[Closed] Cyclist jailed

Violent nutcase jailed more like.

Wasnt this a thread on here a while back when they were looking for him?

He killed somebodies dad,brother,son, etc, got caught and has gone to prison, end of story.

What would others want if a cyclist had kiled someone close to you, no matter how they did it.

He is a violent nutter with mental problems. Who happened to also own a bike. Cyclists are not a separate race, they are humans with bicycles.

I knew there were some bells going off in my head when I saw this thread.

http://www.singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/naughty-cyclists-in-sussex

As long as the killer of Ian Tomlinson receives a similar punishment, then fair enough...

Depends whether a jury convicts Tomlinson's alleged killer in a fair trial.......

**** killed an innocent man 18 months WTF IS WRONG WITH THE JUDGE WAS HE ON SMACK! I just hope karma come's back the MURDERER HIS BARRISTER AN THE JUDGE!

18 months is a joke, it really is.
He's going walk free in less than a year.
A joke.

18 months is a joke, it really is.

Why is it?

One single punch, following an event where the cyclist may have felt their safety/life may have bin in danger, reacted in anger in the heat of the moment, no intention to kill, no pre-meditated intention to attack or cause harm, and the defendant gave himself up and pleaded guilty to manslaughter.

Fairly proportionate sentence imo. Of course, an emotional reaction is perhaps to call for a much tougher sentence, but how would Justice and Society be best served if the sentence were in fact harsher?

If Justice is indeed as blind and egalitarian as is claimed, then the killer of Ian Tomlinson will be getting a much longer sentence...

One single punch, following an event where the cyclist may have felt their safety/life may have bin in danger, reacted in anger in the heat of the moment, no intention to kill

But he did. No defence IMO.

I'm with fred.

Shudders....

[i]He is a violent nutter with mental problems. Who happened to also own a bike. Cyclists are not a separate race, they are humans with bicycles. [/i]

Totally +1. It's ridiculous. He probably owns a kettle too but they don't say 'Man who likes a nice cup of tea kills someone' do they?

However, there is a very clear line in Britain about going around killing people. If you drive over someone in a car, you will almost certainly be home pretty quickly and at the most, get a fine and a ban of some description. If you kill someone while riding a bike, you will almost certainly go to jail, statistically that is.

I agree with Elfinsafety, sounds more like the intentions were probably nothing more than to give the guy that died a 'bloody nose and something to think about' rather than any real malicious intent to murder him, had he also been kicking the unconscious victim about the head while on the ground etc..then I might believe that but at present I'm not so sure.

I'm not surprised to see the situation 'hyped up' on a forum though, good example being that he's been described as 'a violent nutter with mental problems', now forgive me if I missed the story somewhere but I don't remember seeing a report on that in the press?

He punched a man in the face, the violence part can't be denied, but now he's some kinda escapee from a mental institution as well is he?
So every time someone is punched in the face around the world, (just imagine how common that is) the person doing the punching is a 'nutter with mental problems'?

I think not. 🙄

Agree with Elfin and others. The key in this is intent.

following an event where the cyclist may have felt their safety/life may have bin in danger, reacted in anger in the heat of the moment, no intention to kill, no pre-meditated intention to attack or cause harm,

Many of those arguments could also apply to Tomlinson's killer-wound up by crowds, doing his best to maintain public order and safety in difficult circumstances, etc etc.I think I'll bookmark this thread for when his verdict is given.

EDIT I see if was a psychotic off his meds which must have mitigated sentencing.

That report contains none of your stuff tho Fred...did you make that up?

Many of those arguments could also apply to Tomlinson's killer-wound up by crowds, doing his best to maintain public order and safety in difficult circumstances, etc etc.I think I'll bookmark this thread for when his verdict is given.

Fail. The killer of Tomlinson had a history of trouble, had disobeyed an order and went looking for trouble. In addition to this the police as a whole were undoutably under orders to stamp out trouble.

Not the same in any way, please utilise brain in future. Ta. 😉

Note use of word "could" - I know as little about him as Fred does about this killer.

I was just pointing out that little Fred had made up a bunch of stuff that wasn't in the report to suit his devil's advocacy.

Agree with Elfin and others. The key in this is intent.

Yup, intent to do harm, which he clearly had & responsibility for any consequences that intent may have caused

If I'd been the judge he'd be looking at 5+

Note use of the word "fail".

I cannot believe that Fred would simply pluck 'facts' out of the air, it just wouldn't happen. 😀

As ever with stuff like this we get the charge, the sentence and a couple of largely irrelevant factoids. Sloppy journalism.

18 months is **** all. So why'd he get it? Must have been a [b]number[/b] of mitigating circumstances that haven't been reported. I reckon Fred is on the right track.

18mths for manslaughter is the minimum sentence iirc

sad story, that really has nothing to do with 'cyclists' at all...

I wonder how this thread would have gone if the roles were reversed and it was the driver that punched the cyclist to death after an altercation on the road.

I suspect there's have been calls to bring back hanging

punched the cyclist/driver to death

That wasn't really what happened though was it. It was a single punch which caused the driver to fall, which ultimately caused the death. Punched to death makes it sound like a sustained attack, which would be worse and would deserve a bigger sentence -> IMHO.

He probably owns a kettle too but they don't say 'Man who likes a nice cup of tea kills someone' do they?

-1

Point taken and I'm quick to criticise reporting like this too but in this case the cyclist bit was relevant to the case and the story, seeing as he was on his bike at the time. Your comment did make me chuckle, so +0.5 back for that 😉

Difficult one, and while I feel very sorry for the family of the guy who died, there does not appear to have been any intent to kill.

It's the sort of incident that happens hundreds, if not thousands of times any day of the week and both parties walk away without much harm being done. I know of at least two similar incidents (resulting in the death of the person punched) in which the assailant has not gone to jail, or even as far as court.

Could be said that sometimes your luck is just shit-out, for both parties.

Thin skull doctrine innit.

My guess is the mental health thing was the main factor, tho imo if he had awareness of what stopping meds did you'd think the sentence should reflect that responsibility.

The guy had mental health issues and wasn't taking his meds, but was in possession of cannabis. Not a great combination. A sad story for all involved, especially the victim and his family.

I was just pointing out that little Fred had made up a bunch of stuff that wasn't in the report to suit his devil's advocacy.

No I jolly well have not. You've just made it up that I've made stuff up. 😉

What I said was:

the cyclist [b]may have[/b] felt their safety/life [b]may have[/b] bin in danger, reacted in anger in the heat of the moment

Note the words 'may have'. Just trying to understand what [b]might[/b] have happened.

According to reports I've read linked from here, there was an argument between the driver and 3 cyclists, which culminated in one bloke punching another bloke. Now, having bin in many a simliar situation myself, I can well imagine things getting a bit heated, and someone lashing out. Perfectly believable scenario I'd say. And news reports do actually suggest that tbh. What we don't know, were there any threats made on either side? Did the victim make any sort of move towards the assailant, causing the assailant to think he was in danger and to react instinctively. We don't know all that.

But it does very much seem that the sentence is entirely appropriate and proportionate.

I've ****ted people and worse, for doing stupid things which endangered my safety and life, but fortunately no-one's ever died. Bin a few black eyes and bloody noses though, and in my book, ****ing right an' all. Having bin clipped/almost mown down, then having some idiot screaming in your face cos it's apparently your fault they're a crap driver does tend to get the old adrenaline flowing...

This is just a tragic case where that one-in-a-lot chance of death has occurred. Hence the manslaughter conviction.

I'm with fred.

I agree with Elfinsafety

Agree with Elfin

😀

It's the best way, really...

Seems to be an acceptance here that it's ok to go around punching people. Wrong, just as it's wrong to drive carelessly. If the 'cyclist' hadn't punched the guy he wouldn't be dead.

. Perfectly believable scenario I'd say. And news reports do actually suggest that tbh. What we don't know, were there any threats made on either side? Did the victim make any sort of move towards the assailant, causing the assailant to think he was in danger and to react instinctively.

Does any of that have a bearing on sentencing? I think not.

And you're just looking for yes-men rather than a proper challenge? Getting old? I suspect you may have a point though...you may be slightly less unpopular on here than me.

Seems to be an acceptance here that it's ok to go around punching people.

Where? I don't see that at all.

What I do see, is an understanding that sometimes, in the heat of the moment, people resort to anger and sometimes even violence. I don't see anyone claiming this is acceptable or 'ok'.

My 'victims' were all smacked cos they were making extremely threatening gestures or actually attacked me. Par Example; when someone's deliberately just driven their car into you and then go to get out of their car, you don't wait to see if they're gonna do owt else, you smack 'em. Pre-emptive strike. Could actually be considered self-defence in some circumstances.

The assailant in this case could well be someone who goes around smacking others at the drop of a hat. We don't know that. Although surely a history of violent offences would have come up in court, and possibly have affected his sentence, if there were any.

Does any of that have a bearing on sentencing? I think not.

Erm, I'm sure if the defendant claimed he felt threatened and in fear of his own safety/life, then that may be considered mitigation, no?

Your diatribes seek to justify the violence, ergo you think it's ok.

Well, I'm just trying to 'understand' the situation by using my own experiences to perhaps offer some clues or insight into what really might have happened.

I'm not trying to 'justify' any violence that occurred, as I wasn't there, wasn't involved and don't know much about it. In the situations I've bin in, I've felt that violence was by and large 'justifiable'. It is my belief that my use of force prevented me from injury and/or further attack. Wether or not the Law would agree with me, we'll never know.

But as you weren't there on any of those occasions, then you can't possibly hope to have much understanding of them other than what I've told you. If you then chose to make a judgement based on such scant information, then you're not acting in a particularly reasoned and objective manner.

As for 'condoning violence'; you may notice I've not, at any point, argued that the attacker should not have bin found guilty nor received any custodial sentence.

Agree with Elfin and others. The key in this is intent.

ok... the guy threw a punch that did a heck of a lot more damage than intended.. and as such I think the calls for a tougher sentence are a bit over the top..
BUT.. it's about time that society as a whole started taking responsibility for these accidents..
By my early 20s I'd seen enough people seriously and sometimes permanently injured from a punch that resulted in a fall that I realised that throwing a punch is a little more serious than men and boys 'sorting out their differences'.. and adjusted my behaviour and that of those around me accordingly..
no-one intends to kill or maim with a good old gentlemanly traditional punch in the face.. but the sad fact of the matter is that it often happens..

lads should be educated very seriously regarding this fact from an early age..
It's a boody shame to watch two mates having a row over a girl or an insult. and then to witness one of them out cold and twitching with their head cracked open on a kerb while the other breaks down in tears of remorse..

but the sad fact of the matter is that it often happens

Does it? Are lots of people killed just by a punch to the face?

More so, maybe, than are killed by careless drivers not paying attention to other road users, for example?

I'm not really arguing that point elf.. and I suspected a pedant would pull that out of the bag.. I have to admit to having a higher opinion of you than that..
if I was in front of you I would like to think that I could refrain from punching you in the nose for being such a tit..

If you think the benefits of teaching boys that it's noble to throw your fists around outweigh the risks then that's your bag man..

maybe a swift kick in the bollocks would be more appropriate.. now where's me steelies..?

Does it? Are lots of people killed just by a punch to the face?

Doesn't help that mainstream tv, films etc. regularly show guys trading punches with little effect.

but that's not the point, is it?

I think that you're actually missing it...

if I was in front of you I would like to think that I could refrain from punching you in the nose for being such a ****..

If you were in front of me in an agitated and potentially violent state, I'd like to think I could take appropriate measures to prevent you causing me any physical harm... 😉

If you think the benefits of teaching boys that it's noble to throw your fists around outweigh the risks then that's your bag man..

Erm, once again; I don't think I've actually condoned the use of violence other than for self-defence. 🙄

But if it makes you happy to think I have, then I spose I should be happy that you are similarly joyful. 🙂

I think that you're actually missing it...

Elf..

have a word with yourself lad..

fortunately I haven't got time for any deliberate obtuseness this morning..

I was only trying to make a small request that we try and teach our kids about the dangers as well as the glamour..
what you hope to gain from attempting to undermine my post is a bit beyond me..
I'll put it down to sore legs and intrinsic sillybillyness or summink...

and then to witness one of them out cold and twitching with their head cracked open on a kerb while the other breaks down in tears of remorse..

Thing is in this case there wasn't even any remorse, they fled the scene. I'd prosecute the two cyclists who were with him too.

What point am I missing?

The point that no-one's actually arguing against the fact that punching people is wrong. I think there's probbly a healthy consensus on this matter. Deaths resulting from punches to the head isn't the point of this particular discussion really; had the victim died from hitting his head following just being pushed over, then we wouldn't be arguing about punching people in the face at all. The issue here is that a violent attack has caused a death. And that the sentencing of the attacker has created a debate around appropriateness/proportionality of sentencing.

Of course, we could go on to discuss just how many accidents are caused by careless drivers opening their doors without due consideration for other road-users, but I spect that will be as equally off-tangential as Yunki's punching in the face sub-discussion.

Elf I really can't be bothered - you carry on with your own 'entirely relevant' submissions 🙄

If you were in front of me in an agitated and potentially violent state

I'd like to think it would be more like this, Elf..

[img] [/img]

Yunki et al...Fred's never wrong, why can't you just accept that?

Fred's never wrong

I know this.. it's why I was so saddened that he jumped on my benign and benevolent post.. I think the post century exhaustion has made fred paranoid perhaps..?

🙁

I'll look out for a grovelling email and simpering public apology later today.. 🙂

Take a deep breath, it's only an attack of Freditis. I'm off to find some more positive vibes 😉

he's not a cyclist, he's a mental who happend to be on a bike

I'd prosecute the two cyclists who were with him too

he's not a cyclist, he's a mental who happend to be on a bike

Who, me?? 😯

That's a bit unfair...

Yunki et al...Fred's never wrong, why can't you just accept that?

Most intelligent thing you've ever said in your entire life, Al! 😀

it's only an attack of Freditis

Which of course is a condition forum dwellers develop whenever they see anything I've posted. They suddenly develop an irrational and stupid desire to try and prove me wrong, or resort to personal insults cos they've failed to 'win' an argument. Invariably follows not reading my posts propperly and actually thinking about things...

My 'victims' were all smacked cos they were making extremely threatening gestures or actually attacked me. Par Example; when someone's deliberately just driven their car into you and then go to get out of their car, you don't wait to see if they're gonna do owt else, you smack 'em. Pre-emptive strike. Could actually be considered self-defence in some circumstances.

You really mean this? Just how many people do you get into fights with then?

I cycle in London every day, and strangely, I [b]never[/b] get people deliberately driving into me. Never gets even close.

Pre-emptive strike? Sounds awfully butch, but I subscribe to the view that cars will never be able to catch me in a city - I've get to see the ones that can bunnyhop kerbs - and if the driver gets out I'm pretty confident I could ride rather faster than they could run.

You really mean this? Just how many people do you get into fights with then?

Talking about 25 years of riding round London, so probbly only about a couple of dozen proper angry incidents, and not all of those came to blows. I do have a short fuse, but a lot less explosive than I used to be, so jolly well have not had any paggas for quite a while now. 🙂

The example I gave; riding along a narrow street (It's actually called Narrow Street!!), some impatient twunt bibbing cos there was no room to pass due to parked cars, then deliberately drove into the back of me, screaming 'get out of the *ing way you *ing ****!'. Not a very nice man. Jumped off the bike, then he's gone to get out of the car, so I just reacted instinctively and smacked him one. He thought better of it, and drove off rapidly. Did I do wrong? I don't really care. You come at me, try to injure me, then expect retribution.

Pre-emptive strike? Sounds awfully butch

Be'ave. If someone looks like they mean to harm you, what you gonna do? Let them? Sod that; dog eat dog. Get the first blow in, hopefully end it there. You don't know if they'll pull a tool on you or owt, so don't hesitate, just knack 'em straight away. Obviously, retiring to a safe distance is preferable, but if you've bin almost knocked over and are a bit stunned, you might not have that option.

I've ridden off sharpish far more times than I've had fights. Far more enjoyable to ride off laughing at them getting all wound up, than get involved in violence. Cos violence can hurt, and get you in trouble.

I do have a short fuse

No shit?

I've always been on your side Fred.. (apart from the inconsiderate farmers thing..)

You fight for what is just and good and right and your consistantly being right forms the cornerstone of my belief system.. I always turn to your wise words when times is 'ard.. you're like a shinin' beacon of truth and justice in this dark and seethin' morass..

you've 'urt me today though guv'nor and no mistake..

I cycle in London every day, and strangely, I never get people deliberately driving into me. Never gets even close

Not in London but I've had it a couple of times. I tend to get a bit shirty when it happens as well..... Followed someone home once and gave them the fright of their life after they got out the car. I've got a nice line in proper Anglo Saxon expletives and put downs. Plus I look a bit scary too.

Guy in a 3 Series buzzed my gf's rear tyre once, if I'd been there hospital and police cells would have been in tif story.

Sympathies on the racist asshat. But whacking people can have real consequences.

Cos violence can hurt, and get you in trouble.

We can all agree on that; I learned my lesson 25 years back. I got into a fight, hit a guy extremely (far too) hard, put him in hospital for a couple of days. He'd clobbered my girlfriend and we'd both been showered in glass, but there was no excuse for my stupid overreaction.

Just a (little) bit harder and I'd have been facing a very serious charge and the strong probability of jail time.

I've not fought anyone since then, nor will I unless it's life-threatening. Getting the first punch in? Nope; been there, done that, and quarter of a century later I'm still ashamed of how close I came to permanently damaging someone.

I've not fought anyone since then, nor will I unless it's life-threatening. Getting the first punch in? Nope; been there, done that, and quarter of a century later I'm still ashamed of how close I came to permanently damaging someone.

Fair enough, that's a good stance IMO, but it could have been you in his place....

arm wrestle for a quid..?

Oh dear. I think somebody's bin out just a little too long in the sun today... 😆

Yunki; why so upset? 😕 I don't get it.

But whacking people can have real consequences.

I know. S'why I don't go round doing it too often, only when necessary. Hoping that it won't be necessary, but unfortunately it's not a perfect world.

It is interesting to read differing views on the validity/legitimacy of violence in certain circumstances. I've had to use violence on a good number of occasions, for self-defence. As I said, I'll only use it as a last resort, if I believe I'm in danger. I don't see what's wrong with that really. I've seen/heard of people being proper hurt because they din't take steps to prevent an attack on themselves. I'm not going to be a victim if I can help it.

And truth be told, and I'm being completely honest here; if someone is seriously injured or worse as a result of me taking what I believe to be appropriate action to prevent them from hurting me, then so be it. I'll have to deal with the consequences. But I certainly won't feel much remorse for them. If they intended to hurt me or mine, and ended up suffering themselves, then tough. Live by, die by.

I know. S'why I don't go round doing it too often, only when necessary.

When is it really necessary though? CErtainly not in at least some of your previous examples.

When is it really necessary though?

When you believe you are in danger of getting seriously hurt.

I've had someone attack me with an iron bar. What am I sposed to do, let them batter me to a pulp? Or get straight in there before they've even taken a swing at me, thus surprising them so much they drop the bar and run off?

CErtainly not in at least some of your previous examples.

What examples?

Yunki; why so upset? I don't get it.

Well I'm sorry if I did, and I din't mean to. 🙁

[img] [/img]

This one:

deliberately drove into the back of me, screaming 'get out of the *ing way you *ing ****!'. Not a very nice man. Jumped off the bike, then he's gone to get out of the car, so I just reacted instinctively and smacked him one.

...and the iron bar...unable to run away were you?

Guilty of two assaults.

enough of the abuse - mod

Heh

so your all abusing elf for defending his self?

@fathead

stop reading the daily mail, it isn't doing you any favours!

@cynic-al

not assault, self defense ...

pastcaring-not in the eyes of the law it's not.

cynic-al - Member
pastcaring-not in the eyes of the law it's not.

you don't have to wait to be attacked first, for it to be self defense. you just have to fill threatened in the eyes of the law....

you don't have to wait to be attacked first, for it to be self defense. you just have to fill threatened in the eyes of the law....

True but it's the use of reasonable force that's the issue, was it necessary to punch in the face as he was getting out of the car? Could have something else been done, i.e. blocking the door or buggering off.

depends on the situation, sometimes necessary to do more than just one punch to the face.

a few kids on my estate were giving someone a hard time on a regular basis. the guy had had enough stepped out of his house and hit the first one that came for him, with a small axe twice in the head (the kid lived but was a little slow for awhile) the cps never brought charges against the fella with the axe because they saw it that he had no option but to defend himself and his family. the old bill did **** all to defend him!

would i have done the same thing? yes without hesitation!

sometimes in life you need to stand and be counted!

Guilty of two assaults.

Because of course you were there and saw everything that happened so obviously have a full and comprehensive account of events that took place therefore qualifying you to make a full objective judgement oh yeah silly me... 🙄

I do hope you aren't actually a lawyer. I'm very glad you're not mine.

HA ha Fred, hate being pwned don't you? All I can go on is your description, which is clear enough.

As for the rest of you on amateur hour, you need a lot more that to "feel threatened" to successfully invoke self defence.

Don't late my word for it though, a few seconds on Google should do it.

you are as much an expert on the law as you are at making a disc mount from a spoon!

All I can go on is your description, which is clear enough.

Is it? Is it really Al? Is it? Oh, right, so the briefest description of events is sufficient information for you to base your mighty legal onion on, is it? Blimey, you must be some sort of amazing super-lawyer who can tell exactly what happened without even being there! Amazing!

😆

WEll you've said you hit people and have presented nothing that could amount to a defence.

Good back pedalling/turning it on me though. But not good enough.

AND of course if you can explain how they weren't assaults, you'd be doing so wouldn't you?

No Al. Because no matter what I say, you will jump on it to try and find some way to 'win' your pathetic conflict with me. So there's no point in me carrying on with this silly argument.

Besides, I have a date with a [i]real[/i] lawyer this evening. And she's a lot prettier than you. 😉