Hit and run cyclist faces jail
 

A hit and run cyclist who critically injured a girl aged 9 after he knocked her down on a pedestrian crossing is facing jail. He is being charged with causing grievous bodily harm by Wanton and Furious Cycling under the 1861 Offences Against the Person Act. The collision occurred near Poole in Dorset.

Hit and run cyclist faces jail
 

On Wednesday, 27 November 2013 12:51:09 UTC, Derek C wrote:
A hit and run cyclist who critically injured a girl aged 9 after he knocked her down on a pedestrian crossing is facing jail. He is being charged with causing grievous bodily harm by Wanton and Furious Cycling under the 1861 Offences Against the Person Act. The collision occurred near Poole in Dorset.

Already discussed, you daft bugger.

Hit and run cyclist faces jail
 

I haven't been on this forum for a while and read about the hit and run cyclist in this morning's Times. I love the 'wanton and furious cycling' offence. It should have been applied to the young man on a bicycle who ran into me from behind while I was walking along the pavement in the High Street of my local town a couple of weeks ago, but by the time I had picked myself up again he had gone. Didn't even get an apology, although fortunately I was not injured beyond a few bruises. Time for cyclists to be registered and insured I think!

Hit and run cyclist faces jail
 

On Wed, 27 Nov 2013 06:03:12 -0800 (PST), Derek C
wrote:

I haven't been on this forum for a while and read about the hit and run cyclist in this morning's Times. I love the 'wanton and furious cycling' offence. It should have been applied to the young man on a bicycle who ran into me from behind while I was walking along the pavement in the High Street of my local town a couple of weeks ago, but by the time I had picked myself up again he had gone. Didn't even get an apology, although fortunately I was not injured beyond a few bruises. Time for cyclists to be registered and insured I think!

The WFC charge has been dropped.

Hit and run cyclist faces jail
 

"Bertie Wooster" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 27 Nov 2013 06:03:12 -0800 (PST), Derek C
wrote:

I haven't been on this forum for a while and read about the hit and run
cyclist in this morning's Times. I love the 'wanton and furious cycling'
offence. It should have been applied to the young man on a bicycle who
ran into me from behind while I was walking along the pavement in the High
Street of my local town a couple of weeks ago, but by the time I had
picked myself up again he had gone. Didn't even get an apology, although
fortunately I was not injured beyond a few bruises. Time for cyclists to
be registered and insured I think!

The WFC charge has been dropped.

Oh, guilty of "only" GBH then.

Hit and run cyclist faces jail
 

On Wed, 27 Nov 2013 04:51:09 -0800 (PST)
Derek C wrote:

A hit and run cyclist who critically injured a girl aged 9 after he
knocked her down on a pedestrian crossing is facing jail. He is being
charged with causing grievous bodily harm by Wanton and Furious
Cycling under the 1861 Offences Against the Person Act. The collision
occurred near Poole in Dorset.

No he's not, and even if the charge hadn't been dropped there's no such
offence as "Wanton and Furious Cycling" - IIRC the wording of the act
describes driving a "carriage or other vehicle". Bicycles as we know
them, two wheeled vehicles propelled by pedals (they still had wooden
wheels with iron tyres), had only just been introduced in 1861 and can't
have been in common use.

Hit and run cyclist faces jail
 

On 27/11/2013 16:07, Rob Morley wrote:

Derek C wrote:

A hit and run cyclist who critically injured a girl aged 9 after he
knocked her down on a pedestrian crossing is facing jail. He is being
charged with causing grievous bodily harm by Wanton and Furious
Cycling under the 1861 Offences Against the Person Act. The collision
occurred near Poole in Dorset.

No he's not, and even if the charge hadn't been dropped there's no such
offence as "Wanton and Furious Cycling" - IIRC the wording of the act
describes driving a "carriage or other vehicle". Bicycles as we know
them, two wheeled vehicles propelled by pedals (they still had wooden
wheels with iron tyres), had only just been introduced in 1861 and can't
have been in common use.

So what?

Hit and run cyclist faces jail
 

Rob Morley wrote:
On Wed, 27 Nov 2013 04:51:09 -0800 (PST)
Derek C wrote:

A hit and run cyclist who critically injured a girl aged 9 after he
knocked her down on a pedestrian crossing is facing jail. He is being
charged with causing grievous bodily harm by Wanton and Furious
Cycling under the 1861 Offences Against the Person Act. The collision
occurred near Poole in Dorset.

No he's not, and even if the charge hadn't been dropped there's no
such offence as "Wanton and Furious Cycling" - IIRC the wording of
the act describes driving a "carriage or other vehicle". Bicycles as
we know them, two wheeled vehicles propelled by pedals (they still
had wooden wheels with iron tyres), had only just been introduced in
1861 and can't have been in common use.

According to this page:
http://www.roadswerenotbuiltforcars.com/1835highwayact/
In 1878 ... justices Mellor and Lush ... held that bicyclists were liable to
the pains and penalties imposed by the 1835 Highway Act. ... and justices
Mellor and Lush ruled that bicycles were henceforth to be considered
carriages under the law.

--
Iain

Hit and run cyclist faces jail
 

On Wed, 27 Nov 2013 17:01:23 -0000
"Iain" wrote:

Rob Morley wrote:
On Wed, 27 Nov 2013 04:51:09 -0800 (PST)
Derek C wrote:

A hit and run cyclist who critically injured a girl aged 9 after he
knocked her down on a pedestrian crossing is facing jail. He is
being charged with causing grievous bodily harm by Wanton and
Furious Cycling under the 1861 Offences Against the Person Act.
The collision occurred near Poole in Dorset.

No he's not, and even if the charge hadn't been dropped there's no
such offence as "Wanton and Furious Cycling" - IIRC the wording of
the act describes driving a "carriage or other vehicle". Bicycles
as we know them, two wheeled vehicles propelled by pedals (they
still had wooden wheels with iron tyres), had only just been
introduced in 1861 and can't have been in common use.

According to this page:
http://www.roadswerenotbuiltforcars.com/1835highwayact/
In 1878 ... justices Mellor and Lush ... held that bicyclists were
liable to the pains and penalties imposed by the 1835 Highway
Act. ... and justices Mellor and Lush ruled that bicycles were
henceforth to be considered carriages under the law.

I'm not sure what you're trying to illustrate there.

Hit and run cyclist faces jail
 

On 27/11/2013 17:13, Rob Morley wrote:

"Iain" wrote:
Rob Morley wrote:
On Wed, 27 Nov 2013 04:51:09 -0800 (PST)
Derek C wrote:

A hit and run cyclist who critically injured a girl aged 9 after he
knocked her down on a pedestrian crossing is facing jail. He is
being charged with causing grievous bodily harm by Wanton and
Furious Cycling under the 1861 Offences Against the Person Act.
The collision occurred near Poole in Dorset.

No he's not, and even if the charge hadn't been dropped there's no
such offence as "Wanton and Furious Cycling" - IIRC the wording of
the act describes driving a "carriage or other vehicle". Bicycles
as we know them, two wheeled vehicles propelled by pedals (they
still had wooden wheels with iron tyres), had only just been
introduced in 1861 and can't have been in common use.

According to this page:
http://www.roadswerenotbuiltforcars.com/1835highwayact/
In 1878 ... justices Mellor and Lush ... held that bicyclists were
liable to the pains and penalties imposed by the 1835 Highway
Act. ... and justices Mellor and Lush ruled that bicycles were
henceforth to be considered carriages under the law.

I'm not sure what you're trying to illustrate there.

What he is illustrating depends on the meaning of your paragraph quoted
above.

If your point was that "bicycles aren't vehicles within the meaning of
the 1861 Offences Against the Person Act because they hadn't yet been
invented", he was pointing out that the Act does indeed cover bicycles,
as has established by case-law.