Cyclist who football manager forced off road reveals full story

And this is why having front and rear cameras is basically mandatory. Pictures prove it did happen.

As
If you would like to provide feedback on the CPS decision not to pursue the dangerous driving charge you can do so by using the form here https://www.cps.gov.uk/form/feedback the CPS area is South West and county is Gloucestershire. The case ref is 53CH0065019/TP/HP

Interesting, how for someone in a rush he deliberately drove very slowly, leaving obvious gaps for the cyclist to filter, and when the cyclist took the opportunity to filter he deliberately forced him off his bike.  It is complete and utter BS that the court accepted his "I was in a rush" defense when it was clear that he was deliberately intimidating the cyclist, and purposely not in a rush so he could extract his planned revenge on the cyclist.

There are times I wish that the victim in such cases had the opportunity to veto a plea to a lesser charge so that the assailant has to face the prospect of a much higher sentence.

Why do I get the feeling that if this had been a car driver, who had done the same thing to another car driver the "carless driving" charge wouldn't have been on the table. 

And why was there no mention of failing to stop at the scene of an accident?  That in its own right is a minimum penalty of 5 points on his licence.

Cheers for the info Matthew, glad you're okay, shame you came across this massive bellend, least he got some comeuppance.

This is atrocious from the CPS based on the description and credible witnesses. I know there can be legal challenges on sentence lengths but can there be one on accepting such a lesser charge based on obvious evidence?

No wonder the defence jumped at the offer. I suspect they didn't realise the witness had such standing in the law or was hoping witnesses wouldn't turn up.

Sounds like an entitled, aggressive, egotistical motorist who couldn't stand have his driving ability commented on and preferred to cause some injury and damage instead. I don't know how he got away with such a lenient verdict. Maybe the review into road traffic offences will sort these kinds of shenanigans out.

A cumulation of Careless incidents, sounds like cut n dried dangerous to me, it certainly isn't a momentary lapse, they really should have persued the more hefty charge, it is defo in the public interest to maximise the time he is removed from the roads

"he had been frustrated by the cyclist because he was in a rush to get home"

But was he not frustrated behind the slow car? And he managed to not assault a member of staff while on the train. And what has a 3 hour train journey got to do with how he threatens someone with a lethal weapon?

It seems he was only banned because he already had 6 points on his driving license (which suggests that he is an incompetent driver as well as an aggressive bully).

What a complete and utter twat. Perhaps there are a couple of cyclists among the Chippenham Town supporters that could take him to one side in the changing rooms and have a quiet word.

Thank you, Matthew, that now makes a lot more sense. Unfortunately. It beggars belief how something like that could be considered merely careless. At least he will be off the road for a little while (though nowhere near long enough) and I shall feel a little safer cycling through Stroud for the next few months.

New day...new injustice on the roads...

Utterly appalling, which makes the CPS decision to accept the plea to careless driving inexplicable.  With a witness like a PCSO giving evidence and the evidence from Matthew himself, surely they should have refused to accept that plea and pressed on with the dangerous driving charge?

Next time the twat will kill someone and there won't be any witnesses when he gets his licence back in six months.  Should be banned for life, he's clearly not mature enough to have charge of a lethal weapon in a public place.