The father of a five-year-old girl who was knocked over by a cyclist on a snowy path in Belgium on Christmas Day 2020, the footage of the incident subsequently going viral on social media, has won his appeal against a defamation case brought by the rider – after a court ruled that the video amounted to “freedom of expression” and “contributed to the public debate on cyclists and pedestrians”.
The incident, which took place in Baraque Michel nature reserve, in the province of Liège, sparked widespread online debate after a video posted on Facebook showed the cyclist’s left knee making contact with the girl, named Neïa, after he came around a bend on a snow-covered path.
The cyclist, who was 61 at the time of the incident, handed himself into the police after an appeal was launched and spent a night in the cells. The public prosecutor pressed charges of intentional assault and battery to a minor, which could have resulted in a year in jail.
In March 2021, the cyclist, identified only as Jacques D, was ordered to pay a symbolic €1 in damages to the child’s family. He was also handed a suspended sentence by a judge in Verviers, who agreed that the footage showed the cyclist had been riding too fast and there was insufficient space to overtake safely.
Later that year the man sued the child’s father for defamation. A lawyer for the cyclist claimed that the footage – shared on social media with a caption asking if it should be reported to the police, before it was picked up by media outlets around the world, provoking shock and anger among many who viewed it – had caused his client to feel threatened whenever he went outside.
Patrick Mpasa, the child’s father, said he had not shared the clip to seek revenge, rather to raise awareness, insisting he not “want a witch hunt, just him to apologise”.
In September 2023, the cyclist won his defamation case, with Mr Mpasa ordered to pay €4,500 (£3,911) in compensation for the value of the bike Jacques says he can no longer use.
However, on Thursday, that ruling was thrown out by a court in Liège, who argued that the cyclist could not be identified by the video, which was posted as a form of “freedom of expression”.
“In essence, the court said that posting the video was a freedom of expression and it was not a crime, so the original ruling was overturned,” Mr Mpasa’s lawyer, Jacques Englebert, told the Daily Mail.
“The court said that by uploading the clip, the father had contributed to the public debate on cyclists and pedestrians, and it was not an issue.
“The cyclist had argued that by uploading the video, he had been identified, and the initial reports said he was between forty and fifty-years-old when he was in fact well over sixty-years-old.
“Uploading the video did not identify him or his address, he says he was insulted as a result, but has not been able to provide any evidence of this.”
The cyclist has also been ordered to pay €2,040 (£1,770) in court costs.
When the defamation case was originally brought against the girl’s father in 2021, Mr Mpasa’s lawyer at the time stated: “We have the right to express ourselves. We have the right to post or have posted a video on the internet. In this case, we must check whether we have exceeded the limits of this freedom of expression.”
At an earlier hearing on 3 February 2021, the cyclist said that he had not caused the child to fall on purpose.
“When I left my home and set off, there was hardly anyone there. It was only on this portion, of about one kilometre, near the Baraque Michel, that there were a lot of pedestrians,” he said.
“I braked, I adapted my speed, and I activated my 120-decibel horn. As I passed the little girl, I felt my rear wheel slipping. To avoid the fall I rebalanced myself by doing a knee movement. I felt that I had touched the little girl but I did not immediately realise that she had fallen.”

16 thoughts on “Father of child knocked over by cyclist wins legal appeal – as court rules viral video “contributed to public debate on cyclists and pedestrians””
Not sure about it contributing to any debate but the guy is a prick. This is akin to when drivers claim they didn’t realise they had hit a cyclist.
I wouldn’t have overtaken if there was someone in the way let alone a child but even if I had a rush of blood to the head and did, if I touched the child I would have stopped to make sure she was ok.
I have children of my own and when you have kids you are around kids and the little blighters get everywhere and occasionally you bump into them. You don’t just assume they are fine and go on your merry way, you check on them if you’re a decent human.
He totally would have known he hit her quite firmly as well. Even if we are to believe it wasn’t intentional, he would have known it wasn’t a light contact.
Yup. Complete dick and someone who gives us all a bad name.
Yes he’s an arsehole, but he doesn’t give “us” a bad name at all.
Bike, helmet, lycra. That’s all most people see and it inevitably ends up as lowest common denominator because all that gets discussed is the bad stuff, true or not.
Bike, helmet, lycra. That’s all most people see and it inevitably ends up as lowest common denominator because all that gets discussed is the bad stuff, true or not.
The behaviour of some idiot in another country doing something I would never do does not give me a bad name. Funny how we’re always being told that this or that subgroup of cyclists, or sometimes just one individual, gives us all a bad name and yet nobody suggests that drunken drivers give all drivers a bad name, isn’t it? Anybody who decides to hate on cyclists because of the behaviour of this individual is just looking for an excuse to hate, they would do it anyway.
Exactly. I hear far far far too many cyclists who buy into this narrative that “if only every cyclists was an angel people would love us”. Its complete BS. Shit like this is just something for them to hang their dislike of us on. Its not rational, its an excuse.
Any thoughts about the story and the specific issue of freedom of expression versus privacy in a civil law case? Or just swear words relating to a criminal case in which the cyclist was convicted and handed a suspended prison sentence?
Annoyingly with it being in the Daily Fail they will be using it to fuel the hatred of cyclists 🙁
I guess. But I’ve seen a fair amount of this sort of entitled behaviour from cyclists sharing paths with pedestrians…
I noticed he said he’d got a 120db horn and had used it…Makes you think he was actually used to blasting it at people who had the temerity to be in his way.
I’m in Belgium and saw the full clip at the time in the media. I’m also a cyclist. That bike rider is an a$$hole, if you watch the full thing there’s no doubt he deliberately knocked over the kid.
There’s no excuse for that type of behaviour.
Certainly looks that way to me. Also makes sense as to why he didn’t stop as well. If you intend to do something and then do it, you generally don’t immediately stop to check what happened. If you did it accidentally you would check on the outcome.
It does look deliberate, but also weirdly efficient, as though the rider was practiced at that particular move. Which make me believe it might have been unintentional after all.
He still should have stopped, of course.
I have not seen the video (maybe I did when it first went viral?), but I see that knee as possibly an automatic balancing reflex. He moved onto fresh snow with a slight drop towards the side to get around the child standing in the path, so I would find it entirely plausible that it was not an intentional act to hit the child, Even so, it was totally unacceptable to go past as any speed, and to not stop having made contact.
From what I remember of it, it was plausible that it could have been a balancing reflex, but from the timing of it, it looked more deliberate to me. Personally, I wouldn’t stick my knee out for balancing, but would be using my upper body as it’s more effective for that due to it being heavier and further from the ground, thus a longer “lever”.
Certainly, the cyclist’s actions immediately afterwards and with the legal action suggest that they’re not the nicest person.
Any thoughts about the story and the specific issue of freedom of expression versus privacy in a civil law case?