Home
Occupants of silver BMW sought by South Gloucestershire Police

Avon & Somerset Constabulary have appealed for witnesses to an assault in Yate, South Gloucestershire, that left a cyclist with a broken arm.

According to police, the incident took place in the town, 12 miles northeast of Bristol, at around 10pm on Saturday 8 June.

The witness appeal continued: “The victim, a man in his 50s, was cycling past Tesco Express on Station Road when he was involved in an incident with two people in a silver BMW.

“The victim turned into Cranleigh Gardens where the occupants of the car followed him, pulled him off his bike and assaulted him. They then drove off leaving him on the floor with a broken arm.

“The occupants of the silver BMW were a man and woman in their 20s.”

Police say that they have opened an investigation into the assault after it was reported to them and have asked anyone with information to contact DC Celia White by calling 101 and quoting 55000/13.

Born in Scotland, Simon moved to London aged seven and now lives in the Oxfordshire Cotswolds with his miniature schnauzer, Elodie. He fell in love with cycling one Saturday morning in 1994 while living in Italy when Milan-San Remo went past his front door. A daily cycle commuter in London back before riding to work started to boom, he's been news editor at road.cc since 2009. Handily for work, he speaks French and Italian. He doesn't get to ride his Colnago as often as he'd like, and freely admits he's much more adept at cooking than fettling with bikes.

10 comments

Avatar
nowasps [419 posts] 3 years ago
0 likes

This is an interesting one... if they'd used the car to hurt him, they wouldn't be facing the possibility of a charge of assault.

Avatar
Animal [41 posts] 3 years ago
0 likes

Indeed. Stupid of them to realize that. "It was an accident" is the ultimate defence against any crime committed using a vehicle.

Avatar
fatbeggaronabike [810 posts] 3 years ago
0 likes

I take it that the CCTV used by the shop didn't get the original incident and/or the number plate of the car?

Avatar
AWPeleton [3294 posts] 3 years ago
0 likes

Unfortunately most shops only cover their front doors and an angle for their windows and not the whole street / road.

You find to many do-gooders complain its breaching human rights if a camera covers anywhere else  14

Avatar
Wookie [233 posts] 3 years ago
0 likes
stumps wrote:

You find to many do-gooders complain its breaching human rights if a camera covers anywhere else  14

I agree with the do-gooders. Britain has 1% of the world’s population but 20% of the world’s cameras also a private company cannot breach someone’s Human Rights only the state and those employed by the State can.

But I digress I hope they catch the b*****d

Avatar
AWPeleton [3294 posts] 3 years ago
0 likes

The human rights act was not set up for people to complain about a shop camera pointing to far into a road, or a neighbours camera partly covering their driveway.

The country has gone human rights mad. Cameras are a necessary evil and to be honest if you do nothing wrong and they aren't staring into your house, why worry ?

Your quote about 20% camera's is an interesting fact, it seems an awfully high number considering virtually every city in every country is covered with them and especially the US who have cameras at virtually every major junction.  39

But i also digress, i hope the offenders get caught and dealt with severely.  4

Avatar
a.jumper [846 posts] 3 years ago
0 likes
stumps wrote:

The human rights act was not set up for people to complain about a shop camera pointing to far into a road, or a neighbours camera partly covering their driveway.

Why on earth are you all talking about the human rights act? Has this become the daily mail? It's nothing to do with the human rights act - the street is a public place, so the right to privacy would not be infringed by a shop camera pointing out into the road.

If there's any legal problem, it's more likely to be from the data protection act, because the pictures of passers-by in the street maybe aren't needed for the purpose of securing the shop, but I guess having it pointing so it could see the number plates of possible looters might be OK.

But I also digress to deal with all the loony human-rights bashing. I hope the cyclist-bashers are caught and convicted, with appropriate punishment.

Avatar
northstar [1108 posts] 3 years ago
0 likes
Wesselwookie wrote:
stumps wrote:

You find to many do-gooders complain its breaching human rights if a camera covers anywhere else  14

I agree with the do-gooders. Britain has 1% of the world’s population but 20% of the world’s cameras also a private company cannot breach someone’s Human Rights only the state and those employed by the State can.

But I digress I hope they catch the b*****d

Erm, yes they can.

Avatar
AWPeleton [3294 posts] 3 years ago
0 likes

a.jumper, you know how the forum works, it goes off piste regularly with topics within topics.

northstar, your right, the prevention of disorder / crime can impinge on the right to a private life.

Avatar
stealth [254 posts] 3 years ago
0 likes

I think that the victim (when he has recovered) should be allowed to hit his assailants with a chainset in the face, that way, every morning they would be reminded that they are utter ***ts.