Forum menu
Also agree about bike paths. There's a lovely one near me that runs parallel to a very busy dual carriageway. Unfortunately it's also near a school so in the morning it's full of kids texting and mums with pushchairs!
There's one near me that's OK, but it's completely segregated from the carriageway but the access to it is from a traffic lighted spiral roundabout and on my way into work it's on the wrong side, so getting onto it it's easier to ride along 1/2mile to the next roundabout and go round that one to get across.
Without fail get the *bbbbbbbbbeeeeeeeeeeeeeeppppppppp* and finger wagging at the path, usually form a black 4x4 of some kind.
A wandsworth council van tried to ram me off the same road some years back, then lept out and shouted abuse. The council apologised for the bad language, but couldn't care less that their employees were trying to kill people.
Shared space cycle paths are rarely fit for purpose IMHO, I've tried a few and invariably they're full of meandering people staring at their smartphone screens.
I've had a couple of people beep and point at the cycle path. My response is usually along the lines of "Show me where in the Highway Code it states that I must ride on a cycle path". This invariably results in much confusion from the inevitable simian behind the wheel as they attempt to process this.
[ninja edit]
The law is an ass. There are so many instances where a cyclist has been assaulted by a motorist and the authorities seem to take the view that the presence of a bicycle constitutes an act of provocation. This will only change if we take the police to task on this, with help from our elected representatives.
Of course, this sort of thing never happens anywhere else, does it?
not in places with real beer and hills it doesnt. [b]FACT[/b]
IIRC you need corroboration to convict someone - i.e. 2 or more witnesses (not including the perp, under HRA he/she can't incrimiate him/herself)
That particular bike lane, IMO, is not fit for purpose.
It's no more than a line painted on the pavement, no physical segregation between pedestrians/cyclist. There certainly isn't enough room for cyclists to pass each other & pedestrians at the same time. There's been no attempt to widen it anyway - it's a weak, poor, failed, CHEAP, excuse of a bike lane & very poorly thought through!
Can you tell I don't like it??
Of course they can make a confession and admit guilt.
under HRA he/she can't incrimiate him/herself
Put the daily mail down and step away slowly.
Does the fact that the cyclist is also a bit shouty (I think TBH i would have been as well ) make a difference in a court case?
Does the fact that the cyclist is also a bit shouty (I think TBH i would have been as well ) make a difference in a court case?
Can't see how, considering the shouting was [i]after[/i] he veered at the rider with his vehicle. Which I presume is what he was convicted for.
[quote=cynic-al ]IIRC you need corroboration to convict someone - i.e. 2 or more witnesses (not including the perp, under HRA he/she can't incrimiate him/herself)
I challenge you to find where in the law it says that. Do you have plenty of time to waste?
How do you need corroboration when they confess they did it and a victim reports?
Does that mean I can rob a shop as long as there is only one person in there ?
Rape would seem to be an easy crime to get away with as we will never be able to prosecute due to lack of witness ETC
[i]Can't see how[/i]
Escalating the situation?
Obviously he doesn't have to take whatever the driver throws at him, but they do seem to just manage to wind each other up more and more. (I'm not trying to defend anyone's actions just trying to get an idea how the 'law' views this sort of thing?
Police are always "Anymore of that language and it's curtains" I just wondered if a dim view is taken?
On a lighter note...I did a 10 mile ride around our local town yesterday, about 40 of us, of all age groups from 4 yrs to probably 70 yrs plus. We had appointed marshals zipping ahead to stop traffic & can honestly say we didn't encounter a single bit of abuse from any drivers who were held up.
[quote=aracer ]Do you have plenty of time to waste?
I've just realised how stupid a comment that is to post to the STW daytime crowd 😳
At the end of the video the two cyclists rode off two abreast nattering to each other. No chance of that annoying the next approaching motorist then. 😆
MrSmith - Membernot in places with real beer and hills it doesnt. FACT
Bavaria?
Aye fair enough, it's Sctochland where you need corroboration, and HRA means you can't force someone to incriminate themselves.
But if they've volunteered the information, HRA doesn't make it inadmissible.
I don't know much about Scottish law (even less than I know about English law), but surprised if the statement of a single witness is inadmissible - for reasons outlined above. Up to the court to decide whether to trust it.
God help anyone who complains about his food.
[url= http://brew-cafe.com/ ]http://brew-cafe.com/[/url]
aracer - Member
I don't know much about Scottish law (even less than I know about English law), but surprised if the statement of a single witness is inadmissible
It's not inadmissible, just not sufficient to convict (with some exceptions)
Be surprised!:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corroboration_in_Scots_law
A cornerstone of Scots law, the requirement for corroborating evidence means at least two different and independent sources of evidence are required in support of each crucial fact before a defendant can be convicted of a crime.[2] This means, for example, that an admission of guilt by the accused is insufficient evidence to convict in Scotland, because that evidence needs to be corroborated by another source
If you look at his Twitter (assuming it's the same bloke) he's posing with a meat cleaver...
Is the bloke in the brew-cafe website the maniac nutcase on video ?
Is the bloke in the brew-cafe website the maniac nutcase on video ?
Someone on Roadcc has named him and linked him to that business. It looks like it could be the same bloke... but that's not the same as an official confirmation!
Is the bloke in the brew-cafe website the maniac nutcase on video ?
I wanna know...
Shall I leave a negative Tripadvisor review?
😛
shall we do a group ride to see 😈
Do it.
Looks right, has the right accent, is in the right place. Not definitive proof, but it seems likely.
A load of MAMIL's should reserve a few tables on a weekend, order a glass of water each, nothing else and take about 4 hours to drink it. If he's the one of course.
That HAS to be the same guy.
Mahoosive PR fail!
Is there a way of sending all his twitter followers a link to the video?
The driver clearly has a very small pe**s.
I`m not sure he has one at all !!
Slight antipodean accent. Watch the video again with that in mind. He seems to be such a nice bloke on the video on his website!
Another chef, another c**t: [url= http://www.theguardian.com/environment/green-living-blog/2009/sep/15/james-martin-cyclists ]James Martin[/url]
If it had been Gordon Ramsay...
Videos like this remind me of why I try not to cycle on the roads.
Ah, the power of the tinternet.
Booh, you can't leave a url in a review on their FB page.
I'm going to order a knuckle sandwich, some hospital food and a can of w'up ass.
[i]Obviously[/i] it would be unacceptable to visit his restaurant and doodle a bike in spray paint over the frontage. Then get a good 40 or so lycra-clad roadies to wait for him to arrive and watch an angry man explode.
Follow him from his greasy spoon to his Chelsea tractor and someone can confirm we have the right convict ?
I cycle past that place (Brew, Lower Richmond Road branch) reasonably often - I'll keep an eye out for that Discovery parked nearby!
Already being tagged like mad on twitter
https://twitter.com/search?q=%40brewwells
https://twitter.com/search?q=%40brew_cafe
I think the people have decided
Funk me, he should be shot ([b]to death[/b]) just for having that video auto-playing and auto-repeating on his website.
Windup spec internet = "Hi, I'm Jason Wells" on repeat.
👿
Bonus points to anybody who can do a nice mix of the road rage and website videos. I might have a go myself later if no offers, but I'm sure there are folks on here much better at that sort of thing.
At the end of the video the two cyclists rode off two abreast nattering to each other. No chance of that annoying the next approaching motorist then.
So, lets take this one apart shall we.
It's legal to ride two abreast.
Riding in single file the lanes on that road are not wide enough to overtake if anything is approaching in the opposite direction (see the incident at the start of the video).
Riding two abreast means it is less likely that a driver will attempt a dangerous overtake.
There's actually a strong argument that you should always ride two abreast - no-one should be overtaking unless the other lane is clear and riding 2 abreast you take up less road so overtaking manoeuvres require a shorter distance and are therefore safer.