Brighton Cyclist 900 quid down

On Oct 9, 6:15*pm, Tony Raven wrote:
Tony Raven wrote:
Derek C wrote:

This incident was reported in this newsgroup before, but I didn't know
it had been caught on camera. The cyclist was spotted by a Police
patrol car riding at night without lights or reflectors on his bike.
He then deliberately rode through a red traffic light and then onto
the pavement. The police pulled him over with some difficulty just to
suggest that it would be a good idea to wheel his light-less bike home
on foot, but being a typical 'You can't touch me because I am a
cyclist and above the law' psycholist, he argued that he hadn't done
anything wrong, despite the above offences all being caught on the
police car video camera, and also being under the influence of drink.
Eventually the Police had to issue him with fixed penalty notices and
had to threaten him with arrest because he wouldn't give them his name
and address. What a knob! I am pleased that the Court decided to make
an example of him and imposed a hefty fine. If he had been a motorist
I am sure that many penalty points and a long driving ban would have
also been imposed.

Could you tell us what the rest of the programme and the episode before
and before that were about? *Only I'm wondering how they keep a whole
series of programmes going on the behaviour of cyclists and what they
fill in the rest of the time with.

Derek, I seemed to have missed your reply. Would you like to tell us
about motorcyclists doing wheelies and power sliding all over the dual
carriageway at speed or doing 150mph on a single carriageway road,
drivers driving unsupervised on provisional licenses and cars with no
lights? *Of course that's all trivial compared to a cyclist riding
without lights isn't it?

At least one of them went to prison and several were fined and banned
banned from riding, a fate that should have also been applied to the
stroppy psycholist IMHO!

According to the police commentary they were hassling the cyclist with
no lights because he was "a danger to himself" whereas the driver with
no lights was just warned "because in a modern car you are safer with
air bags to protect you". *And as pointed out later, the cyclist crossed
the junction on a green light.

But he had already passed a stop line with a light that was clearly on
red. How could he have known that the next set would change to green?
Purely fortuitous. I am personally fed up with cyclists that ride dark
coloured bikes wearing dark coloured clothing with no lights at night.
I have only just got in and passed one such cyclist who was riding at
some speed on the footpath with many pedestrians around, as it is a
Saturday night. These idiots can be very hard to spot from a car on a
dark night. They are risking their lives and those of others, and
breaking the law, so I hope that the Police will take some more action
about these offences

Derek C

On Oct 9, 6:15*pm, Tony Raven wrote:
Tony Raven wrote:
Derek C wrote:

This incident was reported in this newsgroup before, but I didn't know
it had been caught on camera. The cyclist was spotted by a Police
patrol car riding at night without lights or reflectors on his bike.
He then deliberately rode through a red traffic light and then onto
the pavement. The police pulled him over with some difficulty just to
suggest that it would be a good idea to wheel his light-less bike home
on foot, but being a typical 'You can't touch me because I am a
cyclist and above the law' psycholist, he argued that he hadn't done
anything wrong, despite the above offences all being caught on the
police car video camera, and also being under the influence of drink.
Eventually the Police had to issue him with fixed penalty notices and
had to threaten him with arrest because he wouldn't give them his name
and address. What a knob! I am pleased that the Court decided to make
an example of him and imposed a hefty fine. If he had been a motorist
I am sure that many penalty points and a long driving ban would have
also been imposed.

Could you tell us what the rest of the programme and the episode before
and before that were about? *Only I'm wondering how they keep a whole
series of programmes going on the behaviour of cyclists and what they
fill in the rest of the time with.

Derek, I seemed to have missed your reply. Would you like to tell us
about motorcyclists doing wheelies and power sliding all over the dual
carriageway at speed or doing 150mph on a single carriageway road,
drivers driving unsupervised on provisional licenses and cars with no
lights? *Of course that's all trivial compared to a cyclist riding
without lights isn't it?

According to the police commentary they were hassling the cyclist with
no lights because he was "a danger to himself" whereas the driver with
no lights was just warned "because in a modern car you are safer with
air bags to protect you". *And as pointed out later, the cyclist crossed
the junction on a green light.

Tony

He crossed the stop line on a red light at 42.38, have you had your
eyes tested lately, when he crossed the junction does not matter.

Derek C wrote:

I have only just got in and passed one such cyclist who was riding at
some speed on the footpath with many pedestrians around, as it is a
Saturday night. These idiots can be very hard to spot from a car on a
dark night.

Perhaps you shouldn't have been driving on the footpath then.

Tony

Mrcheerful wrote:
Tony Raven wrote:
Mrcheerful wrote:
the other items you refer to would be off topic for this news group
and so were (correctly) not mentioned.

Not at all - they set the cyclists behaviour and his treatment in
context. But I keep forgetting you are the group moderator and can
dictate what can and can't be posted.

But out of interest, which do you think were the most serious crimes
in the programme?

Tony

I reckon The unlicenced driver that lied about her name springs to mind as
being the most likely to hurt someone.
The bikers were being silly, but most showed very high skills at controlling
the bikes, not suitable for the roads of course.
The stupid girl that was travelling too close and ran into the back of the
van should have been done for careless driving at least.
The illegal immigrants should just be put back on the boat and dumped at
sea. What else was there? The cyclist really was such a prat, you just
could not make it up, he epitomises everything bad about cyclists. How
those cops restrain themselves is beyond me, I could not do it, with or
without cameras he would have tripped over several times on the way to the
arrest van.


Good, so we are agreed that of everything that happened on that
programme, the cyclist was a trivial matter. In case you didn't know,
the BBC are extremely good at making entertainment and engineering
situations to make it.

I wouldn't put it beyond them to have done some engineering of the
cyclist situation too.

Tony

On Oct 9, 8:43*pm, Tony Raven wrote:
Derek C wrote:

I have only just got in and passed one such cyclist who was riding at
some speed on the footpath with many pedestrians around, as it is a
Saturday night. These idiots can be very hard to spot from a car on a
dark night.

Perhaps you shouldn't have been driving on the footpath then.

Tony

If you had no useful comment to make. why bother?

Tony Raven wrote:
Mrcheerful wrote:
Tony Raven wrote:
Mrcheerful wrote:
the other items you refer to would be off topic for this news group
and so were (correctly) not mentioned.

Not at all - they set the cyclists behaviour and his treatment in
context. But I keep forgetting you are the group moderator and can
dictate what can and can't be posted.

But out of interest, which do you think were the most serious crimes
in the programme?

Tony

I reckon The unlicenced driver that lied about her name springs to
mind as being the most likely to hurt someone.
The bikers were being silly, but most showed very high skills at
controlling the bikes, not suitable for the roads of course.
The stupid girl that was travelling too close and ran into the back
of the van should have been done for careless driving at least.
The illegal immigrants should just be put back on the boat and
dumped at sea. What else was there? The cyclist really was such a
prat, you just could not make it up, he epitomises everything bad
about cyclists. How those cops restrain themselves is beyond me, I
could not do it, with or without cameras he would have tripped over
several times on the way to the arrest van.


Good, so we are agreed that of everything that happened on that
programme, the cyclist was a trivial matter. In case you didn't know,
the BBC are extremely good at making entertainment and engineering
situations to make it.

I wouldn't put it beyond them to have done some engineering of the
cyclist situation too.

Tony

It started as a trivial matter, but supposing that cyclist had mown someone
down or caused an accident. You either have rules and they get obeyed and
enforced, or you don't. That cyclist was an aggressive accident waiting to
happen, why wait till he hurts someone before stopping him? Was he breaking
multiple laws? and was he repentant? No, on both counts. Put him away I
reckon.

On Oct 9, 8:43*pm, Tony Raven wrote:
Derek C wrote:

I have only just got in and passed one such cyclist who was riding at
some speed on the footpath with many pedestrians around, as it is a
Saturday night. These idiots can be very hard to spot from a car on a
dark night.

Perhaps you shouldn't have been driving on the footpath then.

Tony

I wasn't. I was driving on the carriageway and the cyclist was riding
alongside me on the footpath. I know that there is no marked cycle
path on this bit of footpath.

Derek C

Derek C wrote:
On Oct 9, 8:43 pm, Tony Raven wrote:
Derek C wrote:

I have only just got in and passed one such cyclist who was riding at
some speed on the footpath with many pedestrians around, as it is a
Saturday night. These idiots can be very hard to spot from a car on a
dark night.
Perhaps you shouldn't have been driving on the footpath then.

Tony

I wasn't. I was driving on the carriageway and the cyclist was riding
alongside me on the footpath. I know that there is no marked cycle
path on this bit of footpath.


So why did you need to see him and why did it bother you that he was
unlit if you were on the road and he was on the footpath?

Tony

webreader wrote:
On Oct 9, 8:43 pm, Tony Raven wrote:
Derek C wrote:

I have only just got in and passed one such cyclist who was riding at
some speed on the footpath with many pedestrians around, as it is a
Saturday night. These idiots can be very hard to spot from a car on a
dark night.
Perhaps you shouldn't have been driving on the footpath then.

Tony

If you had no useful comment to make. why bother?

To wind you up.

Tony

Tony Raven wrote:
Derek C wrote:
On Oct 9, 8:43 pm, Tony Raven wrote:
Derek C wrote:

I have only just got in and passed one such cyclist who was riding
at some speed on the footpath with many pedestrians around, as it
is a Saturday night. These idiots can be very hard to spot from a
car on a dark night.
Perhaps you shouldn't have been driving on the footpath then.

Tony

I wasn't. I was driving on the carriageway and the cyclist was riding
alongside me on the footpath. I know that there is no marked cycle
path on this bit of footpath.


So why did you need to see him and why did it bother you that he was
unlit if you were on the road and he was on the footpath?

Tony

some clues are in the dark, busy pavement, speed