Scum driver in the dock for attacking woman

On 07/01/2016 22:46, Tom Crispin wrote:
driving without failing to stop

Really? any idea of which section this comes under?

On Thursday, January 7, 2016 at 11:38:07 PM UTC, Mrcheerful wrote:
On 07/01/2016 22:46, Tom Crispin wrote:
driving without failing to stop

Really? any idea of which section this comes under?

I was quoting the Mail. I too felt that there was an error somewhere in there, but the essence of that section of the report, if not complete rubbish, is that the prosecution case against Dennis Baker is not yet complete.

On 07/01/2016 22:46, Tom Crispin wrote:
On Thursday, January 7, 2016 at 9:27:29 PM UTC, JNugent wrote:
On 07/01/2016 19:51, Tom Crispin wrote:

On Thursday, January 7, 2016 at 6:59:46 PM UTC, Judith wrote:
On Tue, 5 Jan 2016 00:10:31 -0800 (PST), Alycidon wrote:

What nice people these drivers are.
QUOTE:
"A delivery driver deliberately knocked a female cyclist off her bike after she flashed a V-sign at him, a court heard today.
Dennis Baker, 67, was captured on his own onboard CCTV beeping his horn at Alison Kempster and groaning 'Come on get out of the bloody way.'
Annoyed by her sticking two fingers up in response, Baker then pulled up alongside the cyclist and edged closer and closer to her until she fell off into the road, jurors were told."
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...-sign-him.html

Good to see he was only driving carelessly and not dangerously.
He was just a bit unlucky
The suicyclist only managed �1,000 of "compo".
Sounds a good result for him: not so good for the suicyclist.
Now it's all over it will be interesting to see what he thinks and perhaps does
about someone maliciously posting his full address on here with no good reason.

If you call a court bill for £3,100, plus his own costs a "good result", you must be far richer than any cyclist.

But a conviction for *DD* usually results in a custodial, doesn't it? A
"not guilty" for DD, a guilty to CD and a fine and five points sounds
preferable to that. Wouldn't you say?

Coong Duong Voong, who was found guilty of dangerous driving after he killed an innocent cyclist in Greenwich Park, was fined just £2,500.

*Usually*.

Oh - and I note he still hasn't been sentenced for failing to stop. The local beak should deal with that.

Do you think he's going to face another hearing arising out of the same
incident? Is this down to some inside knowledge you might have?

=====Quote=====

He denied a separate offence of driving without failing to stop which has been sent back to the magistrates court to be dealt with.

=====/Quote=====

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...-sign-him.html

Still isn't a foregone conclusion. Do you think the mags will convict
(there's a useful defence to the charge)?

If they do convict, do you think they'll do anything substantial to add
to the fine and five points?

On Thu, 7 Jan 2016 19:51:09 +0000, Norman Rowing wrote:

snip


Bet he wouldn't have been so brave if it had been a male cyclist.
Cowardly ****ing scum.




I don't think that all male cyclists are such: however, I can see how you have
got that impression.

On Friday, January 8, 2016 at 1:39:37 AM UTC, JNugent wrote:
On 07/01/2016 22:46, Tom Crispin wrote:
On Thursday, January 7, 2016 at 9:27:29 PM UTC, JNugent wrote:
On 07/01/2016 19:51, Tom Crispin wrote:

On Thursday, January 7, 2016 at 6:59:46 PM UTC, Judith wrote:
On Tue, 5 Jan 2016 00:10:31 -0800 (PST), Alycidon wrote:

What nice people these drivers are.
QUOTE:
"A delivery driver deliberately knocked a female cyclist off her bike after she flashed a V-sign at him, a court heard today.
Dennis Baker, 67, was captured on his own onboard CCTV beeping his horn at Alison Kempster and groaning 'Come on get out of the bloody way.'
Annoyed by her sticking two fingers up in response, Baker then pulled up alongside the cyclist and edged closer and closer to her until she fell off into the road, jurors were told."
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...-sign-him.html

Good to see he was only driving carelessly and not dangerously.
He was just a bit unlucky
The suicyclist only managed �1,000 of "compo".
Sounds a good result for him: not so good for the suicyclist.
Now it's all over it will be interesting to see what he thinks and perhaps does
about someone maliciously posting his full address on here with no good reason.

If you call a court bill for £3,100, plus his own costs a "good result", you must be far richer than any cyclist.

But a conviction for *DD* usually results in a custodial, doesn't it? A
"not guilty" for DD, a guilty to CD and a fine and five points sounds
preferable to that. Wouldn't you say?

Coong Duong Voong, who was found guilty of dangerous driving after he killed an innocent cyclist in Greenwich Park, was fined just £2,500.

*Usually*.

Oh - and I note he still hasn't been sentenced for failing to stop. The local beak should deal with that.

Do you think he's going to face another hearing arising out of the same
incident? Is this down to some inside knowledge you might have?

=====Quote=====

He denied a separate offence of driving without failing to stop which has been sent back to the magistrates court to be dealt with.

=====/Quote=====

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...-sign-him.html

Still isn't a foregone conclusion. Do you think the mags will convict
(there's a useful defence to the charge)?

If they do convict, do you think they'll do anything substantial to add
to the fine and five points?

It is more than possible that the court were not convinced that Baker of 71 Pembury Avenue, KT4 8BU, deliberately ran into Mrs Kempster, but were convinced that he knew that they had collided. An independent witness gave evidence that Baker's said to him "Really, did I? Did she not run into me?" after Baker was informed that he had knocked someone off their bicycle.

If guilty, and I expect he is, which is why the matter is being sent back to the magistrate's court, there are a number of possibilities:

=====Quote=====
Each offence can result in an instant driving ban, but in normal circumstances, you should expect a means tested fine up to £2,500 and between 5 and 10 penalty points. In extremely serious cases, punishment can include community service, a curfew order or a prison sentence.
=====/Quote=====

On Fri, 8 Jan 2016 01:57:56 -0800 (PST), Tom Crispin wrote:

snip

Quite clearly, despite your protests to the contrary, I have somehow managed to get you very distressed. Purely accidental, I assure you.


Not at all - you are not equipped to do so. I just love pointing out what a
****wit you are - and a truly vindictive person. And of course the posts are
here for posterity
TOM CRISPIN is one of the saddest people on usenet. He is a failed teacher.
He is a well known stalker, having scoured the internet for personal details
of other posters, which he has then posted. These included family photographs of children - and address details.
He publishes the full address details of people who have had an incident with a cyclist.
The only reason he would do this is to encourage vigilante action.
He finds it necessary to tell people on usenet how well off (he thinks) he is, at every opportunity;
he must think people are interested and that they believe him.
He is also a pervert, having described his thoughts of female sex organs sliding down car windscreens.

Tom Crispin is a cyclist and clearly mentally ill.

Norman Rowing wrote:
On 07/01/2016 18:59, Judith wrote:
On Tue, 5 Jan 2016 00:10:31 -0800 (PST), Alycidon
wrote:
What nice people these drivers are.
QUOTE:

"A delivery driver deliberately knocked a female cyclist off her
bike after she flashed a V-sign at him, a court heard today. Dennis
Baker, 67, was captured on his own onboard CCTV beeping his
horn at Alison Kempster and groaning 'Come on get out of the bloody
way.' Annoyed by her sticking two fingers up in response, Baker then
pulled up alongside the cyclist and edged closer and closer to her
until she fell off into the road, jurors were told."
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...-sign-him.html


Good to see he was only driving carelessly and not dangerously.

He was just a bit unlucky

The suicyclist only managed £1,000 of "compo".

Sounds a good result for him: not so good for the suicyclist.

Now it's all over it will be interesting to see what he thinks and
perhaps does about someone maliciously posting his full address on
here with no good reason.

Bet he wouldn't have been so brave if it had been a male cyclist.
Cowardly ****ing scum.

I stopped a *MALE* cyclist after he slammed his fist down on my car roof
because he thought that I had 'nearly run him off the road'.

He was rather angry until I got out of my car and forcibly asked him the
following:

1 How could he expect me to see him in my mirrors when he was approaching
the rear of my car on a very dark and wet morning and an unlit road *without
lights* on his bike or body?

2 If he couldn't afford lights, why wasn't he wearing some high-visibilty
clothing over his black cape and trousers which could possible reflected
enough ambient light to give me a clue that he was there?

3 Why didn't he slow down or stop when he saw my vehicle (with lights and
indicators showing) starting to pull out from the kerb?

4 I asked him if he was qualified to drive a motorised vehicle - and when
his answer was yes!

5 I told him he should know better not to ride a bike in the dark without
lights etc as he was fully aware of how difficult it can be for a vehicle
driver to see such idiotic cyclists.

The upshot of this, that "Cowardly ****ing scum" of a cyclist jumped on his
bike and rapidly fled down the road - to almost hit by another car that was
overtaking my parked vehicle!

Poetic justice.

On Fri, 8 Jan 2016 12:14:07 -0000 (UTC), Alycidon wrote:

On Fri, 08 Jan 2016 09:40:13 +0000, Judith wrote:

SNIP

TOM CRISPIN is one of the saddest people on usenet. He is a failed
teacher.
He is a well known stalker, having scoured the internet for personal
details of other posters, which he has then posted. These included
family photographs of children - and address details.
He publishes the full address details of people who have had an incident
with a cyclist.
The only reason he would do this is to encourage vigilante action.
He finds it necessary to tell people on usenet how well off (he thinks)
he is, at every opportunity;
he must think people are interested and that they believe him.
He is also a pervert, having described his thoughts of female sex
organs sliding down car windscreens.

Tom Crispin is a cyclist and clearly mentally ill.

What was it Sara Merriman said of you?

Oh yes - here it is:

"you are a very nasty piece of work and I'd say the description of you as
a snivelling **** who needs to **** off is about right.


Why thank you : Alycidon

And - thanks for reposting the stuff about Crispin : much appreciated.

On 12/01/2016 09:33, Bod wrote:
On 12/01/2016 09:26, Judith wrote:
On Tue, 12 Jan 2016 00:22:52 -0000, "Let It Be"
wrote:

snap


They should be compulsorily trained, tested, taxed, insured, MoTd and
made
to drive lights on at all times and wear High-Vis clothing.

agreed

You forgot helmets....airbags and ejector
seats/parachute/indicators/mirrors and reversing lights.

Also, bells/kneepads/elbow protectors and shin pads.

--
Bod

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

On Fri, 15 Jan 2016 12:24:06 +0000, Yitzhak Isaac Goldstein wrote:

Let It Be wrote:
Bod wrote:
On 12/01/2016 09:26, Judith wrote:
On Tue, 12 Jan 2016 00:22:52 -0000, "Let It Be"
wrote: snap

They should be compulsorily trained, tested, taxed, insured, MoTd
and made to drive lights on at all times and wear High-Vis clothing.

agreed

You forgot helmets....airbags and ejector
seats/parachute/indicators/mirrors and reversing lights.

Thank you for adding that to the list - but please give you reasons why
cyclists as road users, should be treated differently to others that
use the road. [1]

1. Cyclists use the road as a matter of right at common law, unlike
drivers whose 'right' can be curtailed.

2. Due to lower speed and weight and thus a fraction of the kinetic
energy, the potential for harm is far greater for a car than for a
bicycle.

In short, cyclists are 'treated differently' because they are different
- as well as superior.

Y.

Are they superior?
That is a very subjective assessment.
Every person can find some point of differentness from ny other person.