Police kill cyclist

Story on the BBC

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/s...re/3884467.stm



--

"MSeries" wrote in message
...
Story on the BBC

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/s...re/3884467.stm


I guess it's a bit insensitive, but how did the driver and passenger of the
car sustain injuries? I was a bit surprised to read that.

Nick

Nick Drew wrote:
"MSeries" wrote in message
...

Story on the BBC

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/s...re/3884467.stm



I guess it's a bit insensitive, but how did the driver and passenger of the
car sustain injuries? I was a bit surprised to read that.

Nick



At a guess, I can think of two ways - either they hit, swerved, hit
something else, or something went through the windscreen (ick).

--


Velvet

On Mon, 12 Jul 2004 15:02:27 +0000, Velvet wrote:

Nick Drew wrote:
"MSeries" wrote in message
...

Story on the BBC

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/s...re/3884467.stm



I guess it's a bit insensitive, but how did the driver and passenger of the
car sustain injuries? I was a bit surprised to read that.

Nick



At a guess, I can think of two ways - either they hit, swerved, hit
something else, or something went through the windscreen (ick).
Hate to be cynical, but read the arcticle more closely.
There are no injuries to the policemen.

The article almost makes it sound like "this cyclist ran into a stationary
police car. The cyclist was killed, and the poor policeman are all shaken
up by the incident"


Due sympathy and respect to this poor fellow, and his family who have now
been left husbandless or fatherless.

On Mon, 12 Jul 2004 16:10:37 +0100, John Hearns wrote:
On Mon, 12 Jul 2004 15:02:27 +0000, Velvet wrote:

Nick Drew wrote:
"MSeries" wrote in message
...

Story on the BBC

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/s...re/3884467.stm



I guess it's a bit insensitive, but how did the driver and passenger of the
car sustain injuries? I was a bit surprised to read that.

Nick



At a guess, I can think of two ways - either they hit, swerved, hit
something else, or something went through the windscreen (ick).
Hate to be cynical, but read the arcticle more closely.
There are no injuries to the policemen.

Reading the article closely, there were minor injuries to the policemen.

The article almost makes it sound like "this cyclist ran into a stationary
police car. The cyclist was killed, and the poor policeman are all shaken
up by the incident"

Reading the article closely, it says nothing about the circumstances of
the incident. How is assuming anything about it given the information
in the article helpful? Is it really not possible that, even were the
policement *entirely* to blame, they would not require treatment for shock?
Is it also not possible that they might not have been entirely to blame
for whatever happened? Reading the article partiularly closely, I fail
to see how it could have been more neutral in both content and tone.

Due sympathy and respect to this poor fellow, and his family who have now
been left husbandless or fatherless.

Reading the article closely, there is no indication that the man was either
a husband or a father. While this is entirely possible, are you not
perhaps reading more into the facts you have at your disposal than might
be justified by the content of the article you so cynically critique?

--
Trevor Barton

On Mon, 12 Jul 2004 15:31:22 +0000, Trevor Barton wrote:



Reading the article closely, there were minor injuries to the policemen.

The article almost makes it sound like "this cyclist ran into a stationary
police car. The cyclist was killed, and the poor policeman are all shaken
up by the incident"

Reading the article closely, it says nothing about the circumstances of
the incident.

I realise that. Let me make try to make this clearer - the words in the
article are slanted in a certain way. It does use the word "accident"
(twice) with no justification if you follow your logic (*). The mental
image they put in my mind is the one I've described.

I'm no good at doing this, but let's say the article said:
"A police car collided with a cyclist on the Rotherham Road.
The cyclist was killed, but the officers escaped with minor injuries"

Sorry, I really don't want to pick a fight with you,
especially over such a tragic story.


(*) the article pre-judges that this was an "accident".

Nick Drew opined the following...
I guess it's a bit insensitive, but how did the driver and passenger of the
car sustain injuries? I was a bit surprised to read that.

The shock made them choke on their doughnuts?

Jon (Who does insensitive remarkably well!)

On Mon, 12 Jul 2004 07:51:13 GMT, MSeries
wrote:

Story on the BBC

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/s...re/3884467.stm

This report supplies some additional details:

http://news.scotsman.com/latest.cfm?id=3189113

Cyclist Killed

By Rod Minchin, PA News

A cyclist was killed today in a collision with a police patrol car.

The crash happened shortly after midnight at Rotherham Road, Maltby,
South Yorkshire.

The cyclist, who police are attempting to identify, was pronounced
dead on arrival at Rotherham District General Hospital.

The Independent Police Complaints Commission is investigating the
circumstances surrounding the fatal crash.

The man was riding his bike towards Hellaby when he collided head-on
with a police car.

The two male officers suffered minor injuries and shock, a South
Yorkshire Police spokesman said.

"We are appealing for witnesses and anyone with information about the
incident to come forward," he said.

"We also need help to identify the cyclist. He is a white man, in his
early 40s, of medium build, with brown hair and had tattoos on both
arms.

"He was wearing a black leather waistcoat, dark trousers, and dark
shoes."

On Mon, 12 Jul 2004 23:24:51 +0100, Marc Brett wrote:



The two male officers suffered minor injuries and shock, a South
Yorkshire Police spokesman said.


snipped

"We also need help to identify the cyclist.

snipped

"He was wearing a black leather waistcoat, dark trousers, and dark
shoes."

Note the cynical attempt to place the blame on the cyclist because he was
wearing dark clothing.
--
Michael MacClancy
Random putdown - "I've just learned about his illness. Let's hope it's
nothing trivial." - Irvin S. Cobb
www.macclancy.demon.co.uk
www.macclancy.co.uk

On Tue, 13 Jul 2004 07:22:15 +0100, Michael MacClancy wrote:



Note the cynical attempt to place the blame on the cyclist because he was
wearing dark clothing.
And why not:
"The police car was travelling in the direction of ??? when
it collided head on with a bicycle"