UKC

Not wishing to start another us'n'them thread but this bloke needs to be prevented from committing a repeat offence.

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/aug/25/man-pushes-cyclist-into-lond...

In reply to Andy Hardy:

I wish I did. What a cock.

In reply to Andy Hardy:

Casually endangering cyclist's lives seems to be getting more popular, be it pushing them over from a car to running them over with a bus. I'll be interested to see what this tragic misuse of semen gets charged with. I wonder what the legal consequences of walking up to someone waiting to cross the road and shoving them in front of a car would be.

In reply to Removed User:


Does it ? I thought it always happened: I remember any number of nob head drivers when I used to cycle to school 40 years ago.

In reply to Andy Hardy:

Well he handed himself in! http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/aug/25/man-pushes-cyclist-into-lond...

Mind you he wasn't arrested

In reply to Andy Hardy:


That remains to be seen.

In reply to Mike Highbury:

What I meant was he wasn't arrested when he showed up at the cop shop. Don't know if that's normal procedure and he'll be arrested and charged later or if it means he'll just get a caution.

In reply to Andy Hardy:


On video that evidence alone I doubt that the police felt in a position to question him so they probably gave him his bus fare and asked him to come back another day.

In reply to Andy Hardy:

I am a keen cyclist but I am getting a bit fed up of self righteous cyclists. So she sticks the middle finger up at some bloke and provokes the whole thing and then complains, whilst not condoning him pushing her off the bike, she started it.

I was out in the car yesterday and some idiot on a bike was cycling so far out in the carriage way he almost caused me to have a head on and then gave me the finger for cutting in on him a bit close to prevent an accident.

In reply to Springfield:


vimeo.com/135884468

In reply to Springfield:

Perhaps she gave him the finger, I don't know. What we saw was a cyclist not giving way to a pedestrian who had as little intention of slowing down as she did; but, as he was already crossing the road, it was his right of way. She whimpers, 'Don't push me off', to which he replied, 'Shut up'. Who knows why, at that point, she thought that he would push her off; maybe she's a brilliant predictor of human behaviour, but I doubt it. Setting that aside, neither did very well as social beings, did they?

The wearing of a head-cam crime is an unforgivable crime, obviously.

In reply to Springfield:

>[...] a bike was cycling so far out in the carriage way he almost caused me to have a head on and then gave me the finger for cutting in on him a bit close to prevent an accident.

He wasn't driving your car, you were. You chose to overtake rather than wait.

In reply to Springfield:

There may have been a reason that he was that far out. For example, if I am approaching a traffic island on my bike, I pull out so that people can't try to squeeze past me at the island. Or maybe the road surface nearer the kerb was unsuitable to ride on? He was clearly wanting space, maybe rather than having a near miss, you could have hung back to see why he wanted that space?

In reply to Mike Highbury:


Assuming that people on bikes are as much part of the traffic as cars are, I'm wondering why the cyclist should have given way to the pedestrian given he wasn't on a pedestrian crossing and the woman on the bike was (presumably) keeping pace with the traffic flow in the morning traffic...what I'm wondering is should cars be expected to give way to pedestrians too who cross in front of them too when moving with the traffic flow?

In reply to Mike Highbury:


It's a strange exchange and there was obviously something going on that we didn't see on the video but there is no excuse for pushing someone off their bike.

The warning that we can all take from the video is that if you shout at and maybe flip the finger at enough people you will eventually get unlucky and do it to someone who is going to retaliate.

In reply to Springfield:


He can cycle wherever in the lane he chooses for his safety and yours. If you're behind him it's up to you to pass him safely without endangering him.

I don't really see how cutting in on him prevented an accident in fact it sounds like you nearly caused one with him.

In reply to Timmd:



There wasn't any need to give way, they passed each other safely. I'm struggling to see why she needed to say anything. There must be more to this than we can see on the video.

To answer the question if I was in a car in that situation I might well have lifted off and waved him across if it was safe to do so. We all have to share the road and little gestures go a long way.

In reply to timjones:

Yes, in a world full of different personalities it's generally safest to be peaceable.

In reply to timjones:


I think I would have paused/slowed on my bike too, I was just wondering if Mike applied the same logic to car drivers.

In reply to Mike Highbury:

He decided to cross the road in moving traffic of which she was part (as were the cars in front and behind her). He did not have right of way in the same way as walking out in front of any other type of vehicle doesn't give you right of way. He is clearly a thug that needs to be shown the error of his ways.

In reply to niggle:

He returns...

In reply to balmybaldwin:
I was thinking he didn't have right of way too, and seemed to bristle a little bit when she didn't slow down, but she shouldn't have given him the finger, it never helps and it's kind of rude.

A friendly sounding 'careful mate' might have had a similar intended effect of making him think about crossing while thinking people on bikes should slow down (which isn't to say nobody should slow down while cycling or driving...).

In reply to balmybaldwin:


But he didn't walk out in front of anyone. He crossed behind her having started to cross as she approached. I'm sure that I'm not the only one who does this and I have yet to encounter anyone who reacts in the way that the cyclist does.

In reply to timjones:

From what we can see on the video it looks like the cyclist has right of way but like you say they would have missed each other anyway so there was no need for any verbal exchange. For her to ask him not to push her off it suggests the 2 of them have had a previous incident.

In reply to Timmd:

I was thinking he didn't have right of way too, and seemed to bristle when she didn't slow down, but she shouldn't have given him the finger, it never helps and it's kind of rude.

Not sure what difference it might make, but he appears to be crossing on a pelican crossing that is temporarily out of order.

In reply to timjones:

He got amazingly close to her if he was behind her - especially considering he can be seen in a forward facing camera (which I think means he must have been crossing before she passed him)

It's something I see people do in London with cars - they take a risk to save them selves a few seconds so they can nip across in front of the car ahead. It unnerves me when people do this when I'm in a car, and I can understand that someone walking what appears initially to be a collision course would unsettle a cyclist on a bike.

You can't clearly see what he's doing, but she's clearly alarmed enough to say "don't try to knock me off". As for giving the finger - I didn't see that (I may be looking at a different edit of the video) - only that the bloke says something about her giving the finger before he knocks her off in the path of oncoming traffic.

In reply to balmybaldwin:


He was crossing beforehand he can be seen crossing as the car in front passed.


I don't see it as a big deal, we all have to co-exist on the roads and this really shouldn't have been a big enough problem to have escalated to her initial comment, let alone as far as it did..



It's a strange incident in many ways, if it makes it to court I suspect that there might turn out to be more to it than meets the eye.

In reply to niggle:

Is that *the* niggle? Welcome back if so.

In reply to Springfield:


Perhaps you should have waited until it was clear to pass him, with time and space to pull back in safely, like it says in the highway code?

Or alternatively you could drive like a tw*t and blame him? Oh sorry, you already have.

In reply to MG:

The same only older, calmer and only reactivated my account to buy some WC cams off a lovely user here!

In reply to girlymonkey:


Probably worried that the moron behind was about to carry out a dangerous overtaking manoeuvre.

In reply to Jimbo C:

My interpretation was that the cyclist seemed nervous and somewhat threatened by the pedestrian and felt the need to say something. I may have been unnecessary nervousness or it may have been something about the pedestrian that we did not see in the video. He certainly seems a somewhat volatile character.

In reply to Timmd:


Mike only drives around London in his Porsche when he's squiring his wife, otherwise he rides a bike.

In reply to FactorXXX:


I did a bit of a double take there as well!

Is it 'The' niggle?

In reply to ThunderCat:

Is it 'The' niggle?

I would hope so. No one else would want to be associated with that name surely!

In reply to The New NickB:

He certainly seems a somewhat volatile character.

Utterly mental, more like.

There is something odd at the beginning of the footage - he hasn't tried to knock her off on the video but she asks him not to. It almost looks likes he stopped to let her go through too. I don't think we are getting "the whole picture" whatever the Guardian says.

In reply to FactorXXX:
How do you know there aren't loads of niggles? We might pass the username and password around to whomever is the most unhinged right now. It's hard work being totally demented all the time you know.

In reply to niggle:


I am learning that niggles are a sign that we are not getting any younger! Don't worry, we have not been short of the unhinged in your absence.

In reply to timjones:


I say this as a cyclist but it wouldn't be the first time there was some selective video editing when a confrontation occurs i.e. just the bit when the non-cyclist reacts.
via phone

In reply to Indy:

There does not appear to be any editing, it's just the camera doesn't necessarily capture the whole incident.

In reply to The New NickB:
where did this finger giving thing come from? that would have been the trigger..
ps i reckon most forum users have at least 2 usernames
niggle=Thundercat?

In reply to Indy:

I doubt there was any editing but anything worth seeing wasnt included in the video due to camera position. Quite strange incident all round especially the please dont knock me off bit.

In reply to malk:

Oh I've got loads of usernames. In fact everyone here is me except you.

In reply to niggle:

You're definitely 'the' niggle with a response like that. Hello there.

Edit. Happy niggling

In reply to niggle:

i suggest you don't post under different usernames in the same thread again- myprex made that mistake on the crash thread..

In reply to niggle:


You're not me. Wait a minute... this is getting confusing...

In reply to timjones:


I agree

I seen the video on facebook the other day - now that was an interesting comments section!!. He is out of order for pushing her, complete idiot and should not have done it. No excuses etc. However, the video seems to have been edited to only show the tasty parts it would be nice if the video with the full lead up to the incident could be posted. I am getting sick of these head cam videos only showing part of the story. (I ride a bike and wear a head cam also)

The whole driver v cyclist debate is crazy most people are both, I am. I use the road for transport purposes sometimes on a bike some times in a car sometimes on a bus, in a taxi etc etc. There was an incident in Liverpool a few weeks back were a cyclist went in to the back of a parked/stationary car. However the debate on facebook was die hard motorists blaming the cyclist and die hard cyclists blaming the car driver for parking on the road. video at
http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/watch-sefton-park-cyclis...

In reply to MG:

He certainly seems a somewhat volatile character.
Utterly mental, more like.

Are you talking about 'Bike Pusher Man' or niggle?

In reply to Alan M:

It hasn't been edited, you could argue another 2 seconds at the start might be informative, but then it might not. There are no cuts! There are lots it doesn't show, but that isn't because of editing.

In reply to The New NickB:


Are we to believe that the female in question was cycling along and a man for no reason what so ever came running up to attack her or are you saying that the female only decided to start recording AFTER the man got agressive?

Hmmmmm tough one.

I wonder if the whole incident was recorded i.e. sound and video but the female only decided to send the male reaction bit not the reason he got irate ie her behaviour?

what do you think?

In reply to Indy:

I'd imagine that the police would be in possession of the full recording, if it existed?

In reply to Indy:

My reading of that video is that his intention was to cross in front of her, relying on her to stop (or maybe he only saw her at the last minute, or misjudged speed and distance, but it looks like 'I dare you' body language to me). Something he wouldn't have contemplated with a car or truck at the same speed and distance.

Having seen she wasn't intending to stop, and that she said something, he sensibly pauses briefly, and they pass each other safely. Note that he is able to cross immediately; there was no need to try to step out in front of her, and could easily have walked down the centre of the road for the couple of seconds it would have taken to let her pass without incident.

In these circumstances, it's hard to instantly produce some apposite comment, so what she says isn't likely to be entirely rational. In any case, I think she says 'please don't knock me off'.

I suspect that he then gave her some verbals that we can't hear, and she flipped him the bird in response, which we don't see; it would be behind the camera.

This enrages him and he gives chase, and the rest unfolds as we see it.

The Merc did a pretty close pass on her, just before matey boy gets to her; not a good day...

In reply to Indy:
I'm with you. The guy could have been deaf, blind, inebriated and drugged up to the eyeballs. She was inept in her decision making. Avoid all possible conflict?
I don't condone the consequences though.

In reply to Indy:



I think it does not show everything, I think we can agree on that. I also don't think there is any editing. As I said, maybe if it started a couple of seconds earlier it might tell us a bit more, but equally as likely it wouldn't. The
guy seems to claim that she gave him the finger, we don't know if this is true, it isn't on camera, it also doesn't appear to be edited out. Her reaction to him crossing the road seems a bit odd to me, but many things do, including your post.

In reply to malk:




Hahaha, absolutely no way fella.

I've spent a long time wondering "Hmmmmm, I wonder if x/y/z is Niggle, logged in under a different name", but was never sure.

There's no real way I can prove it to you of course, but I've got no real reason to have two logons. I barely have enough crap to post for one.

He had been off for rather a long time though. Assumed he'd just lost interest.

In reply to Andy Hardy:

The police do not always arrest for offences these days. This is especially the case if someone goes to a police station voluntarily. To actual take someone's freedoms has to be justified now. To actually book a 'Prisoner' into a custody suite certain criteria have to be fulfilled such as not being able to have an address for serving a Summons or doubting a person would answer bail amongst others. Certain serious offences are still dealt with by arrest, this is why if a police officer does something wrong he is arrested for misconduct in a public office. This is also the reason why hundreds of police officers are currently on police bail where shoplifters, drug dealers and people Who beat people up are not. The guy was probably not interviewed immediately as the police would probably want to gather all the available evidence first as they would be limited on time to process once the interview has taken place. The police know that the CPS will not take on any case they could possibly loose.

In reply to ThunderCat:

I actually haven't been contributing here at all, although I'm a daily reader (the team have done an amazing job with the site, the news section is first class). I asked for my account to be reactivated so I could buy some second hand cams.

I know that's a bit dull, I could make up something about being tied up in Coel's basement and only escaping this week if you prefer?

In reply to niggle:



Much better version of events yes.

Welcome back. I did enjoy some of your more vibrant discussions in the past.

In reply to Phil79:

It was clear but the cyclist swerved out and the car coming the other way was travelling too fast round a corner ahead.

The cyclist was the tw@ and it seems to be getting more common amongst cyclists.

In reply to Springfield:

In other words you failed/were too lazy and selfish to anticipate road and traffic conditions and needlessly put a stranger's life at risk. You clearly have an issue with cyclists in particular.

In reply to Springfield:


Which was it, was it clear, or was there a corner which obstructed your view of oncoming traffic?

In reply to Springfield:

If there was a corner ahead then you should have waited to overtake, until you could see it was clear. The fact that someone potentially could (and did) come round the corner too fast should have been part of your assessment when considering to overtake.

Cyclist swerve out all the time (potholes, drain covers, glass in the road, etc) which you should have also considered. He may well have been cycling like a tw*t, but as a car driver you're far more capable of killing or injuring someone than a cyclist, so you should act accordingly.

Hazard awareness etc.

In reply to Phil79:


This.

In reply to Springfield:


Whereas it isn't getting more common among motorists as they're already at saturation point, with your posts being a good example.

In reply to malk:



From the dialogue on the clip.

Can't imagine why it's not mentioned in the quality Guardian reporting accompanying it??

In reply to Springfield:

So you as a motorist completely ignored two potential hazards, nearly had a serious accident, but none of that was your fault.

In reply to niggle:

You're the love child of JCT and DaveH

and I claim my £5

Welcome back old chap.

In reply to Springfield:


Combine that sequence of events with your user name, you are Homer Simpson and I claim MY five pounds….

In reply to captain paranoia:

>" but it looks like 'I dare you' body language to me). Something he wouldn't have contemplated with a car or truck at the same speed and distance"

My approach to these people is to cycle up as close as possible and at the last moment scream ahhhhhhh, they normally jump out of their skin and look like fools and by the time they know what's happening I'm miles away.

A similar approach works well with people walking towards you engrossed in their mobile phones, stand still and wait for them to walk into you then at the last minute say boo! And what them jump.

In reply to Springfield:

You were overtaking round a corner?

In reply to all:

I think it's only a matter of time before this happens again. Please, if someone does something annoying on the road, just ignore it, you don't know who they are.

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/aug/12/cyclists-funeral-road-rage-d...

In reply to Timmd:


I think that yes, if you read the highway code then traffic should give way to pedestrians. What is the alternative?

In reply to gethin_allen:


I would suggest that like you might hope that car drivers wouldn't try to drive up close to frighten you, as a rider of a relatively fast-moving vehicle perhaps this isn't a respectful or safe way to use a shared route.

In reply to gethin_allen:



Hee hee

In reply to Timarzi:

You're right, I'm just thinking that even when they're going at around the same speed, people more readily step in front of cyclists and expect them to slow down or stop.

Which I'm happy enough to do if riding along, but the guy in the OP seemed to take affront at the cyclist asking him not to step in front of her or whatever she said. Something he might not have done with a car or a van.

In reply to Timarzi:


This approach is used sparingly and only used when people are obviously taking the piss. Some people will eyeball you and then try and play chicken, one day the cyclist may not see them and there will be a crash and the cyclist will probably come out worse.

In reply to Timmd:

To be honest, I haven't watched the video and have found that I haven't noticed cyclists when I'm walking before. Perhaps because they don't move so fast. I'm not sure if it's true, but I feel like I notice them less when I'm walking than when I'm driving.

Or perhaps that explains the scratches.