You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
It seems Bristol has more than its fair share of bike-hating psychos...
[url= http://www.thisisbristol.co.uk/Road-rage-driver-hit-head-butted-cyclist-Bristol/story-15241816-detail/story.html ]Another maniac[/url]
I agree with TJ's perspective about not putting yourself in the way of harm (even if he's not always very good at following his own advice 😉 ), but I can't agree with:
Does look like the cyclist was riding in front of the bus to deliberately block it or slow it down.
- no evidence for that at all from what I can see - I mean the bus had a whole other lane to move into to overtake the bike, and it's the bus driver who controls how small the gap is.
I do wonder why only the charge of "dangerous driving" though. From reported comments (including by the judge) it appears there was plenty of evidence for a charge of GBH using a weapon (an offence with a baseline sentence of 18 months). I presume we still have the issue of reluctance to charge drivers with non motoring offences even when their actions go well beyond the usual scope of such things.
**** me.
Though I reckon that cyclist could have ridden home that day if he hadn't played silly buggers with the bus.
For one brief moment it looks like the cyclist is trying to run the bus off the road 😯
Remember - to all those who ride two abreast: you are antagonising bus/lorry/car drivers and this could happen to you. Don't put yourself in that situation.
Not bad, thread probably too old to get many bites tho.
Not bad, thread probably too old to get many bites th
With so many idiots expressing genuinely held inane opinions, it's ruining it for proper trolls.
From just the video evidence 'the small guy was winding up the big guy', and there is usually only one outcome - the big guy flattens the small guy...
Sentencing feels fine, and as said the driver immediately realised what he'd done.
Hopefully the cyclist will learn from the episode too.
As I said to a chap at work who wanted to get a scooter for commuting; 'it doesn't matter if you are in the right, you're still the one who could get hurt the most'.
I've had similar "words" with a bus driver, but stayed behind the bus following those words. If you don't let them know when they cut you up how will thay learn that cyclists don't appreciate having to bunny hop onto the pavement to avoid a collision?
I've done the same. In my case, it was quite clear that the bus driver couldn't care less that he'd just put me in mortal danger.
Its perfectly reasonable to remonstrate with someone who puts you at risk - even if it gets them cross. However to put yourself in the vulnerable position the cyclist did afterwards in the bit we saw is daft.
I personally didn't see the cyclist putting himself in any situation. I saw him cycling away from an argument and being chased down and knocked off his bike, which I'd say doesn't fall too far short of attempted murder.
Did you watch the same video as me? The bus is in front, the cyclist rides well close to his nearside after he changes lanes, presumably to wind him up, and certainly a daft place to put oneself.
I stopped a bus the other week by stopping in the bus lane so it couldnt get past me (I was guessing he wasnt going to mow me down as bus full of people) to let the t**t of a bus driver know he had cut me up after overtaking me..........he apologised and said he should have known better as he himself was a cyslist!!
Horrific video.
I hate driving in Bristol lately - driving has seemed to have got worse and I really want to go slap the counsellors who decided on this road narrowing scheme up Whiteladies Road. All it is going to do is make things worse.
I hope the idiot that cut me up by going straight on in a left hand turn lane and then went screaming up the bus lane down town yesterday got nabbed by the camera at the end of it.
Al, is it me or is this statement deliberately provocative and 100% wrong?
The bus is in front, the cyclist rides well close to his nearside after he changes lanes, presumably to wind him up, and certainly a daft place to put oneself.
The bus is in front: Its behind him all the time
The cyclist rides well close to his nearside: he doesn’t change his line, just wobbles when he realises how close the bus is to him
changes lanes presumably to wind him up. : Could it be that he was just planning on turning right by any chance?
certainly a daft place to put oneself.: In an argument with a bus maybe, but riding along a road legitimately, certainly not.
Overall, what you have to ask is what did the cyclist do that a) warranted a potential death sentence, and what did the bus driver do that was worth losing his job and liberty over. I believe the answer in both cases is nothing.
[i]I personally didn't see the cyclist putting himself in any situation. I saw him cycling away from an argument and being chased down and knocked off his bike, which I'd say doesn't fall too far short of attempted murder.[/i]
Yep, that's the one I saw.
I presumed the cyclist was taking the lane and about to move into the right hand lane when the bus driver swerved into him.
Taking the lane like that is how I turn right at a similar junction every morning
BB - indeed you are correct, sorry, I didn't look closely enough.
*orders glasses*
The cyclist starts off at the nearside of the "straight on" lane and veers across to the white line separating the lanes as the bus is manoeuvring out to overtake him.
The cyclist was either;
(a) wobbling unsteadily on account of too much adrenaline.
(b) deliberately obstructing the bus.
(c) moving across into the "turn right" lane.
If (c) then he didn't (apparently) signal his intention.
None of this excuses the bus drivers behaviour. An argument does not give anyone the right to assault, be that with a fist or a multi-ton vehicle.
Overall, what you have to ask is what did the cyclist do that a) warranted a potential death sentence, and what did the bus driver do that was worth losing his job and liberty over. I believe the answer in both cases is nothing.
Well, the bus driver did plenty to deserve losing his job and liberty. And the cyclist did nothing that warranted what happened. There's no viewing of the video that can come to any other conclusion.
But I guess none of us can second guess why the cyclist was positioning himself like that. Your interpretation is plausible, but I'm getting a different impression - that he was in a running scrap with the driver, wasn't turning right, but trying to stop the bus driver pulling back into the LH lane after he pulled out to overtake.
The driver had only a few yards to get back into the LH lane before the lights, and thanks to the sprint pulled out by the cyclist when he was level with the driver, he'd already lost that one and would have been forced to pull back in behind the rider. At which point he loses his rag entirely and side-swipes him.
From what I see it is not attempted murder. The bus pulls alongside the cyclist and side swipes him. Yes it will knock him off, but is unlikely to result in death. (but it is still extremely dangerous and is likely to result in injury)
Driver loses job and is jailed fair enough.
We don't know the form of altercation that took place before the incident, and it will not in any way mitigate what the driver did, but would be interesting to know what it was.
We don't know the form of altercation that took place before the incident,
From the [url= http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/9088577/Cyclist-run-down-by-road-rage-bus-driver-says-helmet-saved-his-life.html ]telegraph[/url]
"Mr Mead pulled his bike up against the front of the Bugler Coach as they stopped at traffic lights and tugged at one of the windscreen wipers. He then rode off, at a slow pace, in front of the bus."
Pulling at the wipers really is provocation. If you did that to most car drivers they would go mental.
(the helmet comments should keep this thread healthy for a while now as well 🙂 )
From the slighly more detailed report now showing on BBC, looks like the whole family may benefit from spending a little more time on bikes doing some exercise.
[url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-17069235 ]Linky[/url]
Ah now, I see the bus cutting him up.
Not the best. Some mental people on the roads.....
it did look to me at first that the cyclist tried to block the bus by moving over but tbh that bit of road is quite wide and he's still well on his side of the road - I think it's more that he's just pedalling pretty hard - as you would with a bus that close.
As for attempted murder - they were both very lucky that the cyclist didn't get dragged under the busses wheel. There is not much bodywork near the front corner of a bus before the wheel so it was a pretty high risk.
No way is the biker peddling hard or the bus wouldn't be up his chuff.
[i]bus pulls alongside the cyclist and side swipes him. Yes it will knock him off, but is unlikely to result in death[/i]
How would you know!? Have you done tests!? 😆
I seem to recall a cop getting lambasted on STW for killing a man recently. All he did was push him over. Unlikely to result in death eh?
If you go to the BBC report you can see the incident that prompted the argument. Google streetview shows that the bus pulled out of a Give Way bus lane, into the cyclists path and then squeezes him against an overtaking car. Looking at it: the bike could have eased off and let the bus push in, so he is being pretty aggresive. Bus is still in the wrong, however, even in this initial incident.
DezB - Member
bus pulls alongside the cyclist and side swipes him. Yes it will knock him off, but is unlikely to result in deathHow would you know!? Have you done tests!?
I seem to recall a cop getting lambasted on STW for killing a man recently. All he did was push him over. Unlikely to result in death eh?
True, but both IMHO are still unlikely to result in death. It can happen though. Plus both are wrong.
Find myself agreeing with this mythical TJ fella.
both IMHO are still unlikely to result in death
Thats a bit like saying that it was an unforeseen consequence that someone might die after having a shotgun pointed at them and the trigger pulled. Of course being deliberately run down by a bus is likely to result in death. No doubt TJ'll be along in a minute to suggest that in this instance the helmet manufacturer should also be charged due to the certainty of rotational forces causing injury in an accident likewise being a foreseeable consquence, but just saying something obviously daft doesn't make it right.
Berm Bandit - Memberboth IMHO are still unlikely to result in death
Thats a bit like saying that it was an unforeseen consequence that someone might die after having a shotgun pointed at them and the trigger pulled. Of course being deliberately run down by a bus is likely to result in death. No doubt TJ'll be along in a minute to suggest that in this instance the helmet manufacturer should also be charged due to the certainty of rotational forces causing injury in an accident likewise being a foreseeable consquence, but just saying something obviously daft doesn't make it right.
Not like pulling a shotgun trigger at all. Have you watched it? If bus driver wanted to do real damage he would not have drawn alongside before side swiping cyclist. Yes, it was dangerous, yes it was wrong and he is rightly jailed for it. IMHO it was not attempted murder, and the court seemed to take that view too.
the court seemed to take that view too.
Actually not, its not the courts that decide what the driver is charged with. Similarly in the case of the Rhyll 4 the same people (CPS in collusion with the Police) decided that the appropriate offence for killing 4 people was driving with bald tyres, for which they were very severely criticised later.
The simple fact is in this country if you want to do away with someone, buy them a bike and then run them over. You will get off pretty much Scot free. In this instance the only reason the driver got done was the irrefutable video evidence.
As the fellow cyclist was side swiped by the bus, and he was hurtling along the floor on his side, i bet he or somebody else shouted BOLLARDS,luckily he missed them.
he's a maniac.. or perhaps just an idiot.. but probably both.. and rather smug about it too by the look of the photograph of him that's appeared online..
I'm a yoghurt weaving lentil boiling sandal wearing bleeding heart liberal.. but at the moment I can realistically only see the positive side of 'very traumatising things' happening to him while he's on his short break in jail..
Ordered myself a rear-view handlebar mirror from Wiggle...
Berm Bandit - Memberthe court seemed to take that view too.
Actually not, its not the courts that decide what the driver is charged with. Similarly in the case of the Rhyll 4 the same people (CPS in collusion with the Police) decided that the appropriate offence for killing 4 people was driving with bald tyres, for which they were very severely criticised later.
The simple fact is in this country if you want to do away with someone, buy them a bike and then run them over. You will get off pretty much Scot free. In this instance the only reason the driver got done was the irrefutable video evidence.
Yes, was just being simplistic, its the CPS not the court.
I do agree with what you say regarding the ease of "getting away with murder" for vehicle drivers.
There are cases of deliberate murder, but most deaths have never been the intended outcome. I really don't want to go into that debate.
Do you think the driver of the bus was trying to kill the cyclist? I don't think he was, but that is just my perspective.
Attempted Murder
In contrast to the offence of murder, attempted murder requires the existence of an intention to kill, not merely to cause grievous bodily harm: R v Grimwood (1962) 3 All ER 285. The requisite intention to kill can be inferred by the circumstances: R v Walker and Hayles (1990) 90 Cr App R 226.
From the CPS Website: So tell me precisely how you don't infer an intention to kill out of someone deliberately driving a bus into a cyclist......what was he doing trying to do his hair nicely for him?
IMHO it was not attempted murder, and the court seemed to take that view too.
The driver wasn't charged with attempted murder so the court didn't have to decide if it was attempted murder and had no view on it
Berm Bandit - MemberAttempted Murder
In contrast to the offence of murder, attempted murder requires the existence of an intention to kill, not merely to cause grievous bodily harm: R v Grimwood (1962) 3 All ER 285. The requisite intention to kill can be inferred by the circumstances: R v Walker and Hayles (1990) 90 Cr App R 226.From the CPS Website: So tell me precisely how you don't infer an intention to kill out of someone deliberately driving a bus into a cyclist......what was he doing trying to do his hair nicely for him?
Steady on, did I say the Driver was being friendly? I am not defending him as his actions were despicable. In my opinion, if I am allowed to express it, and please feel free to disagree, the Bus driver was NOT trying to kill the cyclist. Now, what he did would almost certainly result in injury, but I do not think he was intent on murder.
gwaelod - MemberIMHO it was not attempted murder, and the court seemed to take that view too.
The driver wasn't charged with attempted murder so the court didn't have to decide if it was attempted murder and had no view on it
Yes, my apologies, I was just being simplistic, the Police/CPS took that view.
The initial incident on the roundabout looks pretty trivial tbh.
Yes, the bus was in the wrong lane, but he had some clear space ahead of the cyclist and indicated.
The bus was ahead of the cyclist for a good while.
I can only assume that the cyclist was feeling at danger from a multitude of similar incidents which built up into this 'banging the side of the bus' etc.
I've felt like that before and reacted in a similarly 'out of proportion' way.
The thing I'm taking from all this is - do what you can to keep everyone safe and calm. Try and communicate your vulnerability in a way which doesn't enrage.
the Police/CPS took that view
.... and that particular statement is the bone of contention. Very often these decisions are made for the shakiest of reasons, and lead to acceptance of crime rather than dealing with it.
Frankly this was not a driving offence, it was a criminal assault with a lethal weapon, while at the same time risking the safety of the passengers in his care and he should be treated accordingly. Regretably it may well be that what he got was the heaviest punishment available, but it doesn't make it right.
I can only assume that the cyclist was feeling at danger from a multitude of similar incidents which built up into this 'banging the side of the bus' etc.
I can assume he was a confrontational idiot for doing this and he was taking the holier than thou stance that many cyclists take when riding on the road.
All of which can result in getting run over by a bus. 🙂
I think the "used the bus as a weapon" comment is poor from a judge, as it does invite the question "why wan't he charged with assault/GBH?"
Berm Bandit - Memberthe Police/CPS took that view
.... and that particular statement is the bone of contention. Very often these decisions are made for the shakiest of reasons, and lead to acceptance of crime rather than dealing with it.
Frankly this was not a driving offence, it was a criminal assault with a lethal weapon, while at the ame time risking the safety of the passengers in his care and he should be treated accordingly. Regretably it may well be that what he got was the heaviest punishment available, but it doesn't make it right.
Absolutely agree. I am in favour of far heavier sentences for this sort of incident and for far longer driving bans, including lifetime driving bans. Too mant people think it is a right to drive rather than a privilidge, and I believe anyone that abuses it should have it removed for a much longer time.
"why wan't he charged with assault/GBH?"
Perhaps thats precisely why he said it!
He was convicted of GBH, in addition to dangerous driving.
Good
Deleted - I see it now says he did get convicted of GBH
The initial incident is very annoying - bad carve up by an impatient bad bus driver. However - the cyclist only had to back off to let the bus in and not get squished there. Once you get into an altercation don't use your vulnerable body to block a multi tonne bus - and IMO the cyclist does a deliberate block on the the bus - lost his rag as well.
Some interesting stuff here, TJ
I don't think it really matters if you're on a bicycle or not either, someone cuts you up, pulls out in front etc.. definitely best to hang back and let it go even though it means letting someone "get away with it".
Plenty of examples of motorist vs motorist road rage as well...
A bus pulled out of a bus stop layby as I got to it, he half hestitated but had started move. I slowed up, waved him out and fell in behind him, he started manouver without checking properly, I would have been in the right to continue and call him all sorts, but I didn't. Further up the road I past him, later still he drew up alongside me at lights and waved and we exchanged nods. Nice an pleasant.
A lot of bad driver, a few bad cyclists. Guess which ones are more dangerous....
29 you're having a laugh!Hill, 29, from Frome, Somerset,
[img] 
[/img]
29 stone
17 months not enough IMO.
Using a bus to harm someone is behaviour we don't need. It's psychopathic
How is 17 months sending the right deterrent signals to other aggressive drivers who hate cyclists and contemplate the same?
I;m sick of nearly getting knocked off every road ride because drivers think their needs are the only important ones
he looks like the brother from my name is Earl!
No excuses for the bus driver but arguing with a driver, tugging their wiper then riding off slowly in front the vehicle is suicidal.
"Mr Mead pulled his bike up against the front of the Bugler Coach as they stopped at traffic lights and tugged at one of the windscreen wipers. He then rode off, at a slow pace, in front of the bus."
17 months not enough IMO.
I thought so too. Now whilst I don't know the full details, the sentencing guidelines for GBH with a weapon is a baseline of 18 months and a range of 12 months to 3 years. For a first time offender without much in the way of other aggravating factors, 17 months seems about right (you can argue that the guidelines are wrong if you like, but that's a separate issue - he got prosecuted for the correct thing and sentenced in accordance with the guidelines).