Just a fine for cyclist that ran down a solicitor

On Jul 5, 12:09*pm, Ian Smith wrote:

The fridge freezer insurance bit is because John Benn can't argue
with the facts, so prefers to make up nonsense and pretend that
someone else said the nonsense he made up. *It seems this makes him
feel clever. *I don't know why.

I suggest he shows the classic behaviour of a school bully's pet dog.

On Thu, 5 Jul 2012 12:40:26 +0100, "Partac"
wrote:



"Phil W Lee" wrote in message
.. .

Squashme considered Wed, 4 Jul 2012 01:54:32
-0700 (PDT) the perfect time to write:

On Wednesday, July 4, 2012 8:31:34 AM UTC+1, Mrcheerful wrote:
Despite causing brain damage to the pedestrian that he mowed down at
26mph
the cyclist does not even get a ban from the road or prison time, merely
a
fine.

So, 85% of the maximum allowable penalty.
How often do dangerous drivers get anything like that harsh a
treatment?

However, civil proceedings are to follow, so I hope his fridge freezer
insurance is in order since the loss of a career as a solicitor is going
to
be very expensive, and the payout will come from every pocket in the land
(in effect)

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/public...cle3464777.ece

Mark Cavendish makes a useful suggestion:-

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/public...cle3451896.ece

"The fastest man on two wheels says that if drivers knew that they would
face harsh penalties if they knocked down a cyclist they would pay more
attention and safety would improve."

The same should apply in cyclist/pedestrian collisions. It would
concentrate the mind. It should not be necessary, but there you are.

Apparently, in 2009 in the Brussels Region:- "A driver or cyclist who
ignores a red light can get a fine of 150 euro. A pedestrian up to 50
euro."

A driver should get a harsher penalty, as their choice of vehicle
poses a much greater threat.

In a similar case to the one prompting this thread, a motorist would
probably be fined about 80 quid (if that).
If 26mph is a dangerous speed for a bicycle in that location,
shouldn't it be something like 10mph for cars?
Of course, a motorist in that situation would be regarded as having an
absolute defence in that he was traveling within the speed limit.

Note that despite Cheerless' wild accusations, it was NOT a pedestrian
crossing - the solicitor stepped out into traffic entirely on his own
responsibility, and without any sight of what light indication the
cyclist had.

As usual, you are trying to make it appear that it was the pedestrian's
fault ; read this bit again :

...........Schipka, 44, an IT manager with Commerzbank who has cycled in
London for ten years, was also travelling to work when he skipped the red
light. Witnesses said that he shouted “Oi, move” as he saw Mr Hyer step into
the road. Schipka went over his handlebars but neither he nor his bike was
damaged..................

Did you miss the bit about *skipping the red light*, or the bit about him
shouting *Oi, move*, and also the bit about him seeing Mr.Hyer step into the
road?
You will never gain any credibility as long as you keep on cherrypicking
which parts of the story that suit you.

Coong Duong Voong, 59, of Red Barracks Road, Woolwich, pleaded guilty
at Woolwich Crown Court on February 28 2008 to causing death by
dangerous driving when he drove his car into a cyclist in Greenwich
Park while driving on the wrong side of the road on June 26 2007.

He was fined £2,500.

On 05/07/2012 14:39, Bertie Wooster wrote:
On Thu, 5 Jul 2012 12:40:26 +0100, "Partac"
wrote:



"Phil W Lee" wrote in message
...

Squashme considered Wed, 4 Jul 2012 01:54:32
-0700 (PDT) the perfect time to write:

On Wednesday, July 4, 2012 8:31:34 AM UTC+1, Mrcheerful wrote:
Despite causing brain damage to the pedestrian that he mowed down at
26mph
the cyclist does not even get a ban from the road or prison time, merely
a
fine.

So, 85% of the maximum allowable penalty.
How often do dangerous drivers get anything like that harsh a
treatment?

However, civil proceedings are to follow, so I hope his fridge freezer
insurance is in order since the loss of a career as a solicitor is going
to
be very expensive, and the payout will come from every pocket in the land
(in effect)

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/public...cle3464777.ece

Mark Cavendish makes a useful suggestion:-

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/public...cle3451896.ece

"The fastest man on two wheels says that if drivers knew that they would
face harsh penalties if they knocked down a cyclist they would pay more
attention and safety would improve."

The same should apply in cyclist/pedestrian collisions. It would
concentrate the mind. It should not be necessary, but there you are.

Apparently, in 2009 in the Brussels Region:- "A driver or cyclist who
ignores a red light can get a fine of 150 euro. A pedestrian up to 50
euro."

A driver should get a harsher penalty, as their choice of vehicle
poses a much greater threat.

In a similar case to the one prompting this thread, a motorist would
probably be fined about 80 quid (if that).
If 26mph is a dangerous speed for a bicycle in that location,
shouldn't it be something like 10mph for cars?
Of course, a motorist in that situation would be regarded as having an
absolute defence in that he was traveling within the speed limit.

Note that despite Cheerless' wild accusations, it was NOT a pedestrian
crossing - the solicitor stepped out into traffic entirely on his own
responsibility, and without any sight of what light indication the
cyclist had.

As usual, you are trying to make it appear that it was the pedestrian's
fault ; read this bit again :

...........Schipka, 44, an IT manager with Commerzbank who has cycled in
London for ten years, was also travelling to work when he skipped the red
light. Witnesses said that he shouted “Oi, move” as he saw Mr Hyer step into
the road. Schipka went over his handlebars but neither he nor his bike was
damaged..................

Did you miss the bit about *skipping the red light*, or the bit about him
shouting *Oi, move*, and also the bit about him seeing Mr.Hyer step into the
road?
You will never gain any credibility as long as you keep on cherrypicking
which parts of the story that suit you.

Coong Duong Voong, 59, of Red Barracks Road, Woolwich, pleaded guilty
at Woolwich Crown Court on February 28 2008 to causing death by
dangerous driving when he drove his car into a cyclist in Greenwich
Park while driving on the wrong side of the road on June 26 2007.

He was fined £2,500.

And?

On Wed, 04 Jul 2012 20:04:41 +0100, Dave - Cyclists VOR wrote:

thick ****?

I thought you loved thick ****s. Not getting any?



--
Never trust a man in a suit.

On 05/07/2012 12:09, Ian Smith wrote:
On Wed, 4 Jul 2012 15:40:05 +0100, John Benn wrote:
"M Wicks" wrote in message
...
On Jul 4, 8:31 am, "Mrcheerful" wrote:

However, civil proceedings are to follow, so I hope his fridge
freezer insurance is in order

Fridge freezer insurance???????????????

Believe it or not, some mad cyclists claim that household insurance covers
them against any third part claims.

That is because it generally does cover third party claims arising
from cycling (note that no-one has claimed it covers "any third party
claims" - that's more lies).

No-one that denies this has managed to find a single policy document
that doesn't, though many that do have been both cited and quoted.

Yes of course it does dear. Matron will be along soon.....
--
Dave - Cyclists VOR. "Many people barely recognise the bicycle as a
legitimate mode of transport; it is either a toy for children or a
vehicle fit only for the poor and/or strange," Dave Horton - Lancaster
University

On Jul 4, 8:31*am, "Mrcheerful" wrote:
Despite causing brain damage to the pedestrian that he mowed down at 26mph
the cyclist does not even get a ban from the road or prison time, merely a
fine.

However, civil proceedings are to follow, so I hope his fridge freezer
insurance is in order since the loss of a career as a solicitor is going to
be very expensive, and the payout will come from every pocket in the land
(in effect)

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/public...cle3464777.ece

Do make up your mind. If a pedestrian steps out into a road right in
front of an oncoming vehicle who is to blame when they crash? You and
other motorists here keep telling us its the pedestrian's fault if
they are hit by a car.

-- .
A driving licence is sometimes a licence to kill.

"Doug" wrote in message
...

On Jul 4, 8:31 am, "Mrcheerful" wrote:
Despite causing brain damage to the pedestrian that he mowed down at 26mph
the cyclist does not even get a ban from the road or prison time, merely a
fine.

However, civil proceedings are to follow, so I hope his fridge freezer
insurance is in order since the loss of a career as a solicitor is going
to
be very expensive, and the payout will come from every pocket in the land
(in effect)

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/public...cle3464777.ece

Do make up your mind. If a pedestrian steps out into a road right in
front of an oncoming vehicle who is to blame when they crash? You and
other motorists here keep telling us its the pedestrian's fault if
they are hit by a car.

Doug , I have never seen anyone claim that stepping out in front of an
oncoming vehicle *that has jumped a red light* would be the pedestrians
fault, which is exactly what has happened here.
You must try and get a grip with this selective reading disorder that you
appear to be suffering from- it's not doing much for your credibility.

Doug wrote:
On Jul 4, 8:31 am, "Mrcheerful" wrote:
Despite causing brain damage to the pedestrian that he mowed down at
26mph the cyclist does not even get a ban from the road or prison
time, merely a fine.

However, civil proceedings are to follow, so I hope his fridge
freezer insurance is in order since the loss of a career as a
solicitor is going to be very expensive, and the payout will come
from every pocket in the land (in effect)

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/public...cle3464777.ece

Do make up your mind. If a pedestrian steps out into a road right in
front of an oncoming vehicle who is to blame when they crash? You and
other motorists here keep telling us its the pedestrian's fault if
they are hit by a car.

-- .
A driving licence is sometimes a licence to kill.

I have never said that. Pedestrians are usually visible before they step
into the road and astute road users know that and manage to avoid them,
certainly I do, as do millions of road users every day
All road users do some really stupid things, and it is all road users
responsibility to make every effort to reduce the likelihood of that
becoming a crash. In this case the cyclists speed was excessive and he went
through a red light, as a regular commuter he must know that pedestrians
cross the road a lot in London, he had time to shout, yet did not stop. His
use of the road was dangerous, and he should be banned from using it, at
least temporarily.
He got pretty close to the maximum sentence for the ofence he was charged
with. The tariff for this offence is too low for its gravity. After all, a
rich cyclist could pay that out of his daily bonus, I am sure.

On 06/07/2012 08:20, Doug wrote:

On Jul 4, 8:31 am, "Mrcheerful" wrote:

Despite causing brain damage to the pedestrian that he mowed down at 26mph
the cyclist does not even get a ban from the road or prison time, merely a
fine.
However, civil proceedings are to follow, so I hope his fridge freezer
insurance is in order since the loss of a career as a solicitor is going to
be very expensive, and the payout will come from every pocket in the land
(in effect)

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/public...cle3464777.ece

Do make up your mind. If a pedestrian steps out into a road right in
front of an oncoming vehicle who is to blame when they crash? You and
other motorists here keep telling us its the pedestrian's fault if
they are hit by a car.

The answer is so simple that even you understand it (though you are currently
acting daft by pretending that you don't).

(1) *If*, on a highway, a pedestrian - or any other road user, including a
cyclist - (let's call him "A") deliberately or negligently moves into the
near path of another road user ("B"), with such little notice that B cannot
feasibly be stopped or diverted, any resulting collision is the fault of A,
etc, who has acted negligently (or deliberately) by unreasonably (and
possibly unlawfully) moving into the path of B.

(2) *If*, OTOH, on a highway, a pedestrian - or any other road user,
including a cyclist (let's call him "A") - lawfully, deliberately or
negligently (it absolutely doesn't matter which) moves into the near path of
another road user ("B"), but this time with so much notice that B certainly
*can* be stopped or diverted, but B simply doesn't bother to do or attempt to
do either thing, any collision is the fault of B, etc, who has acted
negligently (or deliberately) by failing to follow basic safety rules (ie,
braking to a halt, as required).

The instant case closely resembles (2) (how closely is for a court to decide)
and it does not resemble (1) at all.

On Jul 6, 8:33*am, "Mrcheerful" wrote:
Doug wrote:
On Jul 4, 8:31 am, "Mrcheerful" wrote:
Despite causing brain damage to the pedestrian that he mowed down at
26mph the cyclist does not even get a ban from the road or prison
time, merely a fine.

However, civil proceedings are to follow, so I hope his fridge
freezer insurance is in order since the loss of a career as a
solicitor is going to be very expensive, and the payout will come
from every pocket in the land (in effect)

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/public...cle3464777.ece

Do make up your mind. If a pedestrian steps out into a road right in
front of an oncoming vehicle who is to blame when they crash? *You and
other motorists here keep telling us its the pedestrian's fault if
they are hit by a car.

-- .
A driving licence is sometimes a licence to kill.

I have never said that. *Pedestrians are usually visible before they step
into the road and astute road users know that and manage to avoid them,
certainly I do, as do millions of road users every day
All road users do some really stupid things, and it is all road users
responsibility to make every effort to reduce the likelihood of that
becoming a crash. *In this case the cyclists speed was excessive and he went

wHY was his speed excessive, do you mean for a non-motorised vehicle?

through a red light, as a regular commuter he must know that pedestrians

There is no evidence he passed a red light, he denies it.

cross the road a lot in London, he had time to shout, yet did not stop. *His

One should ask oneself why a successful solicitor "who had finally got
to the top of the greasy pole" in the words of his lawful wife would
cross a busy 6 lane road without the use of a signalled crossing.

use of the road was dangerous, and he should be banned from using it, at
least temporarily.
He got pretty close to the maximum sentence for the ofence he was charged
with. *The tariff for this offence is too low for its gravity. *After all, a
rich cyclist could pay that out of his daily bonus, I am sure.

Looks like a stitch up.