Cyclist & driver road rage in Bristol...punches thrown

[jefmcg]

To be fair they had just been punched repeatedly.

Point taken. I wonder if he drove straight to the police?

 

[LCpl Boiled Egg]

he was certainly at fault for jumping the red light at the start of the clip - a point not picked up on in the report.

As wrong as that is, it doesn't look directly related to the collision.

No mention in the text of the article how the driver accelerates away from the scene of a collision without exchanging names (or providing a certificate of insurance)

I was thinking the same thing. Looks to me like the Mazda driver saw the car indicating left and didn't bother looking for the cyclist.

It's not anti or pro cyclist reporting.

People like watching confrontation of this type.

The newspaper couldn't give a stuff who is involved, it's just a doable story.

It could equally be road rage between a driver and a bloke walking his dog.

No doubt if it were, some people on the doggie forum would be bleating about biased reporting against pet owners.

I disagre, I feel it is very anti-cyclist.

"An angry Bristol cyclist has been caught on camera punching a motorist twice in a shocking display of road rage."

Cyclist described as angry, no description applied to the motorist.

"Enraged after coming off his bike"

Alternatively, nearly being killed or injured...

"After his initial outburst the cyclist walks away from the car, throws down his helmet and then gets on with moving his bike out the way of the rest of the traffic."

No mention of the driver leaving the scene of the accident. At least they admit he is part of the traffic however, that's a start.

 

[winjim]

No mention in the text of the article how the driver accelerates away from the scene of a collision without exchanging names (or providing a certificate of insurance)

I think they could probably argue they were in fear of getting punched again.

he was certainly at fault for jumping the red light at the start of the clip - a point not picked up on in the report.

Yeah, funny how they left that in the edited video, despite it having nothing to do with the later incident.

FWIW I reckon it's a classic SMIDSY. Driver is concentrating on the left indicating car so doesn't notice cyclist.

 

[Milkfloat]

he was certainly at fault for jumping the red light at the start of the clip - a point not picked up on in the report.

I am not sure the video proves that - it shows the cyclist moving to the ASL, but they are obscured if they left it. It was a bit pointless having it in the video apart from trying to stir.

Don't get me wrong the cyclist should not have punched the driver.

 

[LCpl Boiled Egg]

If the car driver felt they were in danger, there should surely be a record of when they pulled over a few streets away and reported the assault to the Police. Especially if they felt it was unprovoked and they had done nothing wrong.

 

[Pale Rider]

As wrong as that is, it doesn't look directly related to the collision.



I was thinking the same thing. Looks to me like the Mazda driver saw the car indicating left and didn't bother looking for the cyclist.



I disagre, I feel it is very anti-cyclist.

"An angry Bristol cyclist has been caught on camera punching a motorist twice in a shocking display of road rage."

Cyclist described as angry, no description applied to the motorist.

"Enraged after coming off his bike"

Alternatively, nearly being killed or injured...

"After his initial outburst the cyclist walks away from the car, throws down his helmet and then gets on with moving his bike out the way of the rest of the traffic."

No mention of the driver leaving the scene of the accident. At least they admit he is part of the traffic however, that's a start.

Describing the cyclist as 'angry' and 'engraged' is an assumption on the paper's part, which strictly speaking they should not be doing.

Going back to my dog walker example, no doubt the paper would have applied the same description.

Or had the roles been reversed, the motorist would have been 'angry' and 'enraged'.

What you've identified is sloppy, albeit commonly done, reporting, not bias against a specific group.

 

[jefmcg]

It was a bit pointless having it in the video apart from trying to stir.

No, that's useful. As we don't see the actual collision, it shows us that the cyclist was travelling in the same direction as the dashcam driver. I assume that's the last shot of him before the collision.

Kudos to the paper for not even mentioning the red light.

 

[the snail]

What you've identified is sloppy, albeit commonly done, reporting, not bias against a specific group.

Can't really argue with this report, but this paper has a lot of form for printing anti-cycling stories, seems to have an agenda. Best not to visit their site and support this s***-rag imo.

 

[captain nemo1701]

The video jumps just as the cyclist pulls into the ASL (I have used that route hundreds of times but now use the segregated path on the opposite side of the river. This is the BP, so usual nobbers replying.