School Run driver runs into teacher

Sitting or not … Hmm

If I got nudged or pushed or indeed threatened Im not sure I’d be as relaxed as to keep my hand in my pockets ?

My reaction would be much more like the teachers once the car starts moving… hands out of pockets arms outstretched ready for whatever’s about to happen next.

Although you might not intend to cause death, deliberately driving a car into someone is something that you could reasonably foresee would be likely to cause death or serious harm, no?

I think America has “Reckless Endangerment” which would seem about right here. Not sure if there is a comparable equivalent under English law. Scots Law has Culpable and Reckless Conduct.

What was the driver actually charged with and what stuck till the prosecution?

yeah junctions are the starting point, we need proper cycle paths like the Netherlands and the review of Road traffic offences (that was started in 2014 and still hasn’t been done!) needs to happen, get rid of the term ‘careless’

I used to live in Fleet when I was a lad so I can empathise with SteveXTC some of the roads round there are a nightmare if you’re on a bike or a ped

at 30-31s on that video and appears to contact the teacher’s legs as there is a slight movement but he stays standing.

I agree on the whole slo-mo/stills… it is very hard to be 100% certain and perhaps each of us will see what we expect???

To me I see the car bonnet move down before the car moves… and I don’t see any movement from the car in the preceding 2-3 seconds

I want to make clear that is not a reason for the driver to do as they did… but it does change the headline and thread title …

“Teacher sits on bonnet of car and car drives off”

But he doesn’t as far as i can tell drive into the teacher, he sets off with the teacher sat on his bonnet.

also, no a school should not be building a drop-off point, why should we further enable car drivers to do something that is not good for the environment or the safety of any of the kids who go to that school ? every junction within a mile of any school should be built in such a way that is effectively biased in favour of those who walk or cycle

That is your biased opinion ….but it is based on what assumptions?
Are you assuming people CHOOSE to drive their kids to school?
Nearly everyone i know that drives their kids to school does so out of necessity.
My pretty much last resort mode of transport is driving…
Do you think we should do the same at trail centres and but a 15mile exclusion zone for drivers ?? After all we can cycle the last 15 miles..?

It’s a complete choice… QE Park, Swinley, FOD, Guisburn Forest, Surrey Hills, Bedgebury … all have parking used largely at times by people going to ride on single track… and its purely our choice… we don’t HAVE to ride and we don’t have to ride single track…

Going to work and dropping the kid at school are not real choices. Sure i could ask for flex-time and then go on benefits when I’m made redundant .. or my partner could not work… (but then they’d need to find another teacher)

This is something most of us do to pay the rent/mortgage and bills… it’s what we do day after day… week in/out until we get to ride.

Those lucky enough to be able to return home after dropping the kid off or lucky enough to be able to walk to work from the school before they are late and get another warning for being late to count towards getting fired… should recognise that’s not what most of us have to do.

I used to work for a nice company… the sort where you could take time off when your kid was ill… be late because you were dropping them off etc. but unsurprisingly the company doesn’t exist anymore.

Now I work in an environment where I would receive a written warning being 1 minute late and asking for flexitime would put me silently onto the “redundancy at the end of the quarter list”.

Most of the parents I know drop there kids at school because they have to be in work 30 minutes later and it’s miles away… at my kids school we all wait until we are officially allowed to leave the kids and they open the inner gate then a whole bunch of us sprint for the cars in an effort not to be late for work.

On the few occasions I know I can also pick the kid up we cycle in.. that is by far the preferred method for both of us… otherwise he has to hang around and wait for his mum to finish to get a lift home.

Having been through 2 years of trying to get 2 parents to work and 1 kid to school prior to this academic year its sheer hell…

Good point well made – maybe we also need to do something specific to facilitate walking and cycling though given Steve’s experiences.

I have a strong preference on cycling… I’d welcome making it easier for me… but it’s just not possible in much of todays UK. Most of the parents I know don’t drive because they want to drive, they drive so they can get to work.

The pre and after school clubs are full and lucky for us parents who are teachers get preference… we spent 3 years on a waiting list for pre-school nd it was only because OH took the job at the same school he got a place this year..

I’m all for facilitating walking and cycling … but we need to acknowledge not everyone can.

But he doesn’t as far as i can tell drive into the teacher, he sets off with the teacher sat on his bonnet.

But that still qualifies as “something that you could reasonably foresee would be likely to cause death or serious harm”

I used to work for a nice company… the sort where you could take time off when your kid was ill… be late because you were dropping them off etc. but unsurprisingly the company doesn’t exist anymore.

Not sure why you think that is “unsurprising” Steve. Most companies are like that.

I worked compressed hours (4 days a week instead of 5) with a bit of flex as well which allows me to drop off or pickup kids as required. And I wouldn’t hesitate to take time off if one of my children was ill.

The company I work for has been going for 30 years and shows no signs of failing due to the burden of being a “nice” reasonable employer.

Now I work in an environment where I would receive a written warning being 1 minute late and asking for flexitime would put me silently onto the “redundancy at the end of the quarter list”.

They sound like arses who don’t give a shit about your employment rights.

Personally I’d brush up the CV and put in that flexitime request. 😆

But that still qualifies as “something that you could reasonably foresee would be likely to cause death or serious harm”

It does but it doesn’t have the same divisive ring to it as “School run driver runs into teacher” etc.
“Parent drives off when teacher sits on his bonnet….” doesn’t generate the same arguments that the media thrive on. I’m sure they’d love to be able to say how we was in immigrant on benefits… but the article doesn’t start off with “Woking man born and raised in the UK….” but had he been Polish etc. the headline would have been “Polish immigrants drives teacher down” ….

Not sure why you think that is “unsurprising” Steve. Most companies are like that.

I worked compressed hours (4 days a week instead of 5) with a bit of flex as well which allows me to drop off or pickup kids as required. And I wouldn’t hesitate to take time off if one of my children was ill.

The company I work for has been going for 30 years and shows no signs of failing due to the burden of being a “nice” reasonable employer.

Most companies used to be like that … well a good deal of them but most of them are not anymore in my experience.

They sound like arses who don’t give a shit about your employment rights.

Personally I’d brush up the CV and put in that flexitime request.

Oh they give a shit about employment rights but their efforts are in finding ways around them.

I’m really glad at least you have a reasonable employer if for no other reason than it shows some still exist. 😉 I’ll keep applying but the last year hasn’t found anything BETTER…. every offer I had was just as bad.

That is a completely accurate description of what happened though.

Your posting on this thread suggests that you are already on flexi-time Steve 😆

go to 30s

The car does nudge forward, but stops, and the man is still standing.

In response, the man sits on the bonnet, and then pretends to act nonchalant by looking around him.

Then the car moves forward, taking the man on the bonnet with it.

Didn’t run into the teacher at all.

I still don’t understand why they didn’t just stick him with a huge fine and a ban for a year. I’m pretty sure that would have the same effect and be a net income rather than a burden to the taxpayer.

Regarding drop offs, a school I pass on my ride to work came up with the brilliant solution of having a small posse of mums and dads whose job it was to open the doors of the cars as they drove up, get the children out and escort them to the gate. Worked and still works really smoothly as long as you can keep the rota of door openers filled. I love a pragmatic solution

Did you bother to watch the legs and see how they moved before he “sat down” as the car contacted him? It’s quite clear that the car contacts his legs, and also from his reaction. There’s also a slight second nudge which is what knocks him down.

Though presumably you know better than what was described in court?

The car does nudge forward, but stops, and the man is still standing.

In response, the man sits on the bonnet, and then pretends to act nonchalant by looking around him.

Then the car moves forward, taking the man on the bonnet with it.

Didn’t run into the teacher at all.

That’s what I see ….

That is a completely accurate description of what happened though.

again, sorry I don’t see the driver run into the teacher … the only positive contact I can say from the video is when the teacher sits on the bonnet…. and at whatever resolution and speed the car isn’t moving.

Of course driving off at speed is not the correct approach to that but media reporting makes it sound like the parent set off his day with a mission to run over a teacher…

Telegraph: Shocking video captures moment parent ploughs into teacher in school run road rage – except he didn’t plough into the teacher…

The Sun: Furious dad runs over teacher in front of kids after parking ban row – except he didn’t run over the teacher he set off with him on his bonnet

Mirror: Parent who mowed down a teacher in a fit of rage when he was told he couldn’t use the staff car park for the school run is jailed for 10 months – Slightly better but mowed down ???

then continues “Rainier Schoeman, 22, saw the teacher and drove straight into him by the school gates in Woking” …”The teacher was thrown off the side of the bonnet after Schoeman rammed into him in Woking” yes he was thrown off… but he wasn’t rammed…

This is sensationalising the event for people to click… and for sales but it’s not accurate and deliberately misleading.

It is, you’re just not watching closely enough. It’s quite subtle but clearly the car does move slightly immediately before he sits on it (I didn’t spot it at first, and it’s only obvious to me when full screen at full speed, but then the video quality isn’t very good). Though as I keep saying watch the legs – there’s clear movement indicating contact from the first nudge forwards by the car, before he turns his head.

I’ll grab some stills later which should hopefully make it more obvious.

It’s quite clear that the car contacts his legs

When he sits on it, yes.

the car does move slightly immediately before he sits on it

Indeed, it is that slight movement that provokes the man to sit on the car, is what I see. The car is stationary when it ‘comes into contact’ with the man’s legs.

Then the driver moves forward again, in response to the man having sat on the bonnet.

On further watches, you can tell from his balance and posture that the car doesn’t knock him onto the bonnet.

As he sits, his upper torso remains upright, his lower legs perpendicular with the ground and his hands ‘nonchalantly’ still in pocket. He wouldn’t be able to do that if there was forward momentum in the vehicle.

He sits in that balanced state for half a second, then the car driver moves forward and you can see physics acting on the man; his torso moves involuntarily back towards the windscreen, his legs come up, and now his hands come out of his pockets, less nonchalant now.

Watched repeatedly on a 36″ monitor the car udges forward and contact is made with his left leg. The light between passing between the teacher’s leg and the car that lights the bumper disappears and the teacher sits back. Contact before sitting.

Oh hang on, let me just measure my monitor.

Maybe get a friend and experiment, stand facing away from their car while they drive slowly up to you and see how long you can avoid sitting on the bonnet as they nudge the back of your knees.

leffeboy, he was already driving illegally, what would the point of a ban be?

Maybe get a friend and experiment, stand facing away from their car while they drive slowly up to you and see how long you can avoid sitting on the bonnet as they nudge the back of your knees.

Don’t need to experiment. I know what I would do if a car nudged the back of my knees at a speed so slow it makes other people argue about whether it was moving or not. I would nonchalantly take my hands out of my pockets, and move out of the way.

How fast does a car have to be moving not to push a man forward, but to sweep him up and collect him on the bonnet? Much faster than 0.01 mph, I would offer.

But it’s not a relevant experiment, because that’s not what happened 🙂

This is all getting close to conveyor belt territory. I am out. (But right.)

It is, you’re just not watching closely enough. It’s quite subtle but clearly the car does move slightly immediately before he sits on it (I didn’t spot it at first, and it’s only obvious to me when full screen at full speed, but then the video quality isn’t very good). Though as I keep saying watch the legs – there’s clear movement indicating contact from the first nudge forwards by the car, before he turns his head.

I’ll grab some stills later which should hopefully make it more obvious.

I watched it again (a few times) and I see exactly what Dorset man sea’s.
Did it or did it not touch him … it’s impossible to be sure… but the car nudges forwards (hardly ramming) … does or does not touch him .. and then there is 1/2 sec before he sits down when the car doesn’t move at all… then as he sits down the only movement is the car bonnet going down and another 1/2 second then the car sets off

At no point does the car run over him (as claimed by press) and at no point is he flung over the car (as claimed by press) ..or he is mown down….

He doesn’t really narrowly miss the kids either… still stupid even without a teacher on the bonnet but he actually seems to have the presence of mind to go round them wide…

What this I suppose means to me is the description of “mows down” and “runs over” is going for a 10/10 malicious act … setting off with a teacher on the bonnet is stupid but he really shouldn’t have sat on the bonnet. We can speculate but I don’t think he was SO stupid he would have “rammed” and “mown down” the teacher had the teacher NOT sat on the bonnet…

It’s still incredibly STUPID but it’s not like he set out to do it… more a stupid reaction than setting out with malicious intent. I’m not excusing the driver… I’m pointing out the difference between someone sitting on your bonnet and having a mad moment and setting out to mow down a teacher.

Has there really been 6 pages of debate as to whether the teacher sits on the car before [and this next bit is what I think is the import part] the man driving the car tries to run him over?

Surely none of standing in front of the car/leaning on the car/sitting on the car should result in having a massive lump of metal smashed in to you and are therefore irrelevant

It was a provocative act by the teacher, personally I like the idea of reversing away from him once he sits on the bonnet and watching him plop onto the ground…i wonder if that’s defendable in court?…you could say you were retreating from the situation I suppose…good comedy value in that too.

I think reversing would probably have been okay, as it is what the teacher wanted. I doubt it would have needed defending in court.

Likewise leaning out the window and shouting “Get the **** off my ******** car” would also have been effective if a little crass with kids about.

Driving forward put the teachers life at risk though and that’s just not on.

Teacher was clearly at fault, he wasn’t wearing a high visibility vest, so the driver could not have possibly have known he was stood there.

More seriously, I think the sentence should have been longer, there’s clear intent to use the car as a weapon there.

Surely none of standing in front of the car/leaning on the car/sitting on the car should result in having a massive lump of metal smashed in to you and are therefore irrelevant

Not to car zombies, they love a bit of whataboutery.

It was a provocative act by the teacher

Get a grip, he told the guy he wasn’t allowed in a place the guy wasn’t allowed. That’s not provocation, that’s doing a job that shouldn’t need to be done but does because some (a tiny minority) drivers are selfish, dangerous, disrepsectful, law breaking, road rage…

Has there really been 6 pages of debate

You got to love the argumenteers on here!!

You can’t defend the driver, he deserves punishment. Standing in front of a car whilst escalating an argument is just plain darwinism though.

We can speculate but I don’t think he was SO stupid he would have “rammed” and “mown down” the teacher had the teacher NOT sat on the bonnet…

This is the funniest thread in ages!

The sitting on the car was provocative not the instruction to park elsewhere…for most people a car is the second most expensive thing they buy after a house…naturally people don’t like others sitting on it…did the driver do the right thing?…of course not, he flipped his lid and lost control…was the teacher being a tit?…yep, if he feels that strongly about parking there call the police or get bollards put up that teachers have passes for…he went all Billy big bo##ocks and didn’t expect a more aggressive person to be up against him…lesson for everyone; don’t get into spats with people you know nothing about, if you fancy yourself as some kind of enforcer get to the local boxing/martial arts gym and let it out that way instead.

Jesus, some threads on here are baying for blood when a mountain bike returns from a service with a slight scratch or if it’s delivered with less than perfect paint…i can almost understand getting angry at someone sitting on my car… if iI didn’t drive a shed of a vehicle.

Just indulge in a keyboard rant rather than do your job eh, deviant.

The main lesson here is:

Use your car as weapon: expect 10 months in jail even if you don’t hurt anyone (much).

That’s good.

if you fancy yourself as some kind of enforcer get to the local boxing/martial arts gym and let it out that way instead

Lots of us enforce rules for safety where children , or others, are concerned or basically we just do our job.
DO we all have to head off down the dojo now?As for go all billy big whatever all he did was stop someone from parking illegally in an illegal place in an illegal car and potentially endangering children in the process. I mean who wants teachers like that eh….**** the lot of them. You are correct on one thing this thread is full of incredible over reactions to things. I dont think your post redressed this.
I once had someone jump on my bonnet then scream through the windscreen i will give you pain.On exciting he was simply restrained till the police arrived. He ended up crying for his mum – he was about 45 and I was in my twenties.I guess i should have shown him thing or two about violence rather than compassion FOrgive me STW I know not what i do. Its just a car. Its replaceable people are not.

Only a **** idiot would give a toss about the car.

deviant – Member

The sitting on the car was provocative not the instruction to park elsewhere…for most people a car is the second most expensive thing they buy after a house…naturally people don’t like others sitting on it…

However if someone sits on your wall you don’t assault them with a deadly weapon. It’s not about the value of the thing, it’s about the power the driver wields or rather the sense of entitlement / empowerment the car gives them which is relevant to the next part of your post

he went all Billy big bo##ocks and didn’t expect a more aggressive person to be up against him…lesson for everyone; don’t get into spats with people you know nothing about, if you fancy yourself as some kind of enforcer get to the local boxing/martial arts gym and let it out that way instead.

I don’t think he went for “billy big bollocks” I think he was taking the highground/ doing his job/the right thing but didn’t expect anyone would be so unreasonable.

Just indulge in a keyboard rant rather than do your job eh, deviant.

Eh, what’s that got to do with anything you retard!?… i work shifts and I’m a day off today…and even if i was at work do you think I’d be allowed to ignore 999 calls to post on STW?

🙄

I think he was taking the highground/ doing his job/the right thing but didn’t expect anyone would be so unreasonable

….and that’s kind of my point, don’t get into spats like this, just call the police, if he’s illegally parking then it’s a police matter, film it, take photographs as evidence etc…taking the high ground/being right really isn’t worth getting into a confrontation for…body vs car, he could’ve ended up dead, just for trying to enforce a parking rule.. I think it was nobbish behavior from both parties.

if he feels that strongly about parking there call the police or get bollards put up that teachers have passes for.

He really shouldn’t have to! It’s the schools private land and they have responsibility for the safety of children on it so they are more than entitled to say that randoms can’t drive their cars in.

Reading the story, the parents had been told they were not allowed to park their by letter and this particular driver had also been told in person before, but last time he just drove around the teacher and parked anyway.

if you fancy yourself as some kind of enforcer get to the local boxing/martial arts gym

Really? No one should enforce rules unless they can back them up with violence? 😕

deviant – Member

….and that’s kind of my point, don’t get into spats like this, just call the police, if he’s illegally parking then it’s a police matter, film it, take photographs as evidence etc…taking the high ground/being right really isn’t worth getting into a confrontation for…body vs car, he could’ve ended up dead, just for trying to enforce a parking rule.. I think it was nobbish behavior from both parties.

I do see your point and it has been discussed on here before. The problem is that particularly in cities people have become a race of entitled self obsessed pricks. People should stand up to them, morally. And if you are going to go out of your way to potentially antagonise a stranger you should be able to deal with the potential violence that arrises.

But I don’t believe that’s the case here because the teacher was to some extent just doing his job or some aspect of his broader responsibilities.

Really? No one should enforce rules unless they can back them up with violence?

You’ve watched the video, it could’ve been much worse, is it worth it?…there are some nutters out there and a healthy amount of caution when entering into an argument is sensible…don’t put yourself in front of a car when you’re arguing with the driver…im not victim blaming, from what we now know about the driver he seems to have a total disregard for the law…im just saying I wouldn’t have put myself in front of the car, it’s stupid and smacks of vigilantism.