Cropton Forest Assault

@HarryTuttle thanks for the explanation

“unbelievable that you would try to blame this on access laws.”

Without such archaic laws we’d not have this kind of confrontation. The issue reported wasn’t one of dangerous riding leading to confrontation, it originates purely from the laws around rights of way.

In no way am I advocating violence and it’s entirely plausible that the offender would deal with any level of confrontation in this manner, but what led to this confrontation?

Without such archaic laws we’d not have this kind of confrontation.

What, no one would punch someone else in the face?

Unless you were there how do you know what the confrontation was about?

It would be a shame if this discussion was reduced to “battering old people” vs “riding on footpaths”.

Or has that already happened?

Without such archaic laws we’d not have this kind of confrontation.

Since Scotland introduced righ to roam, nobody has been punched in the face, a problem that was far too commonplace before and was a key driver for change.

It would be a shame if this discussion was reduced to “battering old people” vs “riding on footpaths”.

I’d go with battering old people being worse. Unless the riding on a footpath was undertaken on an EEB, that’s a whole new level of skullduggery.

The issue reported wasn’t one of dangerous riding leading to confrontation, it originates purely from the laws around rights of way

You are are either one of the 3 riders described, the injured party or you just completely made that up.

The issue reported wasn’t one of dangerous riding leading to confrontation, it originates purely from the laws around rights of way

And that’s a fair mitigation for creating the conditions for conflict from converging users perspectives, and there’s value in having that discussion.

But responsibility for hands getting thrown is totally at the feet of those who choose that as a course of action.

Behaviour is a choice and no amount of trying to scapegoat rules is going to distract from that in the eyes of the law.

It’s not “illegal” to ride a footpath. It’s lazy reporting.

But assault is illegal.

I’d go with battering old people being worse.

Mate, my point was that question is unhelpfully reductive.

What’s the saying about holding two opposing thoughts?

What’s the saying about holding two opposing thoughts?

Dunno. I only have space for one at a time and even then it’s probably wrong. 😉

“unbelievable that you would try to blame this on access laws.”

Without such archaic laws we’d not have this kind of confrontation. The issue reported wasn’t one of dangerous riding leading to confrontation, it originates purely from the laws around rights of way.

We don’t have such archiac access laws in Scotland, but:

– its not inconceivable to me the three pricks on bikes might punch an old guy for little or no reason
– its not inconceivable to me that a person (perhaps an older person) wrongly shouts at cyclists for riding in places they are permitted to
– its not inconceivable to me that people on bikes ride in places, or in manners where its not responsible to do so
– its not inconceivable to me that when challenged bike riders might be come confrontational

I say those are not inconceivable because except for punching an old guy I’ve seen all of the above in Scotland despite our “enlightened” access laws.

In no way am I advocating violence and it’s entirely plausible that the offender would deal with any level of confrontation in this manner, but what led to this confrontation?

You are effectively advocating violence by even asking “what led to this confrontation”, and implying that there might be some set of circumstances where smacking an old guy, even an angry old guy, is a reasonable course of conduct.  I can only assume you are sort of person who if sitting on a jury hearing how a young woman was raped say, yeah but what was she doing out at night dressed like that; or that a man has hit his wife says, yeah but she could be a nagging cow.

Without such archaic laws we’d not have this kind of confrontation. The issue reported wasn’t one of dangerous riding leading to confrontation, it originates purely from the laws around rights of way.

I am not sure that is true. Plenty of cases of people getting aggressive against cyclists on bridleways or trying to prevent walkers walking on footpaths.

Sadly lots of people on here think it’s their God-given right to ride their bikes where ever they like. In their own minds they are like some contemporary Citizen Smith character sticking it to the Man.  It’s quite simple really, follow rule no.1 – don’t be a dick. Don’t ride where you are not supposed to and try to reduce conflict with other users of the countryside.

FWIW, I don’t agree with the access rights here in England but I don’t act like a selfish moron either.

Don’t ride where you are not supposed to and try to reduce conflict with other users of the countryside.

I agree with your post in general but I’m completely over not riding on footpaths in the countryside. It’s a ridiculous rule and it can absolutely be done whilst not breaking Rule 1 as many in here will testify.

Since Scotland introduced righ to roam, nobody has been punched in the face, a problem that was far too commonplace before and was a key driver for change.

Sauce please.

Too many on here resort to “othering” and stereotypes in this kind of thing, stuck in their own culture war.

I’ve encountered far more rude, inconsiderate and entitled mountain bikers out on the trail than I have walkers. The default “the walker must have said something” line is ridiculous. This thread should never have got off the ground – none of us were there and we have **** all to usefully contribute.

Including me, to be fair.

Sauce please.

I suspect that it was said tongue in cheek

This thread should never have got off the ground – none of us were there and we have **** all to usefully contribute.

Including me, to be fair.

Agreed (and me really).

But I’m still going to carry on riding on footpaths and not battering old people.

Actually deleted as it’s OT.

I think its a case of the old chap remonstrated their riding, possibly he felt they got too close to him or were too fast and that went from conversation to argument.

Likely turned into a bit of a pushy pushy, words exchanged, escalating to sweary words and ended up with one of the riders, possibly a bit hyped from the ride, lamped the old guy.

.

But either way, no need for it, but in the heat of the moment these things do happen, it appears to at least be a big part of human nature. We cant all be the Dalai Lama.

But at least nobody is dead or in intensive care. Wounds heal, and this time next year it will likely be a distant memory.

.

The end result is old chap has a bit of psychological damage, and bit of facial damage, and when the cops catch up with the riders, they’re probably going to end up with a fine, which may impact on their job/life etc.

I think we’ve all been there at some point.

Sauce please.

GB News. Doesn’t matter…

I love this fantasy idea that the underfunded, under resourced police force are going to track down 3 blokes on bikes with little more than a pretty vague description. Hope they do… but they won’t.

Whose “fantasy idea” is that?

According to the link in the OP:

Police are urgently asking people to come forward if they recognise the three men from their descriptions, or you were in the Pickering area that day and may have seen them elsewhere.

Anyone with information is asked to email craig.hardcastle@northyorkshire.police.uk, or call 101 and ask for Craig Hardcastle. Alternatively, you can contact Crimestoppers via their website or 0800 555 111. Quote reference number 12240068960.

*and bit of facial damage*

I’d call a broken nose, a fractured cheekbone and a fractured eyesocket as more than ‘a bit of facial damage’.

“I don’t agree – most people are capable of remembering stuff and there’s not much that is very specific in the descriptions.”

Eyewitness account is notoriously unreliable.

“I think it’s a case of the old chap remonstrated their riding, possibly he felt they got too close to him or were too fast and that went from conversation to argument.”

ITV interview describes the confrontation and assault happening at a stile / bridge

Poly “ I can only assume you are sort of person who if sitting on a jury hearing how a young woman was raped say, yeah but what was she doing out at night dressed like that; or that a man has hit his wife says, yeah but she could be a nagging cow.”

You can **** right off. That’s mis-characterisation has proper annoyed me.

“in the heat of the moment these things do happen, it appears to at least be a big part of human nature.”

Aaaaaabsolute bollocks. You are tacitly excusing assault. Neither me, nor any of my mates, have ever got anywhere near to assaulting someone ‘in the heat of the moment’. If they or I had, I’d suggest a lot of introspection would be required for that person to sort their f*****g shit out.

@poly you are usually an excellent voice of reason and useful information on here, but that is a massive cognitive leap, and bang out IMHO

You can **** right off. That’s mis-characterisation has proper annoyed me.

Yep, that’s just wilfully nasty.

The end result is old chap has a bit of psychological damage, and bit of facial damage, and when the cops catch up with the riders, they’re probably going to end up with a fine, which may impact on their job/life etc.

I am really struggling to understand the attitude of some on here. Further up the thread and the disinterested reader may well conclude that a lot of posters are heading towards victim-blaming. We’ve managed to blame access restrictions already, and suggested that there are plenty of times that people have mouthed off at MTBers over where and how to ride, and there’s a suggestion that a violent response is to be sort of expected.

No it isn’t, absolutely not. This guy has suffered a serious, inexcusable and grievous assault. Whatever the circumstances, can anyone here in any way shape or form excuse or justify punching a 68 year old man enough to leave him with facial fractures, just because he remonstrated with some folk who were riding on what he believed to be a footpath (only) ?

It’s far more than a “bit of psychological damage”, it’s an absolute affront to any form of human or moral decency. This guy thought he’d moved to his rural idyll, and some entitled thug has taken offence at being told not to do something he probably shouldn’t have been doing, pinned an old man to the ground and beaten him seriously enough to leave lasting damage.  Minimising facial fractures to a 68 yr old as a “bit of facial damage” is in itself inexcusable.

Can this be stopped before winning the title of being the most thoroughly depressed thread in a long time.

It’s bringing out the absolute worst in some people. It may only be ‘safe behind keyboard’ statements, but is it really how you want to be thought of?

 I can only assume you are sort of person who if sitting on a jury hearing how a young woman was raped say, yeah but what was she doing out at night dressed like that; or that a man has hit his wife says, yeah but she could be a nagging cow.

Dude, WHAT?

In a thread already rife with unsupported assumptions, this takes the top step of the podium.

There are three sides to every story,  so far there has been a part of one and a lot of conjecture.

Maybe it should be left to the courts to work out what actually happened.

Here’s that interview for anyone interested.

https://www.itv.com/news/calendar/2024-05-02/cyclist-who-attacked-oap-over-land-access-could-have-killed-someone

Much as I loathe it when people have said it on other threads, but could this thread perhaps be deleted?

It’s only a matter of time before someone links to it as proof of how loathsome [ some elements of] the cycle community are and we have to reap the consequences

But is not it an honest and fair representation of attitudes?

It seems to me that most on this thread firmly reject the suggestion that decking someone whilst out riding the trails could ever be justified (assuming that it wasn’t self defence).

A few on the other hand would prefer to have a bit more information.

And the disagreement between the two opposing opinions has resulted in an increasingly heated exchange.

Who is surprised?

Did it say that the assault happened on 20th April? 13 days ago, he had broken bones in his face and ribs but in that interview not even a bruise on his face, and he’s moving both arms well without wincing. I hope I heal as well as that when I’m 68. They’re made of tough stuff up north.

In a (better) parallel universe somewhere, the three thugs on bikes were riding through Leeds today rather than Cropton Forest a couple of weeks ago….

Protestors against cycling in Leeds today.

s but in that interview not even a bruise on his face,

pause the itv video at 1 m 35s. You’ll see bruising below his left eye.

enderextender
Free Member
In a (better) parallel universe somewhere, the three thugs on bikes were riding through Leeds today rather than Cropton Forest a couple of weeks ago….

Blimey, just followed the link, they had better hope there isn’t any CTV there.