- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Tubeless valves
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
news
Justice (Lonpicman, Wikimedia Commons)Pick-up truck driver who braked sharply in front of cyclist found guilty of dangerous driving
An Ipswich pick-up truck driver who deliberately braked sharply in front of a cyclist resulting in a collision has been found guilty of dangerous driving reports the East Anglian Daily Times. Michael Pugh came off his bike and landed in the flatbed of Gary Norman’s Nissan Navara following an incident that took place following a row at traffic lights.
Ipswich Crown Court heard that the cyclist, Pugh, had accused Norman of talking on his mobile phone while behind the wheel – an exchange that had ended with the two men swearing at each other. Shortly after, Norman overtook Pugh before braking sharply causing the cyclist to run into the back of his truck. Pugh landed in the flatbed of the vehicle, while his £1,700 bike was a write-off.
Norman denied using his mobile phone while driving and claimed he had been forced to brake sharply after overtaking because another cyclist had come off the kerb in front of him.
After climbing out of the back of the truck, Pugh is said to have walked up to Norman and punched him as he was getting out of the vehicle.
As Pugh was then walking away, Norman is alleged to have approached him with a crowbar, shouting: “I’m going to have you,” at which point Pugh ran away.
Norman says there was no crowbar, but admits he picked up a piece of wood from his truck and walked after Pugh with it. He was found guilty of dangerous driving but cleared of assaulting Pugh by beating and having a crowbar as an offensive weapon. Sentencing has been adjourned until later in the month, although the court imposed an interim driving ban.
In April of last year, an Australian cyclist was forced to dial the emergency number to be rescued from the tray of a utility truck after being flung into it following a collision.
The 'ute' overtook the rider before turning across his path and the resultant collision saw him fly over his handlebars and into the back of the truck. While the cyclist was largely unharmed, he was unable to attract the attention of the 61-year-old driver despite banging on the roof of his cab and was forced to phone the police for assistance.
Alex has written for more cricket publications than the rest of the road.cc team combined. Despite the apparent evidence of this picture, he doesn't especially like cake.
Latest Comments
- mdavidford 7 min 45 sec ago
The extended retest is just the same as the standard test but with half as much driving again, covering more of the manouvres (and also costing...
- pockstone 16 min 41 sec ago
See my comment on the live blog...I think it's pretty clear who the real baddie is.
- hawkinspeter 1 hour 28 sec ago
Well, a large amount of traffic going along e.g. Beaufort Rd would be people not living in St George but merely travelling through the area and...
- Steve K 2 hours 3 min ago
It is, apparently, "packed with high visibility reflective details on back and shoulder."
- Rendel Harris 1 hour 8 min ago
The Battle of Thermopylae (480 BC) was one of the most important battles of the ancient world, where 7,000 Greeks, led by the Spartans under...
- ktache 11 hours 25 min ago
The people at Hexlox have asked me to tell others about their black Friday deals, but I don't quite know what the offer is yet. But saving anything...
- biking59boomer 14 hours 2 min ago
Sadly the cyclist hate in this country seems to have worsened of late. Dangerous motoring combined with anti-cycling officialdom in some places is...
Add new comment
19 comments
I had the same exact incident last year. The Met police decided to take no action.
Wish I'd just lamped the fella instead of doing the correct thing in calling the police.
The thing is I doubt the driver intended to even cause a collision. They just wanted to scare the cyclist by brake checking them. I doubt they expected the cyclist to even hit them, just be startled and scared.
I stand corrected. In any case attempted manslaughter is a nonsense.
Course it is but that was an example. Dangerous driving when deliberately braking like that IMHO is meant to cause Injury/death The rider escaped that but should not be the charge and sentence should be light because of it.
If you carry a knife and only intend to threaten people you would not get a one year sentence would you ?
Gary Norman another of life's tossers.
Well was he using a phone or not whilst driving? Surely plod could have checked Norman's phone records or couldn't they be arsed?
A sweary self righteous cock on a bike. Vigilantes get what they deserve, sometimes.
Why didn't Pugh get charged with assault after punching Norman?
He was and was cleared of it.
Another strange jury that seems to believe the world is full of lovely people who'd never harm a fly. Presumably they never read the papers or watch the news and know that every day people get viciously attacked for catching the wrong person's eye, and wives get battered black and blue for serving tea 5 minutes late. No prizes for guessing how such people behave when driving.
no it only says the driver was cleared of assault in the report, it doesnt say why or how the cyclist was cleared.
seems an odd case allround as it ended up in Crown Court, but the evidence presumably amounted only to drivers word vs cyclists word, which I didnt think the cps usually pursued, must be some significant details missed out in the report.
"Norman overtook Pugh before braking sharply causing the cyclist to run into the back of his truck. Pugh landed in the flatbed of the vehicle, while his £1,700 bike was a write-off."
Is this not ABH as a min and I would claim attempted murder because he could have gone under the truck or anything, the driver of the truck was not in control of the consequences.
If there's no intent to kill them it's not murder or attempted murder. If he isn't in control of the consequences then how can there be premeditation? Doing dangerous things is not de facto murder or attempted murder as people like to claim. If you lay a stupid charge before a court they will throw it out. This is why it is important to charge the right thing, and that means not charging for murder or attempted murder when there is no sniff of intent to kill.
What I am trying to say (badly) is if you do this action that could cause a death then there should be an equillivant charge for that which does not exist. the driver by this action had no control over circumstances so 'attempted manslaughter' ?
Dangerous driving is clearly not fit for purpose.
Manslaughter means causing death when you "only" intended to injure someone, so basically inadvertently causing death while committing GBH, so there can't be such a thing as intended manslaughter, as you can't intend to accidentally kill someone. You could try for something like an aggravated assault, maybe, but that might be tricky as you'd have to demonstrate that the driver intended to cause the cyclist to hit his vehicle, which would be tricky. Presumably what could be proven is that the driver overtook recklessly and then brake checked the cyclist. That's dangerous driving. The consequences were more severe than the driver intended, presumably, but it would be difficult to make any charge covering the resulting impact stick.
The issue is not with the charge, though we may find that the sentence for that charge is unsatisfactory in due course.
That's not quite right - you can be guilty of murder in English law if you intend to cause GBH and death results. Also, there's no such offence of 'aggravated assault' (although there is here in NSW).
I'm following an related murder trial, prosecution stated its murder if they intended to cause very serious harm so guess that's gbh. Not saying it would work in this case but think of all the times someone has been hit deliberately, surely that's intending to cause serious harm ? Case I'm following was someone punched several times, I'd rather that than be hit by a car
I'm following an related murder trial, prosecution stated its murder if they intended to cause very serious harm so guess that's gbh. Not saying it would work in this case but think of all the times someone has been hit deliberately, surely that's intending to cause serious harm ? Case I'm following was someone punched several times, I'd rather that than be hit by a car
Can we have his address please?
Aaw bless!
Seems that the cyclist has replaced the mysterious dog that ran in front of the vehicle excuse for braking sharply and causing someone to drive into the back of the vehicle.