Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

Man tried to strangle pavement cyclist with helmet straps

A business executive, who was "under a bit of stress" attacked the passing cyclist, causing €3,130 dental damage...

A man tried to “strangle” a cyclist with his helmet straps after knocking him off his bike because the victim was cycling on the footpath.

David Corcoran, a company executive, was walking near his office in Dublin, when he attacked Philip Fitzgerald for what the judge called a “minor nuisance”.

Corcoran, who was “under a bit of stress”, shouldered the man off his bike, and punched and kneed him while he was in a headlock, the Irish Independent reports.

Study: Parasite hosted by cats may cause road rage

Judge Michael Walsh ordered him to pay €3,130 compensation for dental injuries and a further €2,500. Adjourning, the judge said he would strike the case out, leaving Corcoran with no criminal record.

Corcoran admitted causing harm to Fitzgerald at Clanwilliam Terrace on July 1 2015. The court heard Mr Fitzgerald was cycling toward Corcoran at 10.30am when the accused shouldered him off his bike, causing him to fall to the ground. Garda Brian Cleary said Corcoran then punched the victim in the head and face, before getting him in a headlock, causing him to be choked by the straps on his bike helmet.

Corcoran, who was a senior executive with a company, was walking near his workplace, near a van which was parked on the pavement.

Corcoran accepted that he over-reacted. His solicitor, Eugene Dunne, described how he caught hold of Fitzgerald and held onto his helmet.

"He went further than that, he used the straps to try to strangle him," Judge Walsh said.

“It’s effective strangulation”.

The judge said, of people cycling on footpaths: "We live in a somewhat congested city and sometimes needs must."

"He should have stepped aside but to be fair, the other party shouldn't have been cycling on the footpath."

Judge Walsh said the accused's response was disproportionate to "no more than a very temporary, minor nuisance."

The victim, who says he made a full recovery, did not want to give evidence. 

Add new comment

20 comments

Avatar
Christopher TR1 | 7 years ago
1 like

Business exec, psyco, Audi-driver. What's not to like?

Avatar
Jimnm replied to Christopher TR1 | 7 years ago
1 like

Christopher TR1 wrote:

Business exec, psyco, Audi-driver. What's not to like?

just love this answer! lmfao  1

Avatar
HarrogateSpa | 7 years ago
2 likes

The criminal justice system isn't based on doing what the victim wants. It was a nasty and dangerous assault, and there should be a penalty and a criminal record.

Avatar
Gus T | 7 years ago
2 likes

Why are we getting het up, if you read the link, the judge has done what the victin wanted and added 2500 Euro's to the agressors "fine" as a charitable donation so everyone's happy but the posters here.

 

Avatar
Accessibility f... replied to Gus T | 7 years ago
3 likes

Gus T wrote:

Why are we getting het up, if you read the link, the judge has done what the victin wanted and added 2500 Euro's to the agressors "fine" as a charitable donation so everyone's happy but the posters here.

 

 

Because the conviction was struck out.  You shouldn't be able to remove a criminal record just because you can afford a large fine.

Avatar
BBB | 7 years ago
0 likes

How does the equality before law principle applies to this case?

Is someone running a company considered a superior citizen in the eyes of the law so they get away without criminal record?

Is it actually legal?

 

Avatar
Butty replied to BBB | 7 years ago
1 like

BBB wrote:

How does the equality before law principle applies to this case?

Is someone running a company considered a superior citizen in the eyes of the law so they get away without criminal record?

Is it actually legal?

 

 

I'm sure O'Leary would agree. He is presently  polishing a 12 bore at this very moment.

Avatar
Sub4 | 7 years ago
3 likes

Minimal penalty for vigilante action?

Avatar
Grahamd | 7 years ago
2 likes

Could have done with Chris Froome at his side.

Avatar
Ush | 7 years ago
1 like

TheJournal has an article which supplements the story with the appropriate Google Maps and a photo which is worth looking at:  http://www.thejournal.ie/man-cyclist-footpath-dublin-2869023-Jul2016/

 

As to why he was on the pavement?: a considerable mass of the public believes that you should not be riding your bike in the roadway and will give you grief if you are.  That includes some people that ride bicycles. 

Avatar
Jimnm | 7 years ago
1 like

I don't see a problem with sharing pavements with cyclists, after all, towns and cities have car sharing with pedestrians, Preston, Blackpool as a couple of examples. 

Avatar
tritecommentbot | 7 years ago
6 likes

Yeah... that's not the question.

Avatar
WillRod | 7 years ago
2 likes

The question is... 

Why was he riding on the pavement? Was he riding excessively fast?

Using common sense, if the road was blocked and he was rolling along at walking pace, there shouldn't be a problem.

If the road was completely clear with light traffic yet he decided to cycle along the pavement at 20mph, he is clearly a nuisance. It doesn't justify violence, but possibly a defensive position by the pedestrian to force him to slow.

 

 

Avatar
KarlM77 replied to WillRod | 7 years ago
0 likes

WillRod wrote:

The question is... 

Why was he riding on the pavement?

 

Not knowing the exact location of the incident, but looking on GoogleMaps, one end of the street is cobbled. This could be the reason.

Avatar
mike the bike | 7 years ago
1 like

 

I'm not keen on the judge's assertion that the pedestrian should have stepped aside, in my world the cyclist should have kept clear.  But hey, he's a learned man and I am not.

Avatar
Rapha Nadal | 7 years ago
0 likes

"Corcoran, who was a senior executive with a company"

Did he lose his job because of this?

Avatar
bornslippy | 7 years ago
2 likes

Apparently he had no previous convictions (or maybe he had paid enough money to ensure that they had been "struck off" as well ?).

 

Avatar
Jimnm | 7 years ago
8 likes

That is disgraceful, assault is assault, therefore he should have a criminal record for actual bodily harm. The judge is an ass! IMO

Avatar
tritecommentbot | 7 years ago
10 likes

No criminal record for beating someone up in the street and causing 3.5 grand of dental damage.

 

Cool.

Avatar
Dnnnnnn replied to tritecommentbot | 7 years ago
0 likes

unconstituted wrote:

No criminal record for beating someone up in the street and causing 3.5 grand of dental damage.

Cool.

Really the ideal stag party destination.

Latest Comments