[Closed] Dangerous driving attempted murder? Wtf

that video clip is suspiciously short. I wonder what happened before the final scene....

almost certainly on a twisty road the cyclist was taking a 'positive' position to prevent a close pass.

The sad thing for me based on comments to the video is that people still don't understand / accept why that positive positioning is a safety thing rather than being annoying. And also now that a driver has lost his job as a result then I can imagine it will turn those types even further against cyclists.

They've had to close their accounts or ignore it all as it has gone viral so imagine they can't deal with it as a small company.

Exactly. Small companies just aren't set up to deal with the volume of email/tweets/messages this would have generated.
They shut the shop up as they had no idea what else to do, they don't have policies in place for this sort of thing like big companies do.

Everyone gets their pitchforks out and is so keen to "get involved" at least one person on this thread has personally emailed the company, and how many thousands of other people did the same thing ?

I can't understand why anyone would do that personally, what will it achieve? They are already aware of what's happened obviously, and why does someone not involved think they are due any kind of response anyway ?

Just let them deal with it, and make a general statement once they have it all sorted.

I know that method isn't pitchfork friendly, but people's livelihoods are on the line, so calm down and step away from the keyboard.

"near miss" ****ing ****s deserve everything they are getting

How cool was the cyclist though 😯

Just dropped back on the road as if he had swerved round a puddle. He looked like he was just going to carry on and not react at all. !

"near miss" * * deserve everything they are getting

Even as I was reading it, I knew there would be complaint on here about those two words within the first few posts.

Poor choice of phrase in my opinion. But he's done the right thing and sacked the bloke.

Seems like a very constructive response from the company.

Seems like a very constructive response from the company.

Agreed.

People will find something to not be happy about though.

Takes a lot longer to put a pitchfork away, than it does to get it out 😆

Poor choice of phrase in my opinion.

Trivializing spin more like. We've all have "near misses" every time we ride, how often has someone deliberately side swiped you ?

He won't go to prison for that, yes technically you CAN get 5 years for an ABH but if you were going to day it common assault max 6 months in Mags court. You won't get a common assault charge out of that. Careless driving and a no doubt a driver improvement scheme. Education not punishment.

At least the MD has sent a response no which I think fair play to him is very reasonable.

I think seems the correct response from the company now. Still scary how many loonies think cyclists deserve what's coming to them!

I think seems the correct response from the company now

Whoever was driving the van should still be prosecuted, whatever he was going through but im sure that line was put in to reduce the desire from the public for that

Skilz

Trivializing spin more like.

Do you need a hand putting the pitchfork away?

Whilst these days I'm a slightly pompous middle age fella. There was a time as a young man given the right circumstances I could have done what this driver did.

I think the correct punishment for me, to bring me back in line would be loosing my job and probably my licence to drive for a couple of years.

[quote=Munqe-chick ]You won't get a common assault charge out of that. Careless driving and a no doubt a driver improvement scheme. Education not punishment.

It appears to meet all the required criteria for assault, with decent evidence. Is that just because driving offences are trivialised? Careless driving for deliberately driving into a vulnerable road user - seriously?

Perfect response from the company - I'm pleased to see that, and clearly the delay was simply to get it right, so I'll retract any criticism (and I'm certainly not going to get hung up on the wording).

...and lo and behold their social media is active again, so they've done exactly what I suggested above, just been a little slow about it, but that's excusable.

I always ask myself how would my reaction be to such an assault/impact with a vehicle if instead of 'a cyclist', it was a horse or a pedestrian. A child?

Shrug it off? 'Near miss'? A suspicious part of me imagines this incident to increase (at least with some) the impression that cyclists are somehow less vulnerable than other (non-driving) road-users. I mean, they just bounce off and carry on riding... (sarcasm of course).

Driver needs hauling up under suspicion of assault/intent to do bodily harm or worse.

I mean, they just bounce off and carry on riding... (sarcasm of course).

Although in this case, due to luck or possibly massive skillz, that's an accurate description of what happened.

I have had this happen to me , twice . Both times vans , once on a narrow country lane , and I was going over 20 as it was downhill. Held driver up for maybe 30 seconds. As we passed a wider passing point he charged past and halfway down swung in to the nearside. Like the guy in the video , I had enough rooom to ride away from the lWB transit.

second time was on the bridge near my house, there is a shared use footpath and a shithead in a Vito tried to force me onto it, after pulling alongside and screaming abuse at me he then yanked the wheel left and aiming at the kerb / me. Emergency stop saved me from dropping it , no room to bunnyhop onto the pavement as the shared footpath is narrow and usuallu congested with families with kids,pushchairs and often fishermen .

It cant see how its not aggreveated assult with a motor vehicle , if there is such a thing. No difference in my mind to me dropping an anvil off a tall building, or a box of kitchen knives. Also breaches the 1.5m pass rule , so as minimum he should be done for that, but he needs a holiay from driving , points , a fine of £1000, and take a re-test before being allowed behind the wheel again.

Klunk - Member
Poor choice of phrase in my opinion.
Trivializing spin more like. We've all have "near misses" every time we ride, how often has someone deliberately side swiped you ?

Are you suggesting that's not a brilliant response from what is, ultimately, a small builders firm? I'm seriously impressed with that, given the context.

Whilst I'm sure the professionally offended will still want to pick holes with it, I can't see how you could ask for a better response and any further/deeper action is for the police to handle.

We don't have aggravated assault and the 1.5m is nothing in the UK. Just back from a week in tenerife where it is law very interesting how they drove out there because of this law.

Ok i stand corrected it was a near miss, no intent by the driver at all he we just moving over to avoid the oncoming car. 🙄

It cant see how its not aggreveated assult with a motor vehicle , if there is such a thing.

http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/l_to_o/offences_against_the_person/#a07

Also breaches the 1.5m pass rule

From that same link, (I've picked out some highlights)

The following examples of circumstances that are likely to be characterised as dangerous driving are derived from decided cases and the SGC Definitive Guideline

-failing to have a proper and safe regard for vulnerable road users such as cyclists, motorcyclists, horse riders, the elderly and pedestrians or when in the vicinity of a pedestrian crossing, hospital, school or residential home;

-aggressive driving, such as sudden lane changes, cutting into a line of vehicles or driving much too close to the vehicle in front;

-overtaking which could not have been carried out safely;

-a brief but obvious danger arising from a seriously dangerous manoeuvre. This covers situations where a driver has made a mistake or an error of judgement that was so substantial that it caused the driving to be dangerous even for only a short time.

Edit: as others are saying, good response by the owner. If I was running the company I wouldn't want that driver representing me.

^ Klunk

He's been sacked, they are looking into improving standards and they have told everybody about it. At what point do you cut the guy who owns the business a bit of slack for the (appalling) actions of one of his employees driving one of his vehicles?

Would it be so hard to take the time to commend him for the action he has taken, rather than the choice of words on a social post?

That's a well constructed response, and it's good to see the MD state that “this experience has made me realise that I can do something to help reduce this sort of behaviour on our roads”. But why has he only realised that now, and why did he not appreciate it in response to previous complaints back in [url= https://twitter.com/phil_66/status/496994378939138048 ]2014[/url] and [url= https://twitter.com/BigJP78/status/639447684001189888 ]2015[/url]?

Their [url= https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/04791380/filing-history ]most recent accounts[/url] at Companies House show assets of around £1 million, so this isn't just some hick business. An organisation that employs drivers has a responsibility to ensure that those drivers are made categorically aware from day one that they must drive safely and respectfully. If this driver's mind was 'all over the place' such that he wasn't safe to drive he shouldn't have been driving. The majority of the culpability here sits with the driver, who should be prosecuted, but if the management of the company has not established systems and a culture to ensure that all drivers are aware of the need to drive within the spirit as well as the letter of the law then the directors must share a portion of that culpability. It is a failure of corporate governance to wait until there's a flare-up on social media to decide that the time has come to make it clear to your employees that they mustn't try to kill people.

He's been sacked,

big whoop, chances are he was a goner anyway once he lost his license.

I commend MD for extracting an apology from the driver, I presume for bring a shit storm down upon the company and then getting a promise never to repeat it, I'm guessing for another company 😆

Ok i stand corrected it was a near miss, no intent by the driver at all he we just moving over to avoid the oncoming car 🙄 .

You can roll your eyes all you want. But he's been sacked, and the MD has responded in pretty much the best way anyone could expect.

Other than those two words, what else don't you agree with in the MD's statement.

big whoop, chances are he was a goner anyway once he lost his license.

But the MD has been proactive, and sacked him in advance of any other punishement.

What he have needed to do for you to approve, execute him live on Facebook ffs.

What he have needed to do for you to approve, execute him live on Facebook ffs.

nothing so dramatic, a simple statement, "This kind of behaviour has no place in our company, the person responsible has be released with immediate effect and his/her details have be passed to the Surrey Police pending any investigation in which we will give all available assistance" etc etc.

Let's get him jailed !!

That's pretty much what he did isn't it? Apart from stating that he'd given the details to the police, but that's an irrelevance.

Let's get him jailed !!

only after we've executed him.

That's pretty much what he did isn't it?

Well apart from describing it as a "near miss", extracting and apology for doing it in a company van, making excuses by proxy, sending his drivers on awareness courses so that they know deliberately ramming cyclist off the road in your van is very very bad and wrong.

[quote=klunk] ... blah ... not good enough...etc etc etc

As I said earlier... you seem to having problems putting your pitchfork away.

Would you like some help 🙄

The reaction to this (via social media) has highlighted the wealth of malice born from ignorance of the Highway Code/cycling in general. Not to mention the many comments from both motorists and self-avowed 'cyclists' who have taken issue with the rider's primary positioning. Complete and total ignorance/projected arrogance/hostility feeds an irrational hatred of any cyclist who appears not to be following the random 'rules' that these morons have invented in their tiny heads.

Here is an [url= https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=1882114922032410&id=1527381920839047 ]example[/url] of what concerns me:

[IMG] [/IMG]

[IMG] [/IMG]

So any riders in the Newcastle area please be wary of Volkswagen BD53 UDP. The driver (by his own admission) projects his own malice on any cyclist taking primary.

That Anthony Hollings chap sounds like a lovely fella - threatening other legal users of the Public Highway.

That Anthony Hollings chap sounds like a lovely fella - threatening other legal users of the Public Highway.

At least he's been considerate enough to fit a flourescent purple 'bell' at the front-end of his car. Presumably to warn other road-users to hit the gutter before he 'f.... them up'

Erratum: [s]Newcastle[/s] [b]LEEDS[/b] area

There are literally hundreds of comments to that incident, so many are threatening violence/murder against cyclists for being in primary. All seem perfectly happy to publicise their intent. The manager did the right thing toimmediately dismiss the driver, but next time it could be the actual manager of a company. Who will sack her/him? Please be wary out there. I can't read any more facebook, it really does make me begin to despise what has become/is becoming of the English/the UK. Completely depressing. Er, 'lol'.

[IMG] [/IMG]
[IMG] [/IMG]

Comments like that are just born out of ignorance ^

Education is key.

Comments like that are just born out of ignorance ^

Really? Even if you truly believed that horse/pedestrian/cyclist hadn't contributed any tax payments towards transport infra, even if you truly believed they were in the road to 'provoke you'* would your first recourse be to physically harm them?

I believe there is much more going on than simple 'ignorance' in these comments and attitudes. They are projecting/assuming hostility into the motives of others (in this case cyclists). Smacks of seeing a stranger/immigrant/homosexual etc in 'your' local pub, and then going into the old 'Are you looking at my pint? Did call my pint a poof?' routine. 'Well 'they' provoked me, coming in here...'

I really believe education will help, but some people are simply hostile as well as uneducated - and so they assume everyone else is. They also often have an exaggerated tribal mentality, ie tend often towards chauvinism/nationalism. This recent growth in anti-cyclist agit-prop is partly driven by the more nationalist media mouthpieces/tabloids as it appeals to a certain mindset. A country divided, and in so many increasingly sad and stupid ways 🙁

I really believe education will help, but some people are simply hostile as well as uneducated - and so they assume everyone else is.

I completely agree with what you're saying. But I think those that are hostile always will be whilst they have means to justify it.

I suspect a quantity of the comments are meant as a joke - as we know, it's not always clear when it's not face to face. But also

[s]That[/s] Anthony Hollings [s]chap sounds like a lovely fella - threatening other legal users of the Public Highway.
At least he's been considerate enough to fit a flourescent purple[/s] bell [s]at the front[/s] end [s]of his car. Presumably to warn other road-users to hit the gutter before he 'f.... them up'[/s]

Surely there are some potential incitement to violence charges to be found among some of these comments?

I'd have "educated" the Audi driver who tried to force me into the central reservation of the M4 the other day.
If it had been this side of the tolls he'd have been sat on the floor by the barrier awaiting "police assistance "
As it was it was after and yes the video, stole and location have all been passed on to the police.
Not just cyclists these arseholes target.

[quote=thegreatape ]I suspect a quantity of the comments are meant as a joke

I'm really not so sure - most of them seem to throw around insults and swear words combined with the hostility. It's not exactly the normal way to joke. Hopefully most of them wouldn't actually do the things they're threatening, but I reckon a significant proportion would if they could get away with it.

Probably not something which should be debated on here as, but I reckon it's worth mentioning that I checked out the profile of one particularly obnoxious character threatening death on cyclists - he appears to be a UKIP/Trump/Le Pen supporter which I reckon also says a lot about the sort of person you're dealing with.

I completely agree with what you're saying. But I think those that are hostile always will be whilst they have means to justify it.

Hmm, not quite sure what you mean by that. Me may agree. I do just think some people 'learned' to be impervious/thick as shit and hostile with it. Every hostile and aggressive act (barring that caused by severe mental illness/disability) seems to be justified by 'means', whether or not those means or justifications actually exist anywhere other than in their minds.

Take the van-driver for example, or the nice fellow in the VW up there? They are openly hostile without any 'justification' at all. Except for the nasty warring fantasy in their minds, which they see as 'justified', of course. I would argue that aggression is only ever justified if you literally require it to defend life and liberty and there is no other option.