibster Assault can be lawful in the protection of property - i.e. the car.
The defence argument can be used in protecting yourself or another or property. The property being prevented being damaged doesn't have to belong to you. Mode of trial would ordinarily be magistrates but I doubt the CPS would even run with it once they saw the cyclists actions.I ride a bike. Doesn't make me green or a tree hugger. I drive a car too.0 -
Its stupid to generalise that audi drivers are worse than any other. Its like saying anyone who rides a specialized is fat. You may have seen plenty of fat people riding specialized but one does not equate to the other.
I suspect there are rather a lot of Audi's in London.philthy3 wrote:The defence argument can be used in protecting yourself or another or property. The property being prevented being damaged doesn't have to belong to you. Mode of trial would ordinarily be magistrates but I doubt the CPS would even run with it once they saw the cyclists actions.
Neither of us know the facts from this distance to call it either way. You say no case.. I say I there is. All depends what he says in interview or twitter Might end up as a hate crime 
0 -
diy wrote:Its stupid to generalise that audi drivers are worse than any other. Its like saying anyone who rides a specialized is fat. You may have seen plenty of fat people riding specialized but one does not equate to the other.
I suspect there are rather a lot of Audi's in London.philthy3 wrote:The defence argument can be used in protecting yourself or another or property. The property being prevented being damaged doesn't have to belong to you. Mode of trial would ordinarily be magistrates but I doubt the CPS would even run with it once they saw the cyclists actions.
Neither of us know the facts from this distance to call it either way. You say no case.. I say I there is. All depends what he says in interview or twitter Might end up as a hate crime
I can only go on what I see. I'm sure there are some great Audi drivers around but from my experience that is how a lot of them drive and it is noticeable. Fast car/ boy racer syndrome.
Come on be honest, I have seen quite a few fat blokes on Specialized. One of my friends is exactly that.0 -
rayjay wrote:
It would be of interest to see what other London cyclist's think about Audi drivers.
I cycle every single day across central London to work. Drivers of Audi's are no different to drivers of other car brands in my experience. Some people whinge the same about black cabs, motorbikes etc......it gets boring fast.
I see aggravation like this on a regular basis in London, and occasionally it boils over and someone gets twatted. I have absolutely no sympathy for either the cyclist or what comes of the car passenger/driver. Both acted like douches.0 -
The cyclist could have dealt with the situation with a bit more diplomacy but then the same applies to the passenger who lamped him.
I was once offered out by an angry driver who claimed I cut him up. When asked how he'd feel having the shite beaten out of him by a guy dressed in lycra he soon backed down. Sadly, occurrences such as these are becoming more & more common place as cycling becomes ever popular and people use bikes more to get to work etc. Perhaps we'll always be seen a second class citizens by drivers with no tolerance. The funnies thing is though that the driver speeding away didn't gain anything as he was stopped at the next red light anyway!0 -
Strith wrote:rayjay wrote:
It would be of interest to see what other London cyclist's think about Audi drivers.
I cycle every single day across central London to work. Drivers of Audi's are no different to drivers of other car brands in my experience. Some people whinge the same about black cabs, motorbikes etc......it gets boring fast.
I see aggravation like this on a regular basis in London, and occasionally it boils over and someone gets twatted. I have absolutely no sympathy for either the cyclist or what comes of the car passenger/driver. Both acted like douches.
I am not whinging , just making a comment from what I have noticed.
Totally agree with your second comment. People always seem in a rush and get easily wound up.0 -
Awesome. Next time I see anybody doing any damage to any property, I'll twat them (with reasonable force, obviously).philthy3 wrote:diy wrote:its emerging that mr punchy was the passenger, not the driver. severely weakens the self defence argument.
@hibster Assault can be lawful in the protection of property - i.e. the car.
The defence argument can be used in protecting yourself or another or property. The property being prevented being damaged doesn't have to belong to you. Mode of trial would ordinarily be magistrates but I doubt the CPS would even run with it once they saw the cyclists actions.0
