Adam Mugridge was just 13 years old when he died after falling off his bike into the path of a lorry, while cycling to school in Market Harborough in September 2006.
Ever since then his family have been working tirelessly to create a cycle path in his memory.
They want to create AdamSmile– a new cycle path along a disused railway – and last September, after overcoming numerous obstacles, they finally got the mile-long route approved unanimously by Leicester County Council. They have also raised £140,000 to fund the path.
Find us in this weeks Harborough Mail following the success of a major hurdle. We are completely overwhelmed by everyone’s support/comments/ feedback and cannot thank you all enough! pic.twitter.com/e6jdYaBEdL
— Adam’S’Mile (@AdamSMile1) September 20, 2018
The family however, now face renewed opposition as one of the local landowners, Peter Thomas, who owns part of the land the path would cross, has appealed against the decision.
Mr Thomas is a former farmer who last year lost the right to keep livestock after a court battle over the mistreatment of his cows.
Speaking to Leicestershire Live, Adam’s father David Mugridge said he couldn’t understand why Mr Thomas was unwilling to give up his land: “He only used it to grow grass for his animals but he now has a lifetime ban from keeping animals.”
Mr Thomas said that he was fine with the cycle path in principal, but he did want some sort of compensation: “Mr Mugridge was offered the route in 2006 as a permissive route rather than a public right of way and I was expecting a lease of £5,000 a year to maintain it, which he could afford to pay.
“But he seems to want to take it for nothing.
“Would he give me his back garden to turn into a memorial to fallen soldiers? Of course, he wouldn’t.”
Mr Thomas also said that he was concerned about parts of the countryside being re-surfaced for a cycle path.
Adam’s family has the backing of Neil O’Brien, MP for Harborough, who said that he is supporting the project as it would be a huge benefit to the local community and a fitting tribute to Adam.
Fantastic backing for @AdamSMile1 in Lubenham on Fri evening.
This is a hugely important campaign that has support across the community, incl Cllr @Bremner777, @Lub_AllSaints, @harboroughdc & many others.
I’ll do my best to help this become a reality & fitting tribute for Adam pic.twitter.com/wJNSAvi2hQ
— Neil O’Brien MP (@NeilDotObrien) March 31, 2019
The final decision on the cycle path will now have to be made by Michael Gove, the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs.
If you want to donate to AdamSmile or express your support then you can do so on their website.
31 thoughts on “Memorial cycle route for 13-year-old boy killed while cycling blocked by local landowner”
Quote:
And people say that any sense of civic goodwill and generosity is dead…
“Yes, I know it’s intended partly as a tribute to a dead kiddy, and its only this wide across land I don’t use anyway, but I got banned from keeping animals so I need to make a living somehow.”
“Would he give me his back
“Would he give me his back garden to turn into a memorial to fallen soldiers? Of course, he wouldn’t.”
I think we know exactly what sort of person we’re dealing with here. Gammon’s gonna gammon.
Hopefully he’ll be shamed into doing the decent thing (though that’s probably wishful thinking)
How bad a livestock farmer do
How bad a livestock farmer do you have to be to get a lifetime ban from keeping animals?
ktache wrote:
This:
https://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/news/leicester-news/cruelty-neglect-cattle-leicestershire-farmer-1902140
shishman wrote:
I think we should be charitable with animal gifts to this farmer. After all if the authorities happened upon an animal on his land then his suspended sentence could then be enforced. If this happened enough times I am sure he would want to give the land away.
shishman wrote:
Duplicate post.
shishman wrote:
Wow – now that is some horrible stuff.
Now, remember, boys and girls, farmers are the custodians of the land…
brooksby wrote:
…and custodians of their maggots??
HoarseMann wrote:
That is a picture of one of the maggots?
I wonder how this bit of land
I wonder how this bit of land came to be privately-owned in the first place?
We need some sort of land-reform.
Okay, as a cyclist I should
Okay, as a cyclist I should be siding with the family etc., but I think if you’re going to accept the principle of land-ownership, then the land owner has every right to object to how it is used.
What we need to do is to take all the private land-ownership and return the land to the peoples (via the state). That would eliminate the bourgeoisie and seize the means of production.
HawkinsPeter wrote:
Well you joke, but land is simply not like other property. Nobody is making the stuff, and it’s where Locke really stumbled in his attempt to justify private-ownership in the first place (its yours if you – or your slave or servant (!) – mix your labour with it, he concluded, unconvincingly). And there is a very specific history of how land in this country came to be privately owned to begin with.
Hence we have public footpaths and rights-of-way, and things like the right-to-roam, and compulsory purchase. Even the US allows the state to forceably purchase land (as Trump is having to do for his wretched wall, ironically enough).
How much did this chap get in state subsidies when he was a farmer, out of interest? Did he repay them when it turned out he was not farming in accordance with the law?
We pay some people a fortune as a reward for owning land, while taxing others. Subsidies handed out to large land owners roughly equal the total take from council tax. I admit this is a general gripe rather than being this specific case, but the whole thing just annoys me.
FluffyKittenofTindalos wrote:
Joking, comrade?
HawkinsPeter wrote:
Ah, yes, Squirrel Girl. Not one of my favourite Marvel heroes, tbh.
brooksby wrote:
Yeah, but she defeated Thanos single-handed (well, with the assistance of Tippy-Toes)
The same Mr Thomas who has
The same Mr Thomas who has left a rusty eyesore of a train in a field in Blaby, in protest of wanting better train links to the village.
He has a habit of irritating people with his odd and often cruel intentions.
https://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/news/local-news/blaby-field-rusty-steam-train-302166
It would be interesting to know when this land became his. As the assumption is he has bought it off British rail / network rail and not just assumed ownership. As the Beeching recommendations were for it to be used for cycling by local council and other local disused lines are used for this purpose.
The council could just offer him a low ball offer for the land, I know locally that he has had land for sale following his fines.
lllnorrislll wrote:
Not sure what the situation is at present in the UK, but as we inherited the bulk of our laws from Britain, I’m pretty sure it’s similar to what goes down here in Ireland where there’s the notion of adverse possession aka squatters rights. The principle is that if a 3rd party can claim possession if they show they’ve occupied a piece of land and excluded others for 12 years.
This has indeed caused similar issues here where railways abandoned in the 50s and 60s have had sections absorbed into gardens and fields leading to years of deadlock and hefty payouts (for what was originally publicly owned land) with the rising popularity of greenways over the last decade
The same Mr Thomas who has
Whoops
The same Mr Thomas who has
Whoops
I suppose now that he’s a
I suppose now that he’s a former farmer.
Pedant on: principal; no
Pedant on: principal; no, it’s principle.
What would happen if this was a road? The land would probably be compulsory purchased with minimal compensation, so why isn’t that being done here.
Compulsory Purchase does look
Compulsory Purchase does look the very obvious solution.
No problem with the farmer
No problem with the farmer wanting to be reimbursed for allowing this to cross his land. Irrelevant comments about his ban on keeping animals, nothing to do with this at all.
Ianr1950 wrote:
But £5K per year to “maintain” the route, when he’s already demonstrated what a fine, upstanding, and *responsible* person he is?
All the irrelevant comments
All the irrelevant comments about how he came into ownership of the land and the idea that land should be taken from the bourgeois and returned to the state is laughable. It is his land and ok maybe from reports he might not be the nicest of people but it is his land and if people want to use part of it then they should pay if that his what he wants. What other pepole might do is irrelevant, it is his c house.
Ianr1950 wrote:
Well, seems like someone is getting a bit defensive (and almost illegible in their defense of
themselvesthe ex-farmer).Bourgeois, the maggoty cow
Bourgeois, the maggoty cow arse thing doesn’t strike me as particularly bourgeois.
Your defence of this reprehensible individual has now made me wonder what relevance his aquisition of the former state owned railway line has in this.
By the way, hello, we all look forward to your erudite views on the rim/disk conundrum, which side of the helmet debate you are on and of course the place of our squirrelly friends in everyday life.
He’s ankles!
Lower than a…
He’s ankles!
Lower than a…
Not wanting to bring up old
Not wanting to bring up old issues, but the ex-farmer, Peter Thomas, seems to treat the land with as much care and respect as he treats animals: https://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/news/local-news/owner-bulls-hit-farm-whetstone-843770
Maybe that’s where the £5,000 maintenance fee will go?
hawkinspeter wrote:
Is it my childish sense of humour or does anyone else find it amusing the farm is called Bulls Hit and not Bullshit Farm, especially considering the bull crap the farmer spouted?
His land, his choice, simples
His land, his choice, simples. If you want the land then pay for it.