This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
http://road.cc/content/news/120748-kingston-driver-aimed-car-cyclist-missed...
I know it is serious, but can't resist
... Police are said to be combing the area for evidence...
In reply to ChrisJD:
It's another case of Scarum Hairum....
> ... Police are said to be combing the area for evidence...
It's another case of Scarum Hairum....
In reply to ChrisJD:
It is a "cut and dried" case against the driver...
...and was a close shave for the cyclist!
It is a "cut and dried" case against the driver...
...and was a close shave for the cyclist!
In reply to Marmoteer:
Salon is OK
No perm-anent damage .
Owners were talking about a couple of extensions ,and maybe a change of colour anyway.
Salon is OK
No perm-anent damage .
Owners were talking about a couple of extensions ,and maybe a change of colour anyway.
Post edited at 13:25
In reply to ChrisJD:
The NitWits had time to Mullet over, now she's got an appointment with the bigwigs, in hirsuit.
> Yes, it was really lucky that no one dyed..
The NitWits had time to Mullet over, now she's got an appointment with the bigwigs, in hirsuit.
In reply to ChrisJD:
Bl**dy hell, you cyclists don't half have a persecution complex: maybe the poor driver misread the name of the hairdressers as 'Park <IN> Salon. ;-/
But it's a transient piece of news interest anyway - hair today, gone tomorrow: it's not like she demolished the whole building - she stopped short of the back and sides.
Martin
ps I bet you a crisp fiver that the driver doesn't get convicted of any criminal offence....
Bl**dy hell, you cyclists don't half have a persecution complex: maybe the poor driver misread the name of the hairdressers as 'Park <IN> Salon. ;-/
But it's a transient piece of news interest anyway - hair today, gone tomorrow: it's not like she demolished the whole building - she stopped short of the back and sides.
Martin
ps I bet you a crisp fiver that the driver doesn't get convicted of any criminal offence....
In reply to maisie:
This highlights a growing fringe issue that is the same all-over the world. It looks like a parting of the ways for road users.
This highlights a growing fringe issue that is the same all-over the world. It looks like a parting of the ways for road users.
In reply to maisie:
Well, not trying to split hairs here, but shes not been picked up by the Fuzz yet?!
> ps I bet you a crisp fiver that the driver doesn't get convicted of any criminal offence....
Well, not trying to split hairs here, but shes not been picked up by the Fuzz yet?!
In reply to dek:
I guess the cyclist must have cut em up, without a wave. Lets hope the judge locks them up and that straightens them out (driver).
I guess the cyclist must have cut em up, without a wave. Lets hope the judge locks them up and that straightens them out (driver).
Post edited at 17:04
In reply to ChrisJD:
Yep, public enemy Number One. Lets hope they Whisker off to jail.
> I guess the cyclist must have cut em up, without a wave. Lets hope the judge locks them up and that straightens them out (driver).
Yep, public enemy Number One. Lets hope they Whisker off to jail.
In reply to FreshSlate:
Ditto (the f*cking hell bit), I've not had intentional swings but it's never good when a car is coming at you and the driver isn't looking (or is).
Hope the book gets thrown at them.
> I had a car have a proper swing at me once. Not a good feeling, f*cking hell.
Ditto (the f*cking hell bit), I've not had intentional swings but it's never good when a car is coming at you and the driver isn't looking (or is).
Hope the book gets thrown at them.
In reply to ChrisJD: Will the driver get a crimpinal record?
In reply to andy:
Probably not given recent incidents but you probably should for that pun.
> Will the driver get a crimpinal record?
Probably not given recent incidents but you probably should for that pun.
In reply to ChrisJD:
as far as I m concerned nothing less than a permanent ban will be acceptable
as far as I m concerned nothing less than a permanent ban will be acceptable
In reply to maisie:
ps I bet you a crisp fiver that the driver doesn't get convicted of any criminal offence....
Maybe, but I bet their next year's premium will make their hair curl.
ps I bet you a crisp fiver that the driver doesn't get convicted of any criminal offence....
Maybe, but I bet their next year's premium will make their hair curl.
In reply to ChrisJD:
Is it confirmed that the cyclist was the intended target or just the bike itself?
Is it confirmed that the cyclist was the intended target or just the bike itself?
In reply to Lusk:
A cutting remark.
> Maybe, but I bet their next year's premium will make their hair curl.
A cutting remark.
In reply to FreshSlate:
I had a car swerve at me on a roundabout - my right of way. Made me more angry than anything - probably just as well I didn't catch him up at the next roundabout...
> I had a car have a proper swing at me once. Not a good feeling, f*cking hell.
I had a car swerve at me on a roundabout - my right of way. Made me more angry than anything - probably just as well I didn't catch him up at the next roundabout...
In reply to Trevers:
I bet he's weighing up whether the fringe benefits provided by cycling are really worth it.
Cheers
Toby
I bet he's weighing up whether the fringe benefits provided by cycling are really worth it.
Cheers
Toby
In reply to ChrisJD:
Latest news is that the driver has got away with a caution... told to beehive himself
Latest news is that the driver has got away with a caution... told to beehive himself
In reply to ChrisJD:
The latest update:
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/motorist-arrested-on-suspicion-of-atte...
I appear to have run out of awful puns.
The latest update:
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/motorist-arrested-on-suspicion-of-atte...
I appear to have run out of awful puns.
In reply to ChrisJD:
Quote from the report:
Angela Bulbeck, who has owned The Park Salon for 17 years and worked there since she was a teenager, said she spoke to the motorist shortly after the crash.
She said: "She kept saying repeatedly that she was sorry. I just said it didn't matter if there was no loss of life. We are just hoping she is insured. She drives a very fancy car. I think that is what saved her children's' lives."
End quote.
Ms Bulbeck should go into politics: that was a masterly dismantling of the driver. Very few people are capable of being that articulate, composed and restrained under such circumstances. "I think that is what saved her children's lives". Or, in other words, the driver almost killed her own kids and was saved from her own negligent stupidity (allegedly, possibly) by the size of the car which she (allegedly) used to attack the cyclist.
I fear I may lose the fiver. Quite happy to do so.
Martin
Quote from the report:
Angela Bulbeck, who has owned The Park Salon for 17 years and worked there since she was a teenager, said she spoke to the motorist shortly after the crash.
She said: "She kept saying repeatedly that she was sorry. I just said it didn't matter if there was no loss of life. We are just hoping she is insured. She drives a very fancy car. I think that is what saved her children's' lives."
End quote.
Ms Bulbeck should go into politics: that was a masterly dismantling of the driver. Very few people are capable of being that articulate, composed and restrained under such circumstances. "I think that is what saved her children's lives". Or, in other words, the driver almost killed her own kids and was saved from her own negligent stupidity (allegedly, possibly) by the size of the car which she (allegedly) used to attack the cyclist.
I fear I may lose the fiver. Quite happy to do so.
Martin
In reply to maisie:
FIVE children? Does the car even seat five passengers? If not then presumably at least one of them wasn't even strapped in when she decided vengeance was far more important than children. And in any case what an example.
FIVE children? Does the car even seat five passengers? If not then presumably at least one of them wasn't even strapped in when she decided vengeance was far more important than children. And in any case what an example.
In reply to ChrisJD:
Puns aside it seems that people are people are taking the side of the cyclist despite there being very little in terms of accurate information out there as to what exactly happened.
Let me inject another perspective with the facts we do have....
Autistic man possibly acting in a non-predictable way gets into a "heated argument" with a lone woman in car with her young children. Autistic man attacks car with lone woman and young children inside causing damage to the car. Terrified lone woman with young children stamps on accelerator in a panic to get away hits cyclist and slams into parked car and and hairdressers.
:|
Puns aside it seems that people are people are taking the side of the cyclist despite there being very little in terms of accurate information out there as to what exactly happened.
Let me inject another perspective with the facts we do have....
Autistic man possibly acting in a non-predictable way gets into a "heated argument" with a lone woman in car with her young children. Autistic man attacks car with lone woman and young children inside causing damage to the car. Terrified lone woman with young children stamps on accelerator in a panic to get away hits cyclist and slams into parked car and and hairdressers.
:|
Post edited at 17:46
In reply to Antigua:
Except she was arrested for GBH and released on bail? Seems a bit like grasping at straws to me.
Except she was arrested for GBH and released on bail? Seems a bit like grasping at straws to me.
In reply to maisie:
in other words, the driver almost killed her own kids and was saved from her own negligent stupidity (allegedly, possibly) by the size of the car which she (allegedly) used to attack the cyclist.
Oddly you neglect to mention that an autistic man has just attacked her car a car thats carrying her young children.
Its not out of the realms of possibility that she stamped on the accelerator in a blind panic to get away.
in other words, the driver almost killed her own kids and was saved from her own negligent stupidity (allegedly, possibly) by the size of the car which she (allegedly) used to attack the cyclist.
Oddly you neglect to mention that an autistic man has just attacked her car a car thats carrying her young children.
Its not out of the realms of possibility that she stamped on the accelerator in a blind panic to get away.
In reply to maisie:
I thought your crisp fiver was safe as houses, but maybe it is only as safe as hair dressing salons after all.
I was under the impression that "attempted grievous bodily harm" was not a thing, the same way that attempted manslaughter isn't. Shows what I know.
> I fear I may lose the fiver. Quite happy to do so.
I thought your crisp fiver was safe as houses, but maybe it is only as safe as hair dressing salons after all.
I was under the impression that "attempted grievous bodily harm" was not a thing, the same way that attempted manslaughter isn't. Shows what I know.
In reply to Bob_the_Builder:
No it was "attempted GBH" and I thought that would have been standard practice with an ongoing investigation of this sort but I'm not a lawyer.
> Except she was arrested for GBH and released on bail? Seems a bit like grasping at straws to me.
No it was "attempted GBH" and I thought that would have been standard practice with an ongoing investigation of this sort but I'm not a lawyer.
In reply to Antigua:
Jeeeezo.....
You don't have to be autistic or not autistic to feel threatened on a bike by drivers and lose your rag with the driver. Being autistic is neither here nor there. Losing your rag with the driver doesn't excuse what she is charged with doing.
Jeeeezo.....
You don't have to be autistic or not autistic to feel threatened on a bike by drivers and lose your rag with the driver. Being autistic is neither here nor there. Losing your rag with the driver doesn't excuse what she is charged with doing.
Post edited at 17:58
In reply to Antigua:
The autistic man and the cyclist were one and the same no?
But maybe her brief will be able to use the cyclist's disability to spin it that way, get it dropped down to good old 'due care and attention' and maisie will keep his fiver after all.
> Oddly you neglect to mention that an autistic man has just attacked her car a car thats carrying her young children.
The autistic man and the cyclist were one and the same no?
But maybe her brief will be able to use the cyclist's disability to spin it that way, get it dropped down to good old 'due care and attention' and maisie will keep his fiver after all.
In reply to nickinscottishmountains:
What is she charged with doing?
Did the attempted GBH occur during the heated argument prior to the crash, during the crash or after the crash?
> Jeeeezo.....
> You don't have to be autistic or not autistic to feel threatened on a bike by drivers and lose your rag with the driver. Being autistic is neither here nor there. Losing your rag with the driver doesn't excuse what she is charged with doing.
What is she charged with doing?
Did the attempted GBH occur during the heated argument prior to the crash, during the crash or after the crash?
In reply to nickinscottishmountains:
You as have others conveniently forgotten to mention the circumstance.
An autistic man physically attacks a car that contains a lone woman and her young children. Is it not out of the bound of possibility that she in sheer panic stamps on the accelerator to get away?
Are there any women out there that would like to comment?
> You don't have to be autistic or not autistic to feel threatened on a bike by drivers and lose your rag with the driver.
You as have others conveniently forgotten to mention the circumstance.
An autistic man physically attacks a car that contains a lone woman and her young children. Is it not out of the bound of possibility that she in sheer panic stamps on the accelerator to get away?
Are there any women out there that would like to comment?
In reply to deepsoup:
Sorry but that's just sick..... I assume that your not and never have been a parent.
> But maybe her brief will be able to use the cyclist's disability to spin it
Sorry but that's just sick..... I assume that your not and never have been a parent.
Post edited at 18:07
In reply to Antigua:
Six kids. But with all the aggressive cyclists out there I don't feel safe in an SUV any more, these days I drive them to school in an amphibious landing craft.
Six kids. But with all the aggressive cyclists out there I don't feel safe in an SUV any more, these days I drive them to school in an amphibious landing craft.
In reply to Antigua:
>
Frankly, no. That kind of explanation is just weedling out if it. Big car, capable of accelerating far faster than he can, with far more protection than he has, and doors etc.....err no...I just don't buy your explanation.
>
> An autistic man physically attacks a car that contains a lone woman and her young children. Is it not out of the bound of possibility that she in sheer panic stamps on the accelerator to get away?
Frankly, no. That kind of explanation is just weedling out if it. Big car, capable of accelerating far faster than he can, with far more protection than he has, and doors etc.....err no...I just don't buy your explanation.
Post edited at 18:21
In reply to Antigua:
She may have panicked, but shes in a big locked metal box and completely invulnerable. Ifher reaction in this situation is to accelerate blindly she should not be allowed the priviledge of a driving license.
However numerous witnesses have indicated she drove at the cyclist. The police have taken the almost unprecedented step of charging her with attempted gbh. The usual police response would be to do nothing or at most charge her with due care.
She may have panicked, but shes in a big locked metal box and completely invulnerable. Ifher reaction in this situation is to accelerate blindly she should not be allowed the priviledge of a driving license.
However numerous witnesses have indicated she drove at the cyclist. The police have taken the almost unprecedented step of charging her with attempted gbh. The usual police response would be to do nothing or at most charge her with due care.
In reply to deepsoup:
Is this some sort of victimhood Top Trumps?
Man attacks woman 0-15
Man attacks BIG EXPENSIVE car 15-15
Lone woman with young children in car 15-30
Man on Bicycle GAME SET MATCH.
Is this some sort of victimhood Top Trumps?
Man attacks woman 0-15
Man attacks BIG EXPENSIVE car 15-15
Lone woman with young children in car 15-30
Man on Bicycle GAME SET MATCH.
In reply to Antigua:
I apologise, you are correct. Attempted GBH. Should have been attempted murder but heyo.
I take it you have never been run at by a car? It isn't a fun experience, even if they don't hit you.
I apologise, you are correct. Attempted GBH. Should have been attempted murder but heyo.
I take it you have never been run at by a car? It isn't a fun experience, even if they don't hit you.
In reply to balmybaldwin:
And there you completely sum up my argument.... we have no idea what happened yet people are are just rushing in to condemn one side with out knowing the full circumstance.
I'd completely commend you on your cool as a cucumber act but it wasn't you it was a lone woman in a highly stressful situation involving her young children having to make spit second decisions. A man with mental health issues has just attacked her car. Are you saying she though "I'm sooooo glad I paid for the optional protection from the violent lunatic swinging a d-Lock" on the Audi Q7 options list?????
Would your reaction have been the same if it had been YOUR wife and YOUR young children?
Unsual to charge? No idea I'm not a lawyer.
> She may have panicked, but shes in a big locked metal box and completely invulnerable. Ifher reaction in this situation is to accelerate blindly she should not be allowed the priviledge of a driving license.
> However numerous witnesses have indicated she drove at the cyclist. The police have taken the almost unprecedented step of charging her with attempted gbh. The usual police response would be to do nothing or at most charge her with due care.
And there you completely sum up my argument.... we have no idea what happened yet people are are just rushing in to condemn one side with out knowing the full circumstance.
I'd completely commend you on your cool as a cucumber act but it wasn't you it was a lone woman in a highly stressful situation involving her young children having to make spit second decisions. A man with mental health issues has just attacked her car. Are you saying she though "I'm sooooo glad I paid for the optional protection from the violent lunatic swinging a d-Lock" on the Audi Q7 options list?????
Would your reaction have been the same if it had been YOUR wife and YOUR young children?
Unsual to charge? No idea I'm not a lawyer.
In reply to Antigua:
It's non sequitur top trumps and I bow to your superior hatstand.
It's non sequitur top trumps and I bow to your superior hatstand.
In reply to timjones:
Apparently she clipped the bike on her way into the hairdressers. Since all the witnesses seem to say she aimed at him, I guess that's where the charge is.
Apparently she clipped the bike on her way into the hairdressers. Since all the witnesses seem to say she aimed at him, I guess that's where the charge is.
In reply to Antigua:
It is unusual to charge, it suggests that there is evidence of wrongdoing by the woman.
> Unsual to charge? No idea I'm not a lawyer.
It is unusual to charge, it suggests that there is evidence of wrongdoing by the woman.
In reply to Bob_the_Builder:
Wonderful, maybe you could have the young children charged with being accessories to attempted murder :|
No I've never been run at by a car but then again I've never attacked one with a lone woman and her children in it so fair do's really.
> I apologise, you are correct. Attempted GBH. Should have been attempted murder but heyo.
> I take it you have never been run at by a car? It isn't a fun experience, even if they don't hit you.
Wonderful, maybe you could have the young children charged with being accessories to attempted murder :|
No I've never been run at by a car but then again I've never attacked one with a lone woman and her children in it so fair do's really.
Post edited at 18:43
In reply to Antigua:
I see no mention in any of the articles to "swinging a d-lock", could you point us to the place you found that? Or is it in fact you who are making unfounded assumptions/accusations?
Why was she in an argument with him in the first place? Why didn't she have the presence of mind to drive away without joining into an altercation, since she and her wee bairns are so delicate and unprotected?
A split second decision to get a haircut was a pretty daft fight-or-flight reaction.
I see no mention in any of the articles to "swinging a d-lock", could you point us to the place you found that? Or is it in fact you who are making unfounded assumptions/accusations?
Why was she in an argument with him in the first place? Why didn't she have the presence of mind to drive away without joining into an altercation, since she and her wee bairns are so delicate and unprotected?
A split second decision to get a haircut was a pretty daft fight-or-flight reaction.
In reply to Antigua:
I'm pretty sure passengers in a vehicle, especially minors, are not held responsible for the actions of the driver. But I, like you, am not a lawyer.
Are you saying that trying to hit somebody with a 2 tonne vehicle is a reasonable response to that person kicking your car? You have an interesting idea of "using reasonable force against an unjust threat"
I'm pretty sure passengers in a vehicle, especially minors, are not held responsible for the actions of the driver. But I, like you, am not a lawyer.
Are you saying that trying to hit somebody with a 2 tonne vehicle is a reasonable response to that person kicking your car? You have an interesting idea of "using reasonable force against an unjust threat"
In reply to Trevers:
Looking at the original article on road.cc and it confirmed the police as saying the driver was a male. The road.cc article has since been "updated" but it doesn't give me much confidence when you can't even get the drivers sex right.
All I can see is she was arrested....
"The woman, who police said is in her 30s, was arrested on suspicion of attempted grievous bodily harm after she allegedly hit the cyclist in her Audi Q7."
> It is unusual to charge, it suggests that there is evidence of wrongdoing by the woman.
Looking at the original article on road.cc and it confirmed the police as saying the driver was a male. The road.cc article has since been "updated" but it doesn't give me much confidence when you can't even get the drivers sex right.
All I can see is she was arrested....
"The woman, who police said is in her 30s, was arrested on suspicion of attempted grievous bodily harm after she allegedly hit the cyclist in her Audi Q7."
In reply to Bob_the_Builder:
I guess you missed the sarcasm!
>Are you saying that trying to hit somebody with a 2 tonne vehicle
"Trying" do we know that? could quite easily have been self-defence. How do we know that this autistic man wasn't stood in front of the car violently waving a D-Lock? He had after all already attacked the car once.
> I'm pretty sure passengers in a vehicle, especially minors, are not held responsible for the actions of the driver. But I, like you, am not a lawyer.
I guess you missed the sarcasm!
>Are you saying that trying to hit somebody with a 2 tonne vehicle
"Trying" do we know that? could quite easily have been self-defence. How do we know that this autistic man wasn't stood in front of the car violently waving a D-Lock? He had after all already attacked the car once.
Post edited at 19:00
In reply to Antigua:
10/10 amazing trolling
> I guess you missed the sarcasm!
>
> >Are you saying that trying to hit somebody with a 2 tonne vehicle
> "Trying" do we know that? could quite easily have been self-defence. How do we know that this autistic man wasn't stood in front of the car violently waving a D-Lock? He had after all already attacked the car once.
10/10 amazing trolling
In reply to Trevers:
Trolling? Why?
I prefer to live in a country that convicts people based on their actions rather than a throwing them to mob justice. If the facts show that this woman has done wrong then fair enough but until thats been proved she's innocent.
Trolling? Why?
I prefer to live in a country that convicts people based on their actions rather than a throwing them to mob justice. If the facts show that this woman has done wrong then fair enough but until thats been proved she's innocent.
In reply to ChrisJD:
Such a shame this light hearted and fun thread has been cut short. No doubt the police will see their mistake and soon have that cyclist by the short and curly's and bang him up for this grade one offence.
Toby
Such a shame this light hearted and fun thread has been cut short. No doubt the police will see their mistake and soon have that cyclist by the short and curly's and bang him up for this grade one offence.
Toby
In reply to Toby_W:
Quite. We cyclists need to take a good look in the mirror from all different angles, and think about how everyone else sees us. Probably with a conveniently placed second mirror
Quite. We cyclists need to take a good look in the mirror from all different angles, and think about how everyone else sees us. Probably with a conveniently placed second mirror
Post edited at 19:51
In reply to Antigua:
Is it perhaps that you don't understand 'allegedly' or 'possibly'? You can clearly mangle your way through a proper non sequitur, to the point of infinite reduction, but can you see the irony in castigating others for taking a viewpoint - based on police action, so actually fair comment - which is much more likely than your own version of events?
But it's all moot - the reason why I didn't go into detail about the cyclist was because I was noting the comments made by the salon owner. I'm sorry that you're confused about that, but it may be that my post caused you to panic and press buttons on your keyboard without thinking. The rest of your contributions seem to back this up.
Mainly, though, I don't think anybody has ever managed to successfully defend themselves in court by claiming that sheer panic and fright caused them to rush AT a perceived assailant, in order to escape through a hairdressers. Whilst driving a car.
Best of luck.
Martin
> Oddly you neglect to mention that an autistic man has just attacked her car a car thats carrying her young children.
> Its not out of the realms of possibility that she stamped on the accelerator in a blind panic to get away.
Is it perhaps that you don't understand 'allegedly' or 'possibly'? You can clearly mangle your way through a proper non sequitur, to the point of infinite reduction, but can you see the irony in castigating others for taking a viewpoint - based on police action, so actually fair comment - which is much more likely than your own version of events?
But it's all moot - the reason why I didn't go into detail about the cyclist was because I was noting the comments made by the salon owner. I'm sorry that you're confused about that, but it may be that my post caused you to panic and press buttons on your keyboard without thinking. The rest of your contributions seem to back this up.
Mainly, though, I don't think anybody has ever managed to successfully defend themselves in court by claiming that sheer panic and fright caused them to rush AT a perceived assailant, in order to escape through a hairdressers. Whilst driving a car.
Best of luck.
Martin
In reply to Antigua:
That's the scoring system for tennis. Almost.
> Is this some sort of victimhood Top Trumps?
> Man attacks woman 0-15
> Man attacks BIG EXPENSIVE car 15-15
> Lone woman with young children in car 15-30
> Man on Bicycle GAME SET MATCH.
That's the scoring system for tennis. Almost.
In reply to kevin stephens:
Maybe if her partner(s) had used "something for the weekend", then she wouldn't have had 5 kids in the car
Maybe if her partner(s) had used "something for the weekend", then she wouldn't have had 5 kids in the car
Post edited at 21:35
In reply to Bob_the_Builder:
If so, she'll probably get extensions on her sentence....
> It might be ruled a frizz-olous defense! :/
If so, she'll probably get extensions on her sentence....
In reply to kevin stephens:
Amuse us?
Some of the punnery was Dove from above bad.
Never seen tumbleweed like it.
Amuse us?
Some of the punnery was Dove from above bad.
Never seen tumbleweed like it.
In reply to andymac:
Lighten up a bit mate, nobody dyed.
Lighten up a bit mate, nobody dyed.
In reply to deepsoup:
Speaking to the missus she said if some wako cyclist had attacked the car with the kids in it she would have run them over as well then put the car in reverse to make sure....... women and kids hey!
Speaking to the missus she said if some wako cyclist had attacked the car with the kids in it she would have run them over as well then put the car in reverse to make sure....... women and kids hey!
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Elsewhere on the site
Fri Night Vid Le Toit de Ben - Quebec 1958
This week's Friday Night Video whisks us back to Val-David, Quebec, in the Autumn of 1958. Two daring young climbers embark on the ascent of a route that seemed unattainable, resembling a roof suspended in the air, defying all the conventions of the time....
3 May
Loading Notifications...