Cyclist mega denial

This one's a cracker:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...irl-three.html


All the ingredients for a psycholist:

a) He's the victim, not the perpetrator
b) It wasn't his fault
c) The video we have all seen has been "edited"
d) He denies hurling abuse at the family
e) It wasn't a hit and run
f) He's emailed an apology, so that's alright
g) He didn't know that cycling on the pavement was illegal
h) He had fallen off his bike and was in shock
i) The outcry following his behaviour has "destroyed his life"

I reckon he must post on here, because we've all seen that sort of ****e on
here before, haven't we?

On 25/05/2015 16:23, Tarcap wrote:

This one's a cracker:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...irl-three.html

All the ingredients for a psycholist:

a) He's the victim, not the perpetrator
b) It wasn't his fault
c) The video we have all seen has been "edited"
d) He denies hurling abuse at the family
e) It wasn't a hit and run
f) He's emailed an apology, so that's alright
g) He didn't know that cycling on the pavement was illegal
h) He had fallen off his bike and was in shock
i) The outcry following his behaviour has "destroyed his life"

I reckon he must post on here, because we've all seen that sort of ****e
on here before, haven't we?

QUOTE
Section 72 of the Highway Act 1835 makes it a criminal offence to ‘lead
or drive’ a ‘carriage of any description’ on any footpath set apart for
the use of foot passengers.
The maximum court fine is £500 or the police can issue a £50 fixed
penalty notice.
ENDQUOTE

Let's all hope that this case is going to court, because a £50 FPN is
nowhere near enough to address the sheer selfish wantonness of this
incident.

Then there's the little matter of compensation for injuries...

"JNugent" wrote in message ...

On 25/05/2015 16:23, Tarcap wrote:

This one's a cracker:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...irl-three.html

All the ingredients for a psycholist:

a) He's the victim, not the perpetrator
b) It wasn't his fault
c) The video we have all seen has been "edited"
d) He denies hurling abuse at the family
e) It wasn't a hit and run
f) He's emailed an apology, so that's alright
g) He didn't know that cycling on the pavement was illegal
h) He had fallen off his bike and was in shock
i) The outcry following his behaviour has "destroyed his life"

I reckon he must post on here, because we've all seen that sort of ****e
on here before, haven't we?

QUOTE
Section 72 of the Highway Act 1835 makes it a criminal offence to ‘lead
or drive’ a ‘carriage of any description’ on any footpath set apart for
the use of foot passengers.
The maximum court fine is £500 or the police can issue a £50 fixed
penalty notice.
ENDQUOTE

Let's all hope that this case is going to court, because a £50 FPN is
nowhere near enough to address the sheer selfish wantonness of this
incident.

Then there's the little matter of compensation for injuries...

S'alright - his fridge/ freezer should cover that.

"Tarcap" wrote in message
...
This one's a cracker:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...irl-three.html


All the ingredients for a psycholist:

a) He's the victim, not the perpetrator
b) It wasn't his fault
c) The video we have all seen has been "edited"
d) He denies hurling abuse at the family
e) It wasn't a hit and run
f) He's emailed an apology, so that's alright
g) He didn't know that cycling on the pavement was illegal
h) He had fallen off his bike and was in shock
i) The outcry following his behaviour has "destroyed his life"

I reckon he must post on here, because we've all seen that sort of ****e
on here before, haven't we?
There is stinking council estate close to where he mowed the kid down.
Scum like him come from there.

On Mon, 25 May 2015 16:23:23 +0100, Tarcap wrote:

****wit:

Thanks very much for that great compliment!
Now please bestow on me the further honour from you of being
hypocritical, greedy, violent, and malevolent.

"Peter Keller" wrote in message ...

On Mon, 25 May 2015 16:23:23 +0100, Tarcap wrote:

****wit:

Thanks very much for that great compliment!
Now please bestow on me the further honour from you of being
hypocritical, greedy, violent, and malevolent.

Ho Hum, here we go again:

Why do people choose to describe themselves as ****wits?

Could it be because they are?

On Tue, 26 May 2015 11:29:34 +0100, Tarcap wrote:

Why do people choose to describe themselves as ****wits?

You described me as a ****wit.
I take that as a great compliment.
After all I am a bicyclist.
And we know what you think of people who use bicycles.
End of.

"Peter Keller" wrote in message ...

On Tue, 26 May 2015 11:29:34 +0100, Tarcap wrote:

Why do people choose to describe themselves as ****wits?

You described me as a ****wit.
I take that as a great compliment.
After all I am a bicyclist.
And we know what you think of people who use bicycles.
End of.

Once yet again, could you please point out where I described you as a
****wit?
(other than not contradicting your own description of yourself)

Hopefully, without any wriggling this time.

On Wed, 27 May 2015 11:54:47 +0100, Tarcap wrote:

You described me as a ****wit.
I take that as a great compliment.
After all I am a bicyclist.
And we know what you think of people who use bicycles.
End of.

"A common synonym for 'psycholist' is '****wit'" JM Smith.

You described me as a ****wit.
I take that as a great compliment.
After all I am a bicyclist.
And we know what you think of people who use bicycles.
End of.

"Peter Keller" wrote in message ...

On Wed, 27 May 2015 11:54:47 +0100, Tarcap wrote:

You described me as a ****wit.
I take that as a great compliment.
After all I am a bicyclist.
And we know what you think of people who use bicycles.
End of.

"A common synonym for 'psycholist' is '****wit'" JM Smith.

You described me as a ****wit.
I take that as a great compliment.
After all I am a bicyclist.
And we know what you think of people who use bicycles.
End of.

Once again, please show me where I called you a ****wit, other than choosing
not to disagree with you when you called yourself a ****wit.
Try and keep the wriggling down a bit, though - it's getting all too
predictable.