Kingston driver 'aimed car at cyclist,' missed - and crashed into hair salon

Is the woman's insurance valid, since it was not technically an accident? Surely they wouldn't pay out if they knew she deliberately drove at someone, anyone know?

If so, probably more of a punishment than the justice system will hand out.

Just going to throw this out there, but i guarantee the whole "aimed at cyclist" part of this will be swept under carpet and will focus entirely on hitting the hair salon.

Thus, you fined x amount for causing damage and stupid driving, rather than

Go to jail for x amount for trying to kill someone..

It gets worse... it was an autistic cyclist, and the driver had 5 kids in the car!

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/motorist-arrested-on-suspicion-of-a...

Shouldn't it be "Hair salon involved in collision with car"?

Police have been combing the scene for evidence .

Hell's Bell's, what is the world coming too? Stupid young lady to attempt motorized MURDER. BUT, what the hell was the mountain biker doing kicking the car and provoking a retaliation?? He's lost is bike; spent time in Hospital .. ( I'm pleased he's OK; and not badly injured BTW) but lets face it; he was partly to blame for this senseless incident. Although I do agree with many of the comments posted about the punishment of the driver; lets hope the LAW seeks justice in this case?

My daughter and her partner cycle in Richmond Park regularly; and I use the park for cycling when I visit them ..

When will people realise that Human Life is Precious?

Am I the only one here wondering how fast was the Q7 going?

She's bounced off a parked transit, looks to have plough through a garden wall and demolished the front of the salon. Yet still managed to get the Q7 back onto the road.

Maybe she'll blame it on a wasp inside the car...and she has a propensity for anaphylaxis. ...I'm 'sure' she wouldn't have blatantly tried to run over an autistic cyclist that allegedly kicked her tank...I mean vehicle...endangering her brood into the bargain....

Id just like to point out to the person that said

Quote:

what the hell was the mountain biker doing kicking the car and provoking a retaliation

that the article later says "tried" to kick, and even if he made contact - attempting to run him down with a car is not a valid response... EVER
the fact that she had children on board tells me that's one incredibly irresponsible and stupid driver that deserves a lifetime ban for risking the lives of her passengers for no reason other than vengeance, although I'm sceptical she'll ever be charged, good ol CPS.

I love the road laws of our country, In the US such an incident would be "assault with a deadly weapon" or "attempted murder" whereas our great nation coins it "attempted GBH"
We are famous for understating things in this country but the trend to lessen the severity of a crime by using a naming system that simply does not reflect the magnitude of the offence,
A car is a deadly weapon if used as one, so in America if someone tries to intentionally run you down they are attempting to murder you, its a very simple conclusion to reach and makes perfect sense,
attempted GBH just makes me laugh but then its an improvement to what we had, in the past if you killed someone with your car it was called 'death by dangerous driving' with its seven year maximum sentence that many thought far too short, GBH is fifteen years but in my opinion still does not do enough to deter people from using their cars a weapons- a disturbing trend that seems to be on the rise.

Id also just like to point out that when a driver says they did not see a cyclist that's an admission of negligence and an offence in itself, not a plausible excuse! try telling the police that you cant see pedestrians and they'll ban you from driving, tell them you cant see cyclists and you get " yeah we can't see em either" its the mindset in this country that's the biggest problem, people have the idea that cyclists are invisible and rather than demanding people pay due attention the government takes a softly softly approach and releases adds that actually condone the opinion http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lsJs4AYa8sU
note when the driver looks right there is no bike- because its invisible!

Mostyn wrote:

but lets face it; he was partly to blame for this senseless incident. Although I do agree with many of the comments posted about the punishment of the driver; lets hope the LAW seeks justice in this case?
?

"Partly to blame"? Nah. There's no logical connection between kicking a car door and a motorist using a car as a weapon and trying to kill you and destroying a building.

Had she kicked his bike in retaliation (while stationary, which is apparently when the original argument occurred), then yeah, 'partly to blame', but not in the case of what actually happened.

If she is found guilty of attempted GBH will the sentence that she is given be automatically multiplyed by six, to take into account of the one cyclist and the five children in the car?

Bang her up..........shes an idiot and there is enough of them on the road. She obviously not of sound mind or fit for driving. No insurance for the rest of her life either that should work.

Well given the last incident I read about in Richmond Park was a driver actually deliberately knocking a cyclist of his bike, then leaving the scene of the accident and pleading not guilty , for which he received a fine and 6 points for careless driving, I doubt the CPS will prosecute the woman for attempted GBH. More likely careless driving and she'll get a small fine and 3 points if that. Of course if she pleads guilty she may just get off with a warning.

Attempted GBH? WTF? You start at the Highest point and work back. She uses a 2500kg weapon in a manor likely to cause life changing injuries and its only attempted GBH? Jesus....... Most likely end up getting away with pleading guilty to Affray.

When I was run off the road deliberately the other day the police officer (on the phone of course, this sort of thing doesn't warrant a home visit) was quite categorical that there was no such thing as assault (etc) using a car, quite categorical.

So it's good to see some forces (one in Manchester as well I believe) coming round to the idea that using a car is aggravating rather than a defence in law and reverting to the much less pointless driving offences.

Have the local Social Services been informed of the driver's inability to safely look after children ?
After all, she deliberately put them at risk from injury for her own selfish aims.
If they are her kids, they should be put into care. If they 'belong' to others, I hope those parents alienate the driver.
Just another way to punish her if our so-called justice system does it's normal 'sweeping under the carpet' thing.

I don't know if its me but this type of monster white car whether an audi, bmw or the like they always seem to want to be very aggressive. One of the white monstrosities once decided to squash me and another lady, who walked with a stick right into a bank with her car on a country road, screaming abuse. There was plenty of room but obvious she had a bad morning.

Any more information on this incident? i.e police report into the actual facts? seems to be lots of speculation and assumptions floating around at the moment.
Cheers

And what FACTS regarding the actual event are you using to claim that this woman tried to kill anyone?

How about the ones in the article!

Article:

He also spoke to an eyewitness, and said: “I'm told that the cyclist and the driver had had an altercation (over what I don't know) and that the cyclist had tried to kick the car.

“The woman's response was completely out of proportion though because she apparently tried to drive at the bike.

And

..the Metropolitan Police said:

The driver of the car, a 30-year-old woman, was arrested on suspicion of attempted GBH. She was taken to a south-west London police station and bailed to return on a date in September.

And

I feel most sympathy for the owner of the hair dressers. Hope he/she has business interruption risk that pays out for idiocy like this.