[Shuntstick]

17 months seems rather lenient. In my view using such road vehicles as a weapon against a person should be an act of attempted murder.
CCTV:

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BG1uGxssWbw&feature=youtube_gdata_player[/ame]

 

[qmsdc15]

Agreed. Attempted murder. It's like shooting someone and getting charged with "use of a gun as a weapon".

 

[Industry_Hack]

Actually, 17 months for a crime not involving money is probably on the high side these days.

 

[photosbymark]

Oh it will involve money. The operator that hired him will pay a very nice settlement to make this go away. The last thing they want is to put video in front of a jury for them to decide an award. There is one thing I wonder about. I wonder what would have happened with no video? As far as 17 months being fair?? That is hard to say. IF this is the accident I think it is (and for some reason the video will not load ) this one was not fatal. There probably have been cases out there where a fatality was involved that got less time or no time at all. Justice is rarely compatible with high emotion. High emotion more often leads to a desire for vengeance rather than justice.

 

[Rossman]

Assault with a motor vehicle . Attempted Murder . Good thing there was video. makes the prosecutions' job easier . Making something like this go away may (probably will) put the public at risk

 

[Industry_Hack]

Assault with a motor vehicle . Attempted Murder . Good thing there was video. makes the prosecutions' job easier .

Not likely.

 

[Digital_Cowboy]

Oh it will involve money. The operator that hired him will pay a very nice settlement to make this go away. The last thing they want is to put video in front of a jury for them to decide an award. There is one thing I wonder about. I wonder what would have happened with no video? As far as 17 months being fair?? That is hard to say. IF this is the accident I think it is (and for some reason the video will not load ) this one was not fatal. There probably have been cases out there where a fatality was involved that got less time or no time at all. Justice is rarely compatible with high emotion. High emotion more often leads to a desire for vengeance rather than justice.

I've watched the video more than once now. This was NOT an "accident." The cyclist was clearly in front of the bus prior to the bus pulling alongside of and then striking the cyclist.

There is no way unless the driver was engaged in an activity that he shouldn't have been doing that he didn't know that the cyclist was in front of and then alongside of the bus. From watching the video it is clear that the driver of the bus knew that the cyclist was there and that this was clearly a premeditated act on the part of the driver.

Seventeen months is a very light sentence. The driver should have to do hard time, and permanently have his license revoked. If he is caught driving any car it should be seized and held even if it isn't his, steep impound fees and fines should be levied and if they can't be paid the car should sold at auction. An auction that he and his family should be barred from participating in.

The fees generated from such impound fees and fines and auctioning of the car(s) should be used to make drivers ed more meaningful than what it currently is these days.

 

[Bluevoss]

Impalement.

Or just swap places, you know, he gets on a bike and let the healed cyclist have a go at him with a bus.

 

[Shuntstick]

Attempted murder does not require intent to kill. If you are sufficiently reckless to the outcome of your act that can be enough, according to the law.
What the CCTV doesn't show clearly is that the cyclist was catapulted from his cycle and the cycle crushed and remained beneath the buses wheels. It doesn't bare thinking what the outcome to the cyclist could have been had he been wearing cleats clipped in pedal footwear!

 

[Industry_Hack]

This was clearly not attempted murder. If the driver wanted to kill him, he had every opportunity to do it while the guy on the bike was in front of him. As for the cyclist, I can only hope he's learned a lesson as well. Anyone who has read the facts of the incident will understand that comment.

 

[Digital_Cowboy]

This was clearly not attempted murder. If the driver wanted to kill him, he had every opportunity to do it while the guy on the bike was in front of him. As for the cyclist, I can only hope he's learned a lesson as well. Anyone who has read the facts of the incident will understand that comment.

Have we watched the same video? The cyclist was doing what many of us here do, he took the lane. The driver of the bus doesn't just attempt to pass the cyclist but slams his bus into him, and according to this article the cyclist's bike was still under the bus as the bus driver proceeded to continue driving down the road. How is that NOT attempted murder? Just because they had an "argument" at a roundabout is no reason to purposely drive one's vehicle into a cyclist.

From this article:

Sentencing the bus driver, Judge Mark Horton said: "This was not an accident. It was an assault, deliberate dangerous driving.


"You used that vehicle as a weapon to bully and intimidate the cyclist who, in the end, was struck by that bus."
​

As the judge said this incident was NOT an "accident" it was deliberate, it was assault and it WAS attempted murder. What else do you call using a multi-ton vehicle/weapon against someone who is operating a vehicle that doesn't afford the person much in the way of protection in a crash?

I'm sure that you have heard of the "one punch homicide," right? That's where a person for whatever reason punches another person, that other person ends up dying from said punch. The person who threw the punch is arrested and tried for homicide.

Despite what some people seem to think it doesn't take a great deal of time to plan a crime. In this instance all it would take is the driver of the bus to say "I'm going to get that cyclist." And it would show a premeditation to inflict harm on or even death on the cyclist.

 

[Shuntstick]

I've read the news reports and seen the same reports as this one on TV and they don't mention anything more.
The case is over so if you enlighten us to those facts it's not going to jeopardise the case.

 

[Digital_Cowboy]

What lesson should the cyclist have learned?

This was clearly not attempted murder. If the driver wanted to kill him, he had every opportunity to do it while the guy on the bike was in front of him. As for the cyclist, I can only hope he's learned a lesson as well. Anyone who has read the facts of the incident will understand that comment.

IH,

Just what lesson(s) should the cyclist have learned? I've read several articles on this brutal attack. And other than having had an argument or heated exchange with the driver I haven't read anything in any of the articles to suggest that they cyclist did anything in anyway to warrant what the bus driver did to him.

For the driver to have used his bus the way that he did was attempted murder. So if you know something that the rest of us do not know please share it with the rest of the class.

 

[Shuntstick]

This was clearly not attempted murder. If the driver wanted to kill him, he had every opportunity to do it while the guy on the bike was in front of him.

Attempted murder does not require intent to kill.

Anyone who has read the facts of the incident will understand that comment.

I never understand why people make reference to something the majority wont understand like its some secret between an enlightened few.

 

[Industry_Hack]

Read the facts. Here's what I got out of the article in question:

A cyclist who, like the bus driver, let his anger get the best of him. "The court was told Mead was biking to work when the bus drove too close to him.When the bus stopped, Mead propped his bike against the front of the vehicle and exchanged words with Hill, who remained in his cab, according to BBC."

He's possibly a bit selfish as well, since anyone cycling for environmental reasons would not hold up traffic out of spite, as this one did. While he thought he was teaching the driver a lesson, he was purposely inconveniencing all the innocent passengers on the bus, as well as traffic behind the bus. Not a good image for cyclists anywhere. And for what?

The cyclist learned a valuable lesson about choosing your battles wisely. I have said it before, and it bears repeating - choosing to exercise your rights over exercising common sense means nothing if it gets you killed. I am not siding with the bus driver here, but most of you seem to be letting your own outrage cloud your judgment, just like these two guys did. If you are on a bicycle, don't pick a fight with someone in a motor vehicle. You don't know their state of mind, and it's pretty much guaranteed that you will lose every time. The guy driving the bus seemed to know exactly what he was doing, and chose to bounce the cyclist off the side of the bus, rather than running him over. Had the cyclist simply accepted that the bus driver was a jerk, he could have let him pass (which would have allowed him to keep an eye on him) and gone about his ride. Better to keep your ego in check, than nearly get killed.

 

[Digital_Cowboy]

Read the facts. Here's what I got out of the article in question:

A cyclist who, like the bus driver, let his anger get the best of him. "The court was told Mead was biking to work when the bus drove too close to him.When the bus stopped, Mead propped his bike against the front of the vehicle and exchanged words with Hill, who remained in his cab, according to BBC."

He's possibly a bit selfish as well, since anyone cycling for environmental reasons would not hold up traffic out of spite, as this one did. While he thought he was teaching the driver a lesson, he was purposely inconveniencing all the innocent passengers on the bus, as well as traffic behind the bus. Not a good image for cyclists anywhere. And for what?

The cyclist learned a valuable lesson about choosing your battles wisely. I have said it before, and it bears repeating - choosing to exercise your rights over exercising common sense means nothing if it gets you killed. I am not siding with the bus driver here, but most of you seem to be letting your own outrage cloud your judgment, just like these two guys did. If you are on a bicycle, don't pick a fight with someone in a motor vehicle. You don't know their state of mind, and it's pretty much guaranteed that you will lose every time. The guy driving the bus seemed to know exactly what he was doing, and chose to bounce the cyclist off the side of the bus, rather than running him over. Had the cyclist simply accepted that the bus driver was a jerk, he could have let him pass (which would have allowed him to keep an eye on him) and gone about his ride. Better to keep your ego in check, than nearly get killed.

Granted that particular article doesn't mention anything about the fact (that with their love affair with the CCTV camera on every street corner shows probably shows) that before the roundabout that the bus driver had already driven too close to the cyclist. The whole thing could have been avoided IF the bus driver had left enough space between him and the cyclist. Plus it was said that they were already STOPPED before entering the roundabout, so how is that causing anyone an increased delay?

You, yourself even acknowledged that the bus had already been stopped when Mr. Mead propped his bike up against it. So again, I ask just what "delay" is Mr. Mead supposed to have caused?

Granted we all need to learn to "pick our battles" better but can you honestly say that if you were in Mr. Mead's shoes that you wouldn't have given the bus driver a piece of your mind?

The bottom line from all of the various articles that I've read on this that the bus driver and NOT Mr. Mead is the one who "started" all of this by driving too closely to Mr. Mead.

 

[Digital_Cowboy]

Attempted murder does not require intent to kill.

Agreed, see my example of the "one punch homicide."

I never understand why people make reference to something the majority won't understand like its some secret between an enlightened few.

Again, agreed, or they may have been privy to more information then one side has had access to and has a clearer picture of what really happened.

 

[Industry_Hack]

Yes, the bus driver apparently got too close in a roundabout. I have entered blind roundabouts in Australia, only to be surprised by slower moving traffic. How many roundabouts have you ridden/driven through? Without seeing video of that, we have no way of knowing if it was intentional, or unintentional at that point. We do know that when the bus stopped, the cyclist chose to confront the driver, by propping his bike against the front of the vehicle. That kind of foolish arrogance speaks volumes. He could have gotten alongside, and expressed himself, but he wasn't letting the bus move until he had his say. Then he proceeded to tie up traffic by taking the center of the lane, as traffic backed up behind him.

Maybe you need to watch the video again. Specifically, watch how the cyclist moves to his right as the bus driver signals and moves right. He's playing a game of chicken he has no chance of winning. After he gets hit, look at the lower part of the screen, and what do you see? I see cyclists sharing the road with vehicles. Lots of them. This guy had plenty of opportunity to just let it go, but he couldn't back down. Once you're past elementary school, the "He started it" defense no longer applies. If the bus driver stopped the bus, got out, and started beating on the cyclist, and the cyclist fought back, killing the bus driver, who do you think would be in jail? There is more honor in walking away from an argument than engaging in a senseless one.

 

[Industry_Hack]

Attempted murder does not require intent to kill.

Uh, yes it does. Quite specifically, under English criminal law "attempted murder is the crime of more than merely preparing to commit unlawful killing and at the same time having a specific intention to cause the death of human being under the Queen's Peace."

Taken from this wikipedia article.

 

[Industry_Hack]

Despite what some people seem to think it doesn't take a great deal of time to plan a crime. In this instance all it would take is the driver of the bus to say "I'm going to get that cyclist." And it would show a premeditation to inflict harm on or even death on the cyclist.

I'd happily go for a bike ride with you, and stop for Mexican food and a beer after. But I wouldn't ask you for legal advice.


Premeditated murder.