Finally! A rammer of Critical Mass to be prosecuted at long last!

[Doug[_3_]]

"After much to and fro, I have now heard that the police are to
prosecute the taxi driver who knocked me off my bicycle (I was
stationary standing astride the crossbar) during the mass on 25 June.
They are to prosecute him for “Driving without due care and attention”
and “Failing to stop after an accident without exchanging details”. I
have not been asked to attend court and neither has my witness to the
incident. If the man pleads not guilty, he will be sent to court and
we will then be asked to attend. Meantime, we have been asked to
provide dates on which we might not be available. It is good to see
some action."

It is indeed and about time. Some of these drivers seem to think they
can ram CM cyclists out of their way with impunity.

-- .
Critical Mass London.
http://www.criticalmasslondon.org.uk
"Get out of my way you f*ing cyclist"

[Mrcheerful[_2_]]

Doug wrote:
> "After much to and fro, I have now heard that the police are to
> prosecute the taxi driver who knocked me off my bicycle (I was
> stationary standing astride the crossbar) during the mass on 25 June.
> They are to prosecute him for “Driving without due care and attention”
> and “Failing to stop after an accident without exchanging details”. I
> have not been asked to attend court and neither has my witness to the
> incident. If the man pleads not guilty, he will be sent to court and
> we will then be asked to attend. Meantime, we have been asked to
> provide dates on which we might not be available. It is good to see
> some action."
>
> It is indeed and about time. Some of these drivers seem to think they
> can ram CM cyclists out of their way with impunity.
>
> -- .
> Critical Mass London.
> http://www.criticalmasslondon.org.uk
> "Get out of my way you f*ing cyclist"

you know the answer: do not wilfully obstruct the carriageway and no one
will 'ram you' or prosecute you.

[Doug[_3_]]

On Dec 8, 6:41*am, "Mrcheerful" > wrote:
> Doug wrote:
> > "After much to and fro, I have now heard that the police are to
> > prosecute the taxi driver who knocked me off my bicycle (I was
> > stationary standing astride the crossbar) during the mass on 25 June.
> > They are to prosecute him for Driving without due care and attention
> > and Failing to stop after an accident without exchanging details . I
> > have not been asked to attend court and neither has my witness to the
> > incident. If the man pleads not guilty, he will be sent to court and
> > we will then be asked to attend. Meantime, we have been asked to
> > provide dates on which we might not be available. It is good to see
> > some action."
>
> > It is indeed and about time. Some of these drivers seem to think they
> > can ram CM cyclists out of their way with impunity.
> >
> you know the answer: do not wilfully obstruct the carriageway and no one
> will 'ram you' or prosecute you.
>
Eh? It is the taxi driver rammer who is being prosecuted not the
cyclist. Maybe the cops are beginning to see that deliberately ramming
cyclists is a tad worse than drivers merely being delayed for a few
minutes.

> > -- .
> > Critical Mass London.
> > http://www.criticalmasslondon.org.uk
> > "Get out of my way you f*ing cyclist"

[Mrcheerful[_2_]]

Doug wrote:
> On Dec 8, 6:41 am, "Mrcheerful" > wrote:
>> Doug wrote:
>>> "After much to and fro, I have now heard that the police are to
>>> prosecute the taxi driver who knocked me off my bicycle (I was
>>> stationary standing astride the crossbar) during the mass on 25
>>> June. They are to prosecute him for Driving without due care and
>>> attention and Failing to stop after an accident without exchanging
>>> details . I have not been asked to attend court and neither has my
>>> witness to the incident. If the man pleads not guilty, he will be
>>> sent to court and we will then be asked to attend. Meantime, we
>>> have been asked to provide dates on which we might not be
>>> available. It is good to see some action."
>>
>>> It is indeed and about time. Some of these drivers seem to think
>>> they can ram CM cyclists out of their way with impunity.
>>>
>> you know the answer: do not wilfully obstruct the carriageway and no
>> one will 'ram you' or prosecute you.
>>
> Eh? It is the taxi driver rammer who is being prosecuted not the
> cyclist. Maybe the cops are beginning to see that deliberately ramming
> cyclists is a tad worse than drivers merely being delayed for a few
> minutes.

it is quite possible that cyclists will be prosecuted for wilfull
obstruction of the highway, and I look forward to it.

Any chance of you telling us when Lord Levenson's ruling on CM was
overturned?

[Mrcheerful[_2_]]

Doug wrote:
> "After much to and fro, I have now heard that the police are to
> prosecute the taxi driver who knocked me off my bicycle (I was
> stationary standing astride the crossbar) during the mass on 25 June.
> They are to prosecute him for “Driving without due care and attention”
> and “Failing to stop after an accident without exchanging details”. I
> have not been asked to attend court and neither has my witness to the
> incident. If the man pleads not guilty, he will be sent to court and
> we will then be asked to attend. Meantime, we have been asked to
> provide dates on which we might not be available. It is good to see
> some action."
>

Anecdotal.

[Doug[_3_]]

On Dec 8, 7:02*am, "Mrcheerful" > wrote:
> Doug wrote:
> > On Dec 8, 6:41 am, "Mrcheerful" > wrote:
> >> Doug wrote:
> >>> "After much to and fro, I have now heard that the police are to
> >>> prosecute the taxi driver who knocked me off my bicycle (I was
> >>> stationary standing astride the crossbar) during the mass on 25
> >>> June. They are to prosecute him for Driving without due care and
> >>> attention and Failing to stop after an accident without exchanging
> >>> details . I have not been asked to attend court and neither has my
> >>> witness to the incident. If the man pleads not guilty, he will be
> >>> sent to court and we will then be asked to attend. Meantime, we
> >>> have been asked to provide dates on which we might not be
> >>> available. It is good to see some action."
>
> >>> It is indeed and about time. Some of these drivers seem to think
> >>> they can ram CM cyclists out of their way with impunity.
>
> >> you know the answer: do not wilfully obstruct the carriageway and no
> >> one will 'ram you' or prosecute you.
>
> > Eh? It is the taxi driver rammer who is being prosecuted not the
> > cyclist. Maybe the cops are beginning to see that deliberately ramming
> > cyclists is a tad worse than drivers merely being delayed for a few
> > minutes.
>
> it is quite possible that cyclists will be prosecuted for wilfull
> obstruction of the highway, and I look forward to it.
>
> Any chance of you telling us when Lord Levenson's ruling on CM was
> overturned?
>
See for yourself.

http://www.criticalmasslondon.org.uk/legal.html

[Doug[_3_]]

On Dec 8, 7:05*am, "Mrcheerful" > wrote:
> Doug wrote:
> > "After much to and fro, I have now heard that the police are to
> > prosecute the taxi driver who knocked me off my bicycle (I was
> > stationary standing astride the crossbar) during the mass on 25 June.
> > They are to prosecute him for Driving without due care and attention
> > and Failing to stop after an accident without exchanging details . I
> > have not been asked to attend court and neither has my witness to the
> > incident. If the man pleads not guilty, he will be sent to court and
> > we will then be asked to attend. Meantime, we have been asked to
> > provide dates on which we might not be available. It is good to see
> > some action."
>
> Anecdotal.
>
How can an actual prosecution be anecdotal?

This is what happened in June.

"Last night was good but, while stationary, I was knocked off my bike
by a lunatic cabbie at the Buck House end of The Mall. The guy had
argued with corkers and then deliberately turned and drove into a
bunch of CM-ers, he then turned even more sharply to strike my back
wheel. Fortunately for me, I got away with a small bruise to my leg.
The bike was apparently undamaged and rode fine although the back
wheel was slightly misaligned and I fixed that when I got home.
Fortunately for everyone, he did not hit anyone else. Someone who knew
me pursued the cab towards Victoria but the guy sped off, jumping two
red lights in the process. Does anyone have a picture or a description
of the incident? If so, I should like to hear from them. Also, I
should welcome advice as to how best to complain about the idiot. I
have no real damages to claim but I believe the guy is dangerously
unstable and should be taken to task."

-- .
Critical Mass London.
http://www.criticalmasslondon.org.uk
"Get out of my way you f*ing cyclist"

[Mrcheerful[_2_]]

Doug wrote:
> On Dec 8, 7:05 am, "Mrcheerful" > wrote:
>> Doug wrote:
>>> "After much to and fro, I have now heard that the police are to
>>> prosecute the taxi driver who knocked me off my bicycle (I was
>>> stationary standing astride the crossbar) during the mass on 25
>>> June. They are to prosecute him for Driving without due care and
>>> attention and Failing to stop after an accident without exchanging
>>> details . I have not been asked to attend court and neither has my
>>> witness to the incident. If the man pleads not guilty, he will be
>>> sent to court and we will then be asked to attend. Meantime, we
>>> have been asked to provide dates on which we might not be
>>> available. It is good to see some action."
>>
>> Anecdotal.
>>
> How can an actual prosecution be anecdotal?
>
> This is what happened in June.
>
> "Last night was good but, while stationary, I was knocked off my bike
> by a lunatic cabbie at the Buck House end of The Mall. The guy had
> argued with corkers and then deliberately turned and drove into a
> bunch of CM-ers, he then turned even more sharply to strike my back
> wheel. Fortunately for me, I got away with a small bruise to my leg.
> The bike was apparently undamaged and rode fine although the back
> wheel was slightly misaligned and I fixed that when I got home.
> Fortunately for everyone, he did not hit anyone else. Someone who knew
> me pursued the cab towards Victoria but the guy sped off, jumping two
> red lights in the process. Does anyone have a picture or a description
> of the incident? If so, I should like to hear from them. Also, I
> should welcome advice as to how best to complain about the idiot. I
> have no real damages to claim but I believe the guy is dangerously
> unstable and should be taken to task."
>
> -- .
> Critical Mass London.
> http://www.criticalmasslondon.org.uk
> "Get out of my way you f*ing cyclist"

is there a newspaper report of this 'prosecution'

[ash[_2_]]

On Dec 8, 6:30*am, Doug > wrote:
> "After much to and fro, I have now heard that the police are to
> prosecute the taxi driver who knocked me off my bicycle (I was
> stationary standing astride the crossbar) during the mass on 25 June.
> They are to prosecute him for “Driving without due care and attention”
> and “Failing to stop after an accident without exchanging details”. I
> have not been asked to attend court and neither has my witness to the
> incident. If the man pleads not guilty, he will be sent to court and
> we will then be asked to attend. Meantime, we have been asked to
> provide dates on which we might not be available. It is good to see
> some action."
>
> It is indeed and about time. Some of these drivers seem to think they
> can ram CM cyclists out of their way with impunity.
>
> -- .
> Critical Mass London.
> *http://www.criticalmasslondon.org.uk
> "Get out of my way you f*ing cyclist"

Did you not break the law yourself by deliberately blocking the
highway, and as such are interfering with the taxi drivers legal right
to pass and repass ?

[NM]

On Dec 8, 6:30*am, Doug > wrote:
> "After much to and fro, I have now heard that the police are to
> prosecute the taxi driver who knocked me off my bicycle (I was
> stationary standing astride the crossbar) during the mass on 25 June.
> They are to prosecute him for “Driving without due care and attention”
> and “Failing to stop after an accident without exchanging details”. I
> have not been asked to attend court and neither has my witness to the
> incident. If the man pleads not guilty, he will be sent to court and
> we will then be asked to attend. Meantime, we have been asked to
> provide dates on which we might not be available. It is good to see
> some action."
>
> It is indeed and about time. Some of these drivers seem to think they
> can ram CM cyclists out of their way with impunity.
>

When and where is the hearing? To assist with the course of justice
the beak should be made aware of your anti car agenda.

[bugbear]

Doug wrote:
> "After much to and fro, I have now heard that the police are to
> prosecute the taxi driver who knocked me off my bicycle (I was
> stationary standing astride the crossbar) during the mass on 25 June.
> They are to prosecute him for “Driving without due care and attention”
> and “Failing to stop after an accident without exchanging details”. I
> have not been asked to attend court and neither has my witness to the
> incident. If the man pleads not guilty, he will be sent to court and
> we will then be asked to attend. Meantime, we have been asked to
> provide dates on which we might not be available. It is good to see
> some action."

Do you have a reference for this quote?

Otherwise it's just pixels on a screen.

BugBear

[Marie]

On Dec 8, 6:30*am, Doug > wrote:
> "After much to and fro, I have now heard that the police are to
> prosecute the taxi driver who knocked me off my bicycle (I was
> stationary standing astride the crossbar) during the mass on 25 June.
> They are to prosecute him for “Driving without due care and attention”
> and “Failing to stop after an accident without exchanging details”. I
> have not been asked to attend court and neither has my witness to the
> incident. If the man pleads not guilty, he will be sent to court and
> we will then be asked to attend. Meantime, we have been asked to
> provide dates on which we might not be available. It is good to see
> some action."
>
> It is indeed and about time. Some of these drivers seem to think they
> can ram CM cyclists out of their way with impunity.
>
> -- .
> Critical Mass London.
> *http://www.criticalmasslondon.org.uk
> "Get out of my way you f*ing cyclist"

Source?

[Justin[_3_]]

On 8 dec, 13:13, NM > wrote:
> On Dec 8, 6:30*am, Doug > wrote:
>
> > "After much to and fro, I have now heard that the police are to
> > prosecute the taxi driver who knocked me off my bicycle (I was
> > stationary standing astride the crossbar) during the mass on 25 June.
> > They are to prosecute him for “Driving without due care and attention”
> > and “Failing to stop after an accident without exchanging details”. I
> > have not been asked to attend court and neither has my witness to the
> > incident. If the man pleads not guilty, he will be sent to court and
> > we will then be asked to attend. Meantime, we have been asked to
> > provide dates on which we might not be available. It is good to see
> > some action."
>
> > It is indeed and about time. Some of these drivers seem to think they
> > can ram CM cyclists out of their way with impunity.
>
> When and where is the hearing? To assist with the course of justice
> the beak should be made aware of your anti car agenda.

The taxi driver is being criminally prosected for driving without due
care an attention and failing to stop after an accident and exchange
details.
These are offences the sentencing of which is not dependent upon a
madman's, or anyone else's, interpretation of any agenda the victim
may or not have.

[NM]

On Dec 8, 1:14*pm, Justin > wrote:
> On 8 dec, 13:13, NM > wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Dec 8, 6:30*am, Doug > wrote:
>
> > > "After much to and fro, I have now heard that the police are to
> > > prosecute the taxi driver who knocked me off my bicycle (I was
> > > stationary standing astride the crossbar) during the mass on 25 June.
> > > They are to prosecute him for “Driving without due care and attention”
> > > and “Failing to stop after an accident without exchanging details”. I
> > > have not been asked to attend court and neither has my witness to the
> > > incident. If the man pleads not guilty, he will be sent to court and
> > > we will then be asked to attend. Meantime, we have been asked to
> > > provide dates on which we might not be available. It is good to see
> > > some action."
>
> > > It is indeed and about time. Some of these drivers seem to think they
> > > can ram CM cyclists out of their way with impunity.
>
> > When and where is the hearing? To assist with the course of justice
> > the beak should be made aware of your anti car agenda.
>
> The taxi driver is being criminally prosected for driving without due
> care an attention and failing to stop after an accident and exchange
> details.
> These are offences the sentencing of which is not dependent upon a
> madman's, or anyone else's, interpretation of any agenda the victim
> may or not have.

Then it should not harm the prosecution if the court is made aware, it
can only assist.

[Justin[_3_]]

On 8 dec, 14:55, NM > wrote:
> On Dec 8, 1:14*pm, Justin > wrote:
>
>
>
> > On 8 dec, 13:13, NM > wrote:
>
> > > On Dec 8, 6:30*am, Doug > wrote:
>
> > > > "After much to and fro, I have now heard that the police are to
> > > > prosecute the taxi driver who knocked me off my bicycle (I was
> > > > stationary standing astride the crossbar) during the mass on 25 June.
> > > > They are to prosecute him for “Driving without due care and attention”
> > > > and “Failing to stop after an accident without exchanging details”. I
> > > > have not been asked to attend court and neither has my witness to the
> > > > incident. If the man pleads not guilty, he will be sent to court and
> > > > we will then be asked to attend. Meantime, we have been asked to
> > > > provide dates on which we might not be available. It is good to see
> > > > some action."
>
> > > > It is indeed and about time. Some of these drivers seem to think they
> > > > can ram CM cyclists out of their way with impunity.
>
> > > When and where is the hearing? To assist with the course of justice
> > > the beak should be made aware of your anti car agenda.
>
> > The taxi driver is being criminally prosected for driving without due
> > care an attention and failing to stop after an accident and exchange
> > details.
> > These are offences the sentencing of which is not dependent upon a
> > madman's, or anyone else's, interpretation of any agenda the victim
> > may or not have.
>
> Then it should not harm the prosecution if the court is made aware, it
> can only assist.

How do you expect to get right of audience? As your point is
completely irrelevant to the proceedings you would not even be allowed
to make a submission - you are not in any way party to the case.

[Justin[_3_]]

On 8 dec, 13:13, NM > wrote:
> On Dec 8, 6:30*am, Doug > wrote:
>
> > "After much to and fro, I have now heard that the police are to
> > prosecute the taxi driver who knocked me off my bicycle (I was
> > stationary standing astride the crossbar) during the mass on 25 June.
> > They are to prosecute him for “Driving without due care and attention”
> > and “Failing to stop after an accident without exchanging details”. I
> > have not been asked to attend court and neither has my witness to the
> > incident. If the man pleads not guilty, he will be sent to court and
> > we will then be asked to attend. Meantime, we have been asked to
> > provide dates on which we might not be available. It is good to see
> > some action."
>
> > It is indeed and about time. Some of these drivers seem to think they
> > can ram CM cyclists out of their way with impunity.
>
> When and where is the hearing? To assist with the course of justice
> the beak should be made aware of your anti car agenda.

Hallo Mr Judge or Magistrate,
my name is NM and I have nothing to do with this case. I would just
like to tell you that that nasty Mr Victim of dangerous driving is a
meber of Critical Mass and I think he has an anti-car agenda. Could
you make sure that the accused does not get convicted because
sometimes those nasty CM people delay motorists? Pretty please?
Surely having an anti car agenda is reason enough to be rammed by a
car, don't you think. If he had an anti gun agenda, that would a
reason to be lenient with anyone who shoots him, don't you think?
Thanks for listening Mister.

[Doug[_3_]]

On Dec 8, 12:20*pm, bugbear > wrote:
> Doug wrote:
> > "After much to and fro, I have now heard that the police are to
> > prosecute the taxi driver who knocked me off my bicycle (I was
> > stationary standing astride the crossbar) during the mass on 25 June.
> > They are to prosecute him for Driving without due care and attention
> > and Failing to stop after an accident without exchanging details . I
> > have not been asked to attend court and neither has my witness to the
> > incident. If the man pleads not guilty, he will be sent to court and
> > we will then be asked to attend. Meantime, we have been asked to
> > provide dates on which we might not be available. It is good to see
> > some action."
>
> Do you have a reference for this quote?
>
> Otherwise it's just pixels on a screen.
>
http://www.criticalmasslondon.org.uk/text/report25-6-2010.html

Doug.

[Mrcheerful[_2_]]

Doug wrote:
> On Dec 8, 12:20 pm, bugbear > wrote:
>> Doug wrote:
>>> "After much to and fro, I have now heard that the police are to
>>> prosecute the taxi driver who knocked me off my bicycle (I was
>>> stationary standing astride the crossbar) during the mass on 25
>>> June. They are to prosecute him for Driving without due care and
>>> attention and Failing to stop after an accident without exchanging
>>> details . I have not been asked to attend court and neither has my
>>> witness to the incident. If the man pleads not guilty, he will be
>>> sent to court and we will then be asked to attend. Meantime, we
>>> have been asked to provide dates on which we might not be
>>> available. It is good to see some action."
>>
>> Do you have a reference for this quote?
>>
>> Otherwise it's just pixels on a screen.
>>
> http://www.criticalmasslondon.org.uk/text/report25-6-2010.html
>
> Doug.

so just more anecdotal stuff.

[Doug[_3_]]

On Dec 8, 4:46*pm, "Mrcheerful" > wrote:
> Doug wrote:
> > On Dec 8, 12:20 pm, bugbear > wrote:
> >> Doug wrote:
> >>> "After much to and fro, I have now heard that the police are to
> >>> prosecute the taxi driver who knocked me off my bicycle (I was
> >>> stationary standing astride the crossbar) during the mass on 25
> >>> June. They are to prosecute him for Driving without due care and
> >>> attention and Failing to stop after an accident without exchanging
> >>> details . I have not been asked to attend court and neither has my
> >>> witness to the incident. If the man pleads not guilty, he will be
> >>> sent to court and we will then be asked to attend. Meantime, we
> >>> have been asked to provide dates on which we might not be
> >>> available. It is good to see some action."
>
> >> Do you have a reference for this quote?
>
> >> Otherwise it's just pixels on a screen.
>
> >http://www.criticalmasslondon.org.uk/text/report25-6-2010.html
>
> > Doug.
>
> so just more anecdotal stuff.
>
Duh! What about the witnesses? Do you seriously imagine the police
would prosecute without solid evidence, especially against a taxi
driver on behalf of a mere cyclist? You just can't handle the truth
can you. BTW, be careful how you drive.

Doug.

[Mrcheerful[_2_]]

Doug wrote:
> On Dec 8, 4:46 pm, "Mrcheerful" > wrote:
>> Doug wrote:
>>> On Dec 8, 12:20 pm, bugbear >
>>> wrote:
>>>> Doug wrote:
>>>>> "After much to and fro, I have now heard that the police are to
>>>>> prosecute the taxi driver who knocked me off my bicycle (I was
>>>>> stationary standing astride the crossbar) during the mass on 25
>>>>> June. They are to prosecute him for Driving without due care and
>>>>> attention and Failing to stop after an accident without exchanging
>>>>> details . I have not been asked to attend court and neither has my
>>>>> witness to the incident. If the man pleads not guilty, he will be
>>>>> sent to court and we will then be asked to attend. Meantime, we
>>>>> have been asked to provide dates on which we might not be
>>>>> available. It is good to see some action."
>>
>>>> Do you have a reference for this quote?
>>
>>>> Otherwise it's just pixels on a screen.
>>
>>> http://www.criticalmasslondon.org.uk/text/report25-6-2010.html
>>
>>> Doug.
>>
>> so just more anecdotal stuff.
>>
> Duh! What about the witnesses? Do you seriously imagine the police
> would prosecute without solid evidence <snip

when the oxford street cabbie was attacked you said the opposite.

[JNugent[_7_]]

On 08/12/2010 13:14, Justin wrote:
> On 8 dec, 13:13, > wrote:
>> On Dec 8, 6:30 am, > wrote:
>>
>>> "After much to and fro, I have now heard that the police are to
>>> prosecute the taxi driver who knocked me off my bicycle (I was
>>> stationary standing astride the crossbar) during the mass on 25 June.
>>> They are to prosecute him for “Driving without due care and attention”
>>> and “Failing to stop after an accident without exchanging details”. I
>>> have not been asked to attend court and neither has my witness to the
>>> incident. If the man pleads not guilty, he will be sent to court and
>>> we will then be asked to attend. Meantime, we have been asked to
>>> provide dates on which we might not be available. It is good to see
>>> some action."
>>
>>> It is indeed and about time. Some of these drivers seem to think they
>>> can ram CM cyclists out of their way with impunity.
>>
>> When and where is the hearing? To assist with the course of justice
>> the beak should be made aware of your anti car agenda.
>
> The taxi driver is being criminally prosected for driving without due
> care an attention and failing to stop after an accident and exchange
> details.

A driver who was stationary because hemmed in by dozens, if hundreds, of
cyclists is being prosecuted for failing to stop?

> These are offences the sentencing of which is not dependent upon a
> madman's, or anyone else's, interpretation of any agenda the victim
> may or not have.

When does the case come up?

And where?

[JNugent[_7_]]

On 08/12/2010 16:28, Doug wrote:
> On Dec 8, 12:20 pm, > wrote:
>> Doug wrote:
>>> "After much to and fro, I have now heard that the police are to
>>> prosecute the taxi driver who knocked me off my bicycle (I was
>>> stationary standing astride the crossbar) during the mass on 25 June.
>>> They are to prosecute him for Driving without due care and attention
>>> and Failing to stop after an accident without exchanging details . I
>>> have not been asked to attend court and neither has my witness to the
>>> incident. If the man pleads not guilty, he will be sent to court and
>>> we will then be asked to attend. Meantime, we have been asked to
>>> provide dates on which we might not be available. It is good to see
>>> some action."
>>
>> Do you have a reference for this quote?
>>
>> Otherwise it's just pixels on a screen.
>>
> http://www.criticalmasslondon.org.uk/text/report25-6-2010.html

I'd be pretty sure that he was asking for an authoritative source for the
"prosecution" fantasy.

[NM]

On Dec 8, 2:35*pm, Justin > wrote:
> On 8 dec, 14:55, NM > wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Dec 8, 1:14*pm, Justin > wrote:
>
> > > On 8 dec, 13:13, NM > wrote:
>
> > > > On Dec 8, 6:30*am, Doug > wrote:
>
> > > > > "After much to and fro, I have now heard that the police are to
> > > > > prosecute the taxi driver who knocked me off my bicycle (I was
> > > > > stationary standing astride the crossbar) during the mass on 25 June.
> > > > > They are to prosecute him for “Driving without due care and attention”
> > > > > and “Failing to stop after an accident without exchanging details”. I
> > > > > have not been asked to attend court and neither has my witness to the
> > > > > incident. If the man pleads not guilty, he will be sent to court and
> > > > > we will then be asked to attend. Meantime, we have been asked to
> > > > > provide dates on which we might not be available. It is good to see
> > > > > some action."
>
> > > > > It is indeed and about time. Some of these drivers seem to think they
> > > > > can ram CM cyclists out of their way with impunity.
>
> > > > When and where is the hearing? To assist with the course of justice
> > > > the beak should be made aware of your anti car agenda.
>
> > > The taxi driver is being criminally prosected for driving without due
> > > care an attention and failing to stop after an accident and exchange
> > > details.
> > > These are offences the sentencing of which is not dependent upon a
> > > madman's, or anyone else's, interpretation of any agenda the victim
> > > may or not have.
>
> > Then it should not harm the prosecution if the court is made aware, it
> > can only assist.
>
> How do you expect to get right of audience? As your *point is
> completely irrelevant to the proceedings you would not even be allowed
> to make a submission - you are not in any way party to the case.

If the defending counsel were to be made aware of Doug's extreme
views? It is a matter of public record, all it would need is direction
towards this forum.

[Doug[_3_]]

On Dec 8, 6:46*pm, JNugent > wrote:
> On 08/12/2010 13:14, Justin wrote:
>
>
>
> > On 8 dec, 13:13, > *wrote:
> >> On Dec 8, 6:30 am, > *wrote:
>
> >>> "After much to and fro, I have now heard that the police are to
> >>> prosecute the taxi driver who knocked me off my bicycle (I was
> >>> stationary standing astride the crossbar) during the mass on 25 June.
> >>> They are to prosecute him for Driving without due care and attention
> >>> and Failing to stop after an accident without exchanging details . I
> >>> have not been asked to attend court and neither has my witness to the
> >>> incident. If the man pleads not guilty, he will be sent to court and
> >>> we will then be asked to attend. Meantime, we have been asked to
> >>> provide dates on which we might not be available. It is good to see
> >>> some action."
>
> >>> It is indeed and about time. Some of these drivers seem to think they
> >>> can ram CM cyclists out of their way with impunity.
>
> >> When and where is the hearing? To assist with the course of justice
> >> the beak should be made aware of your anti car agenda.
>
> > The taxi driver is being criminally prosected for driving without due
> > care an attention and failing to stop after an accident and exchange
> > details.
>
> A driver who was stationary because hemmed in by dozens, if hundreds, of
> cyclists is being prosecuted for failing to stop?
>
No because he tried to ram a cyclist out of his way. Didn't you read
the first report?

Again!

http://www.criticalmasslondon.org.uk/text/report25-6-2010.html
>
> > These are offences the sentencing of which is not dependent upon a
> > madman's, or anyone else's, interpretation of any agenda the victim
> > may or not have.
>
> When does the case come up?
>
> And where?
>
I'll let it be known here when it happens. By then I will expect
retractions from motorists here who try to claim the whole thing is
some kind of a fabrication and who try to make out that all video
evidence which shows drivers ramming cyclists is in some way suspect.

-- .
Critical Mass London.
http://www.criticalmasslondon.org.uk
"Get out of my way you communist Effing scum, dole cheats”

[NM]

On Dec 8, 3:00*pm, Justin > wrote:
> On 8 dec, 13:13, NM > wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Dec 8, 6:30*am, Doug > wrote:
>
> > > "After much to and fro, I have now heard that the police are to
> > > prosecute the taxi driver who knocked me off my bicycle (I was
> > > stationary standing astride the crossbar) during the mass on 25 June.
> > > They are to prosecute him for “Driving without due care and attention”
> > > and “Failing to stop after an accident without exchanging details”. I
> > > have not been asked to attend court and neither has my witness to the
> > > incident. If the man pleads not guilty, he will be sent to court and
> > > we will then be asked to attend. Meantime, we have been asked to
> > > provide dates on which we might not be available. It is good to see
> > > some action."
>
> > > It is indeed and about time. Some of these drivers seem to think they
> > > can ram CM cyclists out of their way with impunity.
>
> > When and where is the hearing? To assist with the course of justice
> > the beak should be made aware of your anti car agenda.
>
> Hallo Mr Judge or Magistrate,
> my name is NM and I have nothing to do with this case. I would just
> like to tell you that that nasty Mr Victim of dangerous driving is a
> meber of Critical Mass and I think he has an anti-car agenda. Could
> you make sure that the accused does not get convicted because
> sometimes those nasty CM people delay motorists? Pretty please?
> Surely having an anti car agenda is reason enough to be rammed by a
> car, don't you think. If he had an anti gun agenda, that would a
> reason to be lenient with anyone who shoots him, don't you think?
> Thanks for listening Mister.

Assuming the defense engaged a lawyer with more brains than you appear
to have do you think he would not use the information publicly
available on this forum to show that Doug had an 'agenda' and more
than likely contributed towards the incident.

[Justin[_3_]]

On 9 dec, 10:22, NM > wrote:
> On Dec 8, 3:00*pm, Justin > wrote:
>
>
>
> > On 8 dec, 13:13, NM > wrote:
>
> > > On Dec 8, 6:30*am, Doug > wrote:
>
> > > > "After much to and fro, I have now heard that the police are to
> > > > prosecute the taxi driver who knocked me off my bicycle (I was
> > > > stationary standing astride the crossbar) during the mass on 25 June.
> > > > They are to prosecute him for “Driving without due care and attention”
> > > > and “Failing to stop after an accident without exchanging details”. I
> > > > have not been asked to attend court and neither has my witness to the
> > > > incident. If the man pleads not guilty, he will be sent to court and
> > > > we will then be asked to attend. Meantime, we have been asked to
> > > > provide dates on which we might not be available. It is good to see
> > > > some action."
>
> > > > It is indeed and about time. Some of these drivers seem to think they
> > > > can ram CM cyclists out of their way with impunity.
>
> > > When and where is the hearing? To assist with the course of justice
> > > the beak should be made aware of your anti car agenda.
>
> > Hallo Mr Judge or Magistrate,
> > my name is NM and I have nothing to do with this case. I would just
> > like to tell you that that nasty Mr Victim of dangerous driving is a
> > meber of Critical Mass and I think he has an anti-car agenda. Could
> > you make sure that the accused does not get convicted because
> > sometimes those nasty CM people delay motorists? Pretty please?
> > Surely having an anti car agenda is reason enough to be rammed by a
> > car, don't you think. If he had an anti gun agenda, that would a
> > reason to be lenient with anyone who shoots him, don't you think?
> > Thanks for listening Mister.
>
> Assuming the defense engaged a lawyer with more brains than you appear
> to have do you think he would not use the information publicly
> available on this forum to show that Doug had an 'agenda' and more
> than likely contributed towards the incident.

Of cousre he will not do so: it is not evidence and nor can it be
pertinent to sentencing.

[NM]

On Dec 9, 9:39*am, Justin > wrote:
> On 9 dec, 10:22, NM > wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Dec 8, 3:00*pm, Justin > wrote:
>
> > > On 8 dec, 13:13, NM > wrote:
>
> > > > On Dec 8, 6:30*am, Doug > wrote:
>
> > > > > "After much to and fro, I have now heard that the police are to
> > > > > prosecute the taxi driver who knocked me off my bicycle (I was
> > > > > stationary standing astride the crossbar) during the mass on 25 June.
> > > > > They are to prosecute him for “Driving without due care and attention”
> > > > > and “Failing to stop after an accident without exchanging details”. I
> > > > > have not been asked to attend court and neither has my witness to the
> > > > > incident. If the man pleads not guilty, he will be sent to court and
> > > > > we will then be asked to attend. Meantime, we have been asked to
> > > > > provide dates on which we might not be available. It is good to see
> > > > > some action."
>
> > > > > It is indeed and about time. Some of these drivers seem to think they
> > > > > can ram CM cyclists out of their way with impunity.
>
> > > > When and where is the hearing? To assist with the course of justice
> > > > the beak should be made aware of your anti car agenda.
>
> > > Hallo Mr Judge or Magistrate,
> > > my name is NM and I have nothing to do with this case. I would just
> > > like to tell you that that nasty Mr Victim of dangerous driving is a
> > > meber of Critical Mass and I think he has an anti-car agenda. Could
> > > you make sure that the accused does not get convicted because
> > > sometimes those nasty CM people delay motorists? Pretty please?
> > > Surely having an anti car agenda is reason enough to be rammed by a
> > > car, don't you think. If he had an anti gun agenda, that would a
> > > reason to be lenient with anyone who shoots him, don't you think?
> > > Thanks for listening Mister.
>
> > Assuming the defense engaged a lawyer with more brains than you appear
> > to have do you think he would not use the information publicly
> > available on this forum to show that Doug had an 'agenda' and more
> > than likely contributed towards the incident.
>
> Of cousre he will not do so: it is not evidence and nor can it be
> pertinent to sentencing.

Not if it can be shown that there was no obstruction except that
deliberately caused by the cyclist?

[Justin[_3_]]

On 9 dec, 11:06, NM > wrote:
> On Dec 9, 9:39*am, Justin > wrote:
>
>
>
> > On 9 dec, 10:22, NM > wrote:
>
> > > On Dec 8, 3:00*pm, Justin > wrote:
>
> > > > On 8 dec, 13:13, NM > wrote:
>
> > > > > On Dec 8, 6:30*am, Doug > wrote:
>
> > > > > > "After much to and fro, I have now heard that the police are to
> > > > > > prosecute the taxi driver who knocked me off my bicycle (I was
> > > > > > stationary standing astride the crossbar) during the mass on 25 June.
> > > > > > They are to prosecute him for “Driving without due care and attention”
> > > > > > and “Failing to stop after an accident without exchanging details”. I
> > > > > > have not been asked to attend court and neither has my witness to the
> > > > > > incident. If the man pleads not guilty, he will be sent to court and
> > > > > > we will then be asked to attend. Meantime, we have been asked to
> > > > > > provide dates on which we might not be available. It is good to see
> > > > > > some action."
>
> > > > > > It is indeed and about time. Some of these drivers seem to think they
> > > > > > can ram CM cyclists out of their way with impunity.
>
> > > > > When and where is the hearing? To assist with the course of justice
> > > > > the beak should be made aware of your anti car agenda.
>
> > > > Hallo Mr Judge or Magistrate,
> > > > my name is NM and I have nothing to do with this case. I would just
> > > > like to tell you that that nasty Mr Victim of dangerous driving is a
> > > > meber of Critical Mass and I think he has an anti-car agenda. Could
> > > > you make sure that the accused does not get convicted because
> > > > sometimes those nasty CM people delay motorists? Pretty please?
> > > > Surely having an anti car agenda is reason enough to be rammed by a
> > > > car, don't you think. If he had an anti gun agenda, that would a
> > > > reason to be lenient with anyone who shoots him, don't you think?
> > > > Thanks for listening Mister.
>
> > > Assuming the defense engaged a lawyer with more brains than you appear
> > > to have do you think he would not use the information publicly
> > > available on this forum to show that Doug had an 'agenda' and more
> > > than likely contributed towards the incident.
>
> > Of cousre he will not do so: it is not evidence and nor can it be
> > pertinent to sentencing.
>
> Not if it can be shown that there was no obstruction except that
> deliberately caused by the cyclist?

No, not even then. Understand?

[NM]

On Dec 9, 10:56*am, Justin > wrote:
> On 9 dec, 11:06, NM > wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Dec 9, 9:39*am, Justin > wrote:
>
> > > On 9 dec, 10:22, NM > wrote:
>
> > > > On Dec 8, 3:00*pm, Justin > wrote:
>
> > > > > On 8 dec, 13:13, NM > wrote:
>
> > > > > > On Dec 8, 6:30*am, Doug > wrote:
>
> > > > > > > "After much to and fro, I have now heard that the police are to
> > > > > > > prosecute the taxi driver who knocked me off my bicycle (I was
> > > > > > > stationary standing astride the crossbar) during the mass on 25 June.
> > > > > > > They are to prosecute him for “Driving without due care and attention”
> > > > > > > and “Failing to stop after an accident without exchanging details”. I
> > > > > > > have not been asked to attend court and neither has my witness to the
> > > > > > > incident. If the man pleads not guilty, he will be sent to court and
> > > > > > > we will then be asked to attend. Meantime, we have been asked to
> > > > > > > provide dates on which we might not be available. It is good to see
> > > > > > > some action."
>
> > > > > > > It is indeed and about time. Some of these drivers seem to think they
> > > > > > > can ram CM cyclists out of their way with impunity.
>
> > > > > > When and where is the hearing? To assist with the course of justice
> > > > > > the beak should be made aware of your anti car agenda.
>
> > > > > Hallo Mr Judge or Magistrate,
> > > > > my name is NM and I have nothing to do with this case. I would just
> > > > > like to tell you that that nasty Mr Victim of dangerous driving is a
> > > > > meber of Critical Mass and I think he has an anti-car agenda. Could
> > > > > you make sure that the accused does not get convicted because
> > > > > sometimes those nasty CM people delay motorists? Pretty please?
> > > > > Surely having an anti car agenda is reason enough to be rammed by a
> > > > > car, don't you think. If he had an anti gun agenda, that would a
> > > > > reason to be lenient with anyone who shoots him, don't you think?
> > > > > Thanks for listening Mister.
>
> > > > Assuming the defense engaged a lawyer with more brains than you appear
> > > > to have do you think he would not use the information publicly
> > > > available on this forum to show that Doug had an 'agenda' and more
> > > > than likely contributed towards the incident.
>
> > > Of cousre he will not do so: it is not evidence and nor can it be
> > > pertinent to sentencing.
>
> > Not if it can be shown that there was no obstruction except that
> > deliberately caused by the cyclist?
>
> No, not even then. Understand?

Is that just because you say so? I understand that bit.

[Mrcheerful[_2_]]

NM wrote:
> On Dec 9, 10:56 am, Justin > wrote:
>> On 9 dec, 11:06, NM > wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Dec 9, 9:39 am, Justin > wrote:
>>
>>>> On 9 dec, 10:22, NM > wrote:
>>
>>>>> On Dec 8, 3:00 pm, Justin > wrote:
>>
>>>>>> On 8 dec, 13:13, NM > wrote:
>>
>>>>>>> On Dec 8, 6:30 am, Doug > wrote:
>>
>>>>>>>> "After much to and fro, I have now heard that the police are to
>>>>>>>> prosecute the taxi driver who knocked me off my bicycle (I was
>>>>>>>> stationary standing astride the crossbar) during the mass on
>>>>>>>> 25 June. They are to prosecute him for “Driving without due
>>>>>>>> care and attention” and “Failing to stop after an accident
>>>>>>>> without exchanging details”. I have not been asked to attend
>>>>>>>> court and neither has my witness to the incident. If the man
>>>>>>>> pleads not guilty, he will be sent to court and we will then
>>>>>>>> be asked to attend. Meantime, we have been asked to provide
>>>>>>>> dates on which we might not be available. It is good to see
>>>>>>>> some action."
>>
>>>>>>>> It is indeed and about time. Some of these drivers seem to
>>>>>>>> think they can ram CM cyclists out of their way with impunity.
>>
>>>>>>> When and where is the hearing? To assist with the course of
>>>>>>> justice the beak should be made aware of your anti car agenda.
>>
>>>>>> Hallo Mr Judge or Magistrate,
>>>>>> my name is NM and I have nothing to do with this case. I would
>>>>>> just like to tell you that that nasty Mr Victim of dangerous
>>>>>> driving is a meber of Critical Mass and I think he has an
>>>>>> anti-car agenda. Could you make sure that the accused does not
>>>>>> get convicted because sometimes those nasty CM people delay
>>>>>> motorists? Pretty please? Surely having an anti car agenda is
>>>>>> reason enough to be rammed by a car, don't you think. If he had
>>>>>> an anti gun agenda, that would a reason to be lenient with
>>>>>> anyone who shoots him, don't you think? Thanks for listening
>>>>>> Mister.
>>
>>>>> Assuming the defense engaged a lawyer with more brains than you
>>>>> appear to have do you think he would not use the information
>>>>> publicly available on this forum to show that Doug had an
>>>>> 'agenda' and more than likely contributed towards the incident.
>>
>>>> Of cousre he will not do so: it is not evidence and nor can it be
>>>> pertinent to sentencing.
>>
>>> Not if it can be shown that there was no obstruction except that
>>> deliberately caused by the cyclist?
>>
>> No, not even then. Understand?
>
> Is that just because you say so? I understand that bit.

unfortunately, even if he was being obstructed it does not give him any
right to barge the cyclist out of the way, his remedy was to call the
police.

[JNugent[_7_]]

On 09/12/2010 09:39, Justin wrote:
> On 9 dec, 10:22, > wrote:
>> On Dec 8, 3:00 pm, > wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> On 8 dec, 13:13, > wrote:
>>
>>>> On Dec 8, 6:30 am, > wrote:
>>
>>>>> "After much to and fro, I have now heard that the police are to
>>>>> prosecute the taxi driver who knocked me off my bicycle (I was
>>>>> stationary standing astride the crossbar) during the mass on 25 June.
>>>>> They are to prosecute him for “Driving without due care and attention”
>>>>> and “Failing to stop after an accident without exchanging details”. I
>>>>> have not been asked to attend court and neither has my witness to the
>>>>> incident. If the man pleads not guilty, he will be sent to court and
>>>>> we will then be asked to attend. Meantime, we have been asked to
>>>>> provide dates on which we might not be available. It is good to see
>>>>> some action."
>>
>>>>> It is indeed and about time. Some of these drivers seem to think they
>>>>> can ram CM cyclists out of their way with impunity.
>>
>>>> When and where is the hearing? To assist with the course of justice
>>>> the beak should be made aware of your anti car agenda.
>>
>>> Hallo Mr Judge or Magistrate,
>>> my name is NM and I have nothing to do with this case. I would just
>>> like to tell you that that nasty Mr Victim of dangerous driving is a
>>> meber of Critical Mass and I think he has an anti-car agenda. Could
>>> you make sure that the accused does not get convicted because
>>> sometimes those nasty CM people delay motorists? Pretty please?
>>> Surely having an anti car agenda is reason enough to be rammed by a
>>> car, don't you think. If he had an anti gun agenda, that would a
>>> reason to be lenient with anyone who shoots him, don't you think?
>>> Thanks for listening Mister.
>>
>> Assuming the defense engaged a lawyer with more brains than you appear
>> to have do you think he would not use the information publicly
>> available on this forum to show that Doug had an 'agenda' and more
>> than likely contributed towards the incident.
>
> Of cousre he will not do so: it is not evidence and nor can it be
> pertinent to sentencing.

You seem to have a hazy idea of what can be evidence.

[NM]

On Dec 9, 3:22*pm, "Mrcheerful" > wrote:
> NM wrote:
> > On Dec 9, 10:56 am, Justin > wrote:
> >> On 9 dec, 11:06, NM > wrote:
>
> >>> On Dec 9, 9:39 am, Justin > wrote:
>
> >>>> On 9 dec, 10:22, NM > wrote:
>
> >>>>> On Dec 8, 3:00 pm, Justin > wrote:
>
> >>>>>> On 8 dec, 13:13, NM > wrote:
>
> >>>>>>> On Dec 8, 6:30 am, Doug > wrote:
>
> >>>>>>>> "After much to and fro, I have now heard that the police are to
> >>>>>>>> prosecute the taxi driver who knocked me off my bicycle (I was
> >>>>>>>> stationary standing astride the crossbar) during the mass on
> >>>>>>>> 25 June. They are to prosecute him for Driving without due
> >>>>>>>> care and attention and Failing to stop after an accident
> >>>>>>>> without exchanging details . I have not been asked to attend
> >>>>>>>> court and neither has my witness to the incident. If the man
> >>>>>>>> pleads not guilty, he will be sent to court and we will then
> >>>>>>>> be asked to attend. Meantime, we have been asked to provide
> >>>>>>>> dates on which we might not be available. It is good to see
> >>>>>>>> some action."
>
> >>>>>>>> It is indeed and about time. Some of these drivers seem to
> >>>>>>>> think they can ram CM cyclists out of their way with impunity.
>
> >>>>>>> When and where is the hearing? To assist with the course of
> >>>>>>> justice the beak should be made aware of your anti car agenda.
>
> >>>>>> Hallo Mr Judge or Magistrate,
> >>>>>> my name is NM and I have nothing to do with this case. I would
> >>>>>> just like to tell you that that nasty Mr Victim of dangerous
> >>>>>> driving is a meber of Critical Mass and I think he has an
> >>>>>> anti-car agenda. Could you make sure that the accused does not
> >>>>>> get convicted because sometimes those nasty CM people delay
> >>>>>> motorists? Pretty please? Surely having an anti car agenda is
> >>>>>> reason enough to be rammed by a car, don't you think. If he had
> >>>>>> an anti gun agenda, that would a reason to be lenient with
> >>>>>> anyone who shoots him, don't you think? Thanks for listening
> >>>>>> Mister.
>
> >>>>> Assuming the defense engaged a lawyer with more brains than you
> >>>>> appear to have do you think he would not use the information
> >>>>> publicly available on this forum to show that Doug had an
> >>>>> 'agenda' and more than likely contributed towards the incident.
>
> >>>> Of cousre he will not do so: it is not evidence and nor can it be
> >>>> pertinent to sentencing.
>
> >>> Not if it can be shown that there was no obstruction except that
> >>> deliberately caused by the cyclist?
>
> >> No, not even then. Understand?
>
> > Is that just because you say so? I understand that bit.
>
> unfortunately, even if he was being obstructed it does not give him any
> right to barge the cyclist out of the way, his remedy was to call the
> police.

Agreed, however showing provocation could result in case dismissed or
a mitigated penalty.

[Doug[_3_]]

On Dec 9, 3:22*pm, "Mrcheerful" > wrote:
> NM wrote:
> > On Dec 9, 10:56 am, Justin > wrote:
> >> On 9 dec, 11:06, NM > wrote:
>
> >>> On Dec 9, 9:39 am, Justin > wrote:
>
> >>>> On 9 dec, 10:22, NM > wrote:
>
> >>>>> On Dec 8, 3:00 pm, Justin > wrote:
>
> >>>>>> On 8 dec, 13:13, NM > wrote:
>
> >>>>>>> On Dec 8, 6:30 am, Doug > wrote:
>
> >>>>>>>> "After much to and fro, I have now heard that the police are to
> >>>>>>>> prosecute the taxi driver who knocked me off my bicycle (I was
> >>>>>>>> stationary standing astride the crossbar) during the mass on
> >>>>>>>> 25 June. They are to prosecute him for Driving without due
> >>>>>>>> care and attention and Failing to stop after an accident
> >>>>>>>> without exchanging details . I have not been asked to attend
> >>>>>>>> court and neither has my witness to the incident. If the man
> >>>>>>>> pleads not guilty, he will be sent to court and we will then
> >>>>>>>> be asked to attend. Meantime, we have been asked to provide
> >>>>>>>> dates on which we might not be available. It is good to see
> >>>>>>>> some action."
>
> >>>>>>>> It is indeed and about time. Some of these drivers seem to
> >>>>>>>> think they can ram CM cyclists out of their way with impunity.
>
> >>>>>>> When and where is the hearing? To assist with the course of
> >>>>>>> justice the beak should be made aware of your anti car agenda.
>
> >>>>>> Hallo Mr Judge or Magistrate,
> >>>>>> my name is NM and I have nothing to do with this case. I would
> >>>>>> just like to tell you that that nasty Mr Victim of dangerous
> >>>>>> driving is a meber of Critical Mass and I think he has an
> >>>>>> anti-car agenda. Could you make sure that the accused does not
> >>>>>> get convicted because sometimes those nasty CM people delay
> >>>>>> motorists? Pretty please? Surely having an anti car agenda is
> >>>>>> reason enough to be rammed by a car, don't you think. If he had
> >>>>>> an anti gun agenda, that would a reason to be lenient with
> >>>>>> anyone who shoots him, don't you think? Thanks for listening
> >>>>>> Mister.
>
> >>>>> Assuming the defense engaged a lawyer with more brains than you
> >>>>> appear to have do you think he would not use the information
> >>>>> publicly available on this forum to show that Doug had an
> >>>>> 'agenda' and more than likely contributed towards the incident.
>
> >>>> Of cousre he will not do so: it is not evidence and nor can it be
> >>>> pertinent to sentencing.
>
> >>> Not if it can be shown that there was no obstruction except that
> >>> deliberately caused by the cyclist?
>
> >> No, not even then. Understand?
>
> > Is that just because you say so? I understand that bit.
>
> unfortunately, even if he was being obstructed it does not give him any
> right to barge the cyclist out of the way, his remedy was to call the
> police.
>
Or, just wait for two or three minutes, however draconian an
imposition that may appear to be to many drivers.

-- .
Critical Mass London.
http://www.criticalmasslondon.org.uk
"Get out of my way you communist Effing scum, dole cheats”

[Mrcheerful[_2_]]

"Doug" > wrote in message
...
On Dec 9, 3:22 pm, "Mrcheerful" > wrote:
> NM wrote:
> > On Dec 9, 10:56 am, Justin > wrote:
> >> On 9 dec, 11:06, NM > wrote:
>
> >>> On Dec 9, 9:39 am, Justin > wrote:
>
> >>>> On 9 dec, 10:22, NM > wrote:
>
> >>>>> On Dec 8, 3:00 pm, Justin > wrote:
>
> >>>>>> On 8 dec, 13:13, NM > wrote:
>
> >>>>>>> On Dec 8, 6:30 am, Doug > wrote:
>
> >>>>>>>> "After much to and fro, I have now heard that the police are to
> >>>>>>>> prosecute the taxi driver who knocked me off my bicycle (I was
> >>>>>>>> stationary standing astride the crossbar) during the mass on
> >>>>>>>> 25 June. They are to prosecute him for Driving without due
> >>>>>>>> care and attention and Failing to stop after an accident
> >>>>>>>> without exchanging details . I have not been asked to attend
> >>>>>>>> court and neither has my witness to the incident. If the man
> >>>>>>>> pleads not guilty, he will be sent to court and we will then
> >>>>>>>> be asked to attend. Meantime, we have been asked to provide
> >>>>>>>> dates on which we might not be available. It is good to see
> >>>>>>>> some action."
>
> >>>>>>>> It is indeed and about time. Some of these drivers seem to
> >>>>>>>> think they can ram CM cyclists out of their way with impunity.
>
> >>>>>>> When and where is the hearing? To assist with the course of
> >>>>>>> justice the beak should be made aware of your anti car agenda.
>
> >>>>>> Hallo Mr Judge or Magistrate,
> >>>>>> my name is NM and I have nothing to do with this case. I would
> >>>>>> just like to tell you that that nasty Mr Victim of dangerous
> >>>>>> driving is a meber of Critical Mass and I think he has an
> >>>>>> anti-car agenda. Could you make sure that the accused does not
> >>>>>> get convicted because sometimes those nasty CM people delay
> >>>>>> motorists? Pretty please? Surely having an anti car agenda is
> >>>>>> reason enough to be rammed by a car, don't you think. If he had
> >>>>>> an anti gun agenda, that would a reason to be lenient with
> >>>>>> anyone who shoots him, don't you think? Thanks for listening
> >>>>>> Mister.
>
> >>>>> Assuming the defense engaged a lawyer with more brains than you
> >>>>> appear to have do you think he would not use the information
> >>>>> publicly available on this forum to show that Doug had an
> >>>>> 'agenda' and more than likely contributed towards the incident.
>
> >>>> Of cousre he will not do so: it is not evidence and nor can it be
> >>>> pertinent to sentencing.
>
> >>> Not if it can be shown that there was no obstruction except that
> >>> deliberately caused by the cyclist?
>
> >> No, not even then. Understand?
>
> > Is that just because you say so? I understand that bit.
>
> unfortunately, even if he was being obstructed it does not give him any
> right to barge the cyclist out of the way, his remedy was to call the
> police.
>
Or, just wait for two or three minutes, however draconian an
imposition that may appear to be to many drivers.

so why can't cyclists wait at pedestrian crossings, give way lines and red
lights?

[Doug[_3_]]

On Dec 10, 7:50*am, "Mrcheerful" > wrote:
> "Doug" > wrote in message
>
> ...
> On Dec 9, 3:22 pm, "Mrcheerful" > wrote:
>
> > NM wrote:
> > > On Dec 9, 10:56 am, Justin > wrote:
> > >> On 9 dec, 11:06, NM > wrote:
>
> > >>> On Dec 9, 9:39 am, Justin > wrote:
>
> > >>>> On 9 dec, 10:22, NM > wrote:
>
> > >>>>> On Dec 8, 3:00 pm, Justin > wrote:
>
> > >>>>>> On 8 dec, 13:13, NM > wrote:
>
> > >>>>>>> On Dec 8, 6:30 am, Doug > wrote:
>
> > >>>>>>>> "After much to and fro, I have now heard that the police are to
> > >>>>>>>> prosecute the taxi driver who knocked me off my bicycle (I was
> > >>>>>>>> stationary standing astride the crossbar) during the mass on
> > >>>>>>>> 25 June. They are to prosecute him for Driving without due
> > >>>>>>>> care and attention and Failing to stop after an accident
> > >>>>>>>> without exchanging details . I have not been asked to attend
> > >>>>>>>> court and neither has my witness to the incident. If the man
> > >>>>>>>> pleads not guilty, he will be sent to court and we will then
> > >>>>>>>> be asked to attend. Meantime, we have been asked to provide
> > >>>>>>>> dates on which we might not be available. It is good to see
> > >>>>>>>> some action."
>
> > >>>>>>>> It is indeed and about time. Some of these drivers seem to
> > >>>>>>>> think they can ram CM cyclists out of their way with impunity.
>
> > >>>>>>> When and where is the hearing? To assist with the course of
> > >>>>>>> justice the beak should be made aware of your anti car agenda.
>
> > >>>>>> Hallo Mr Judge or Magistrate,
> > >>>>>> my name is NM and I have nothing to do with this case. I would
> > >>>>>> just like to tell you that that nasty Mr Victim of dangerous
> > >>>>>> driving is a meber of Critical Mass and I think he has an
> > >>>>>> anti-car agenda. Could you make sure that the accused does not
> > >>>>>> get convicted because sometimes those nasty CM people delay
> > >>>>>> motorists? Pretty please? Surely having an anti car agenda is
> > >>>>>> reason enough to be rammed by a car, don't you think. If he had
> > >>>>>> an anti gun agenda, that would a reason to be lenient with
> > >>>>>> anyone who shoots him, don't you think? Thanks for listening
> > >>>>>> Mister.
>
> > >>>>> Assuming the defense engaged a lawyer with more brains than you
> > >>>>> appear to have do you think he would not use the information
> > >>>>> publicly available on this forum to show that Doug had an
> > >>>>> 'agenda' and more than likely contributed towards the incident.
>
> > >>>> Of cousre he will not do so: it is not evidence and nor can it be
> > >>>> pertinent to sentencing.
>
> > >>> Not if it can be shown that there was no obstruction except that
> > >>> deliberately caused by the cyclist?
>
> > >> No, not even then. Understand?
>
> > > Is that just because you say so? I understand that bit.
>
> > unfortunately, even if he was being obstructed it does not give him any
> > right to barge the cyclist out of the way, his remedy was to call the
> > police.
>
> Or, just wait for two or three minutes, however draconian an
> imposition that may appear to be to many drivers.
>
> so why can't cyclists wait at pedestrian crossings, give way lines and red
> lights?
>
You mean you still don't know after all the discussions on this NG
concerning Critical Mass? There's some serious catching up for you to
do. Hint: 'procession'.

Doug.

[Mrcheerful[_2_]]

"Doug" > wrote in message
...
On Dec 10, 7:50 am, "Mrcheerful" > wrote:
> "Doug" > wrote in message
>
> ...
> On Dec 9, 3:22 pm, "Mrcheerful" > wrote:
>
> > NM wrote:
> > > On Dec 9, 10:56 am, Justin > wrote:
> > >> On 9 dec, 11:06, NM > wrote:
>
> > >>> On Dec 9, 9:39 am, Justin > wrote:
>
> > >>>> On 9 dec, 10:22, NM > wrote:
>
> > >>>>> On Dec 8, 3:00 pm, Justin > wrote:
>
> > >>>>>> On 8 dec, 13:13, NM > wrote:
>
> > >>>>>>> On Dec 8, 6:30 am, Doug > wrote:
>
> > >>>>>>>> "After much to and fro, I have now heard that the police are to
> > >>>>>>>> prosecute the taxi driver who knocked me off my bicycle (I was
> > >>>>>>>> stationary standing astride the crossbar) during the mass on
> > >>>>>>>> 25 June. They are to prosecute him for Driving without due
> > >>>>>>>> care and attention and Failing to stop after an accident
> > >>>>>>>> without exchanging details . I have not been asked to attend
> > >>>>>>>> court and neither has my witness to the incident. If the man
> > >>>>>>>> pleads not guilty, he will be sent to court and we will then
> > >>>>>>>> be asked to attend. Meantime, we have been asked to provide
> > >>>>>>>> dates on which we might not be available. It is good to see
> > >>>>>>>> some action."
>
> > >>>>>>>> It is indeed and about time. Some of these drivers seem to
> > >>>>>>>> think they can ram CM cyclists out of their way with impunity.
>
> > >>>>>>> When and where is the hearing? To assist with the course of
> > >>>>>>> justice the beak should be made aware of your anti car agenda.
>
> > >>>>>> Hallo Mr Judge or Magistrate,
> > >>>>>> my name is NM and I have nothing to do with this case. I would
> > >>>>>> just like to tell you that that nasty Mr Victim of dangerous
> > >>>>>> driving is a meber of Critical Mass and I think he has an
> > >>>>>> anti-car agenda. Could you make sure that the accused does not
> > >>>>>> get convicted because sometimes those nasty CM people delay
> > >>>>>> motorists? Pretty please? Surely having an anti car agenda is
> > >>>>>> reason enough to be rammed by a car, don't you think. If he had
> > >>>>>> an anti gun agenda, that would a reason to be lenient with
> > >>>>>> anyone who shoots him, don't you think? Thanks for listening
> > >>>>>> Mister.
>
> > >>>>> Assuming the defense engaged a lawyer with more brains than you
> > >>>>> appear to have do you think he would not use the information
> > >>>>> publicly available on this forum to show that Doug had an
> > >>>>> 'agenda' and more than likely contributed towards the incident.
>
> > >>>> Of cousre he will not do so: it is not evidence and nor can it be
> > >>>> pertinent to sentencing.
>
> > >>> Not if it can be shown that there was no obstruction except that
> > >>> deliberately caused by the cyclist?
>
> > >> No, not even then. Understand?
>
> > > Is that just because you say so? I understand that bit.
>
> > unfortunately, even if he was being obstructed it does not give him any
> > right to barge the cyclist out of the way, his remedy was to call the
> > police.
>
> Or, just wait for two or three minutes, however draconian an
> imposition that may appear to be to many drivers.
>
> so why can't cyclists wait at pedestrian crossings, give way lines and red
> lights?
>
You mean you still don't know after all the discussions on this NG
concerning Critical Mass? There's some serious catching up for you to
do. Hint: 'procession'.

there are still such things as obeying the laws of the land, however I did
not mean only at CM, I meant everyday why can't cyclists wait when they
should? after all it is only a few moments.