Pedestrian killed by cyclist in London

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/londo...-a3198936.html

On 09/03/2016 09:02, MrCheerful wrote:

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/londo...-a3198936.html

No details apart from there were no arrests.
Meanwhile:

*Baby dies after being hit by car at Hyde Park Gate*
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-35752992

**** happens in all forms of transport.

ps; and don't say that this is off topic, Mr Cheerless, because
I'm simply showing you a comparison.

Oh and this one is on topic:

*Cyclists pushed into canal in west London*

"Six incidents in which cyclists were pushed into a canal in west London
are being linked by police".

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-35754375
--
Bod

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

On 09/03/2016 09:21, Bod wrote:
On 09/03/2016 09:02, MrCheerful wrote:

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/londo...-a3198936.html


No details apart from there were no arrests.
Meanwhile:

*Baby dies after being hit by car at Hyde Park Gate*
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-35752992

**** happens in all forms of transport.

ps; and don't say that this is off topic, Mr Cheerless, because
I'm simply showing you a comparison.

Oh and this one is on topic:

*Cyclists pushed into canal in west London*

"Six incidents in which cyclists were pushed into a canal in west London
are being linked by police".

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-35754375

as this group is about cycling, items that do not involve cyclists are
off topic, just ask Simon, it is in the charter for the group.

"MrCheerful" wrote

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/londo...-a3198936.html

So how was the bicycle involved? When a motorist is in the fray, the press
only seem to mention the vehicle they happened to be driving.

And an interesting difference between the link -
"...killed-after-being-ploughed-into-by-a-cyclist..."
and the headline -
"...killed after crash with a cyclist"

(hmm... so they're saying it was deliberate even before the police have
reached a decision?)

On 09/03/2016 10:42, TMS320 wrote:
"MrCheerful" wrote

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/londo...-a3198936.html

So how was the bicycle involved? When a motorist is in the fray, the press
only seem to mention the vehicle they happened to be driving.

And an interesting difference between the link -
"...killed-after-being-ploughed-into-by-a-cyclist..."
and the headline -
"...killed after crash with a cyclist"

(hmm... so they're saying it was deliberate even before the police have
reached a decision?)



They use the word killed, not murdered. If the cyclist caused her
death, then he killed her.

"MrCheerful" wrote
On 09/03/2016 10:42, TMS320 wrote:
"MrCheerful" wrote

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/londo...-a3198936.html

So how was the bicycle involved? When a motorist is in the fray, the
press
only seem to mention the vehicle they happened to be driving.

And an interesting difference between the link -
"...killed-after-being-ploughed-into-by-a-cyclist..."
and the headline -
"...killed after crash with a cyclist"

(hmm... so they're saying it was deliberate even before the police have
reached a decision?)

They use the word killed, not murdered. If the cyclist caused her death,
then he killed her.

So? If she had been killed by a motorist, the usual phrase is "killed in a
collision with a car"; the person at the controls of the car, the motorist,
is hardly ever involved.

On 09/03/2016 10:42, TMS320 wrote:
"MrCheerful" wrote

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/londo...-a3198936.html

So how was the bicycle involved?

It is reported as having ploughed into the victim. I expect you think
that something turns on the use of "cyclist" as opposed to "bicycle".

When a motorist is in the fray, the press
only seem to mention the vehicle they happened to be driving.

Normal English idiom. There is no hidden meaning. Perhaps you've been
reading too much Dan Brown.

And an interesting difference between the link -
"...killed-after-being-ploughed-into-by-a-cyclist..."
and the headline -
"...killed after crash with a cyclist"

(hmm... so they're saying it was deliberate even before the police have
reached a decision?)

Let alone a court, eh?

Just like "Alycidon" does all the time here, without a murmur of
criticism from you.

What's different this time, I wonder...

JNugent wrote:
On 09/03/2016 10:42, TMS320 wrote:

When a motorist is in the fray, the press only seem to mention the
vehicle they happened to be driving.

Normal English idiom.

No it isn't.

There is no hidden meaning.

The 'meaning' of course is not 'hidden' at all. It is the cultural and
judicial impunity to which psychopaths have become accustomed because
'everybody drives'.

--
john smith |MA (Hons)|MPhil (Hons)|CAPES (mention très bien)|LLB (Hons)
'It never gets any easier. You just get faster'
(Greg LeMond (1961 - ))

"JNugent" wrote
On 09/03/2016 10:42, TMS320 wrote:
"MrCheerful" wrote

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/londo...-a3198936.html

So how was the bicycle involved?

It is reported as having ploughed into the victim. I expect you think that
something turns on the use of "cyclist" as opposed to "bicycle".

No reason they shouldn't be consistent.

When a motorist is in the fray, the press
only seem to mention the vehicle they happened to be driving.

Normal English idiom.

And?

There is no hidden meaning. Perhaps you've been reading too much Dan
Brown.

And an interesting difference between the link -
"...killed-after-being-ploughed-into-by-a-cyclist..."
and the headline -
"...killed after crash with a cyclist"

(hmm... so they're saying it was deliberate even before the police have
reached a decision?)

Let alone a court, eh?

Just like "Alycidon" does all the time here, without a murmur of criticism
from you.

What's different this time, I wonder...

I did not know he was a journalist. What leads you to imagine otherwise?

On 09/03/2016 13:25, TMS320 wrote:

"JNugent" wrote
On 09/03/2016 10:42, TMS320 wrote:
"MrCheerful" wrote

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/londo...-a3198936.html

So how was the bicycle involved?

It is reported as having ploughed into the victim. I expect you think that
something turns on the use of "cyclist" as opposed to "bicycle".

No reason they shouldn't be consistent.

Indeed. And nalso o reason why they should have to. Being able to vary
style, eg, using synonyms throughout a piece to avoid repetition, etc,
is often thought of as a mark of good writing.

When a motorist is in the fray, the press
only seem to mention the vehicle they happened to be driving.

Normal English idiom.

And?

And there's nothing wrong with it?

There is no hidden meaning. Perhaps you've been reading too much Dan
Brown.

And an interesting difference between the link -
"...killed-after-being-ploughed-into-by-a-cyclist..."
and the headline -
"...killed after crash with a cyclist"

(hmm... so they're saying it was deliberate even before the police have
reached a decision?)

Let alone a court, eh?
Just like "Alycidon" does all the time here, without a murmur of criticism
from you.
What's different this time, I wonder...

I did not know he was a journalist. What leads you to imagine otherwise?

He's not a journalist. He's a very naughty boy.