- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
Kingsway shared use path Hove (StreetView)Brighton woman riding with her child on her bike sent face-first into wall by another cyclist
Sussex Police have closed an investigation into an incident on a Hove shared-use path in which a cyclist was knocked face-first into a wall. Agnieszka Merta, who had been riding with her son on her bike at the time, said that the man responsible didn’t stop afterwards and instead told her, “I need to go”.
At around 1pm on December 30, Merta was riding on the shared-use path that runs along Kingsway near Hove Lagoon.
“I was cycling slowly as I had the little one on the back of the bike,” she told The Argus.
“Then I felt a push from behind and couldn’t really remember much. It was with a lot of force as he went past on my left hand side, trying to overtake me. I don’t remember it exactly, but my mouth hit the low brick wall and I suffered concussion.
“The first thing I wanted to see was if my son was hurt. Luckily he did not even have a scratch. I was trying to face a different direction so my son didn’t have to see that I was covered in blood.
“The man was in his early 30s and quite tall. I think he was scared that I would call the police and scared he would then have to face some consequences. He said, ‘I need to go’.
“I think his riding was very dangerous.”
Brighton & Hove councillor left-hooked by white van man while riding in emergency cycle lane
Merta needed 20 stitches and subsequently underwent £350 worth of dental treatment.
A letter from Sussex Police indicates the incident was treated as an alleged assault occasioning actual bodily harm. However, the case has now been closed unless new information comes to light.
One resident who came to Merta’s aid told her they had witnessed numerous crashes and collisions between cyclists and pedestrians on that stretch of shared-use path.
“It is absolutely crazy there, something needs to be done as it is dangerous,” said Merta.
“I really hate the thought of something like this happening to someone else, particularly if it is happening regularly.”
Alex has written for more cricket publications than the rest of the road.cc team combined. Despite the apparent evidence of this picture, he doesn't especially like cake.
Latest Comments
- Yapaxi 19 min 41 sec ago
Being upset does not sound like a good reason to put yourself in more danger. In Amsterdam, things like that happen to me once per month or two and...
- maj7667@gmail.com 30 min 12 sec ago
There's no way I'd be cycling on that road - it's just asking for trouble. Just cos we've got the right doesn't make it right; better to go the...
- Rich_cb 1 hour 22 min ago
The driver is contractually obliged to inform their insurance company. If they do so then you must get your insurance involved....
- HarrogateSpa 1 hour 34 min ago
Mostly due to the court case - they are stuck doing what Hornbeam Park Developments want, or they'll probably face another judicial review....
- David9694 1 hour 41 min ago
thay Shoud be mAde to haVe a regustartion plate s...
- Glov Zaroff 1 hour 47 min ago
"It's worth noting that Enve currently doesn't have a time trial bike in its lineup. It will be interesting to discover whether a time trial bike...
- Miller 2 hours 1 min ago
Fit and forget is a great trait. I'm using a pair of the original Conti GP5K tubeless tyres, they're now well into their 5th year of use (new in...
- Veganpotter 2 hours 8 min ago
Everyone that looks at this bike will see that is an ebike that isn't trying to not look like an ebike
- wtjs 2 hours 24 min ago
I always leave it on the most powerful setting... Yes, that's what they all do!
- wtjs 2 hours 30 min ago
Crikey! Good work PC Marks!! Don't apply for any jobs in Lancashire, though, where you'll be a marked man for not having the sense to just give up...
Add new comment
14 comments
"(A letter from Sussex Police indicates the incident was treated as an alleged assault occasioning actual bodily harm. However, the case has now been closed unless new information comes to light)"
⬆
Very odd remarks from cops but not surprising as to how negligent they are towards cyclists safety at the hands of dangerous criminal drivers.
Here, on the one hand, because it was a CYCLIST colliding into another person, cops automatically allege 'intentional assault,' but on the other hand, because it was only a CYCLIST 'victim,' they quickly dismiss the complaint - nothing new to a huge numbers of cyclist victims having also to deal with anti-cylist cops who often use underhanded tactics to defend dangerous drivers.
If he can't make an overtake safely then you have to question whether he should be cycling at all. Just saying.
Licences for cyclists!
I don't really understand what happened.
Did this bloke (just?) misjudge an undertake, or is Agnieszka saying that some bloke just randomly came up behind her and pushed her over and into a wall? If so, what is the police's justification for closing the case?
Surely if the bikes weren't involved, if this bloke was on foot and had randomly pushed over and hospitalised another complete stranger then they'd be (at least pretending to) moving heaven and earth to find this dangerous individual?
The way she describes it it it sounds like an undertake from another cyclist, who then got scared when she was injured, and fled the scene.
Ironic that if this had happened with interaction between a motorist and a cyclist. It would obviously been recorded as non-fault accident....
Hope she gets better soon.
It does raise the question though of why the police don't presume Bike/car interactions are cases of assault....
It's not the job of police to presume, it's to collect evidence. Presuming assault would presume intent, something which needs to be proven. That's another level of proof beyond negligent or reckless behaviour occasioning actual bodily harm.
Yes, that did occur to me. My point was that the police seem to have presumed intent, but have closed the case due to lack of information. Although the rider has been an utter w&nker, how did they come to the conclusion that it was an assault?
I suppose that I was making a comparison to the way vehicle/bike interactions are treated - "just one of those things", "moment of inattention" "tragic accident" "nothing the driver coud do" and so on, and on. And on....
You can only be charged with careless and inconsiderate cycling if you're cycling on a road, I'm not sure if "road" includes a pavement / cycle path adjacent to the carriageway, so that might be the reason.
Assault requires either intent or recklessness. I think recklessness is more subjective and therefore harder to prove compared to the "competent and careful" cyclist / driver test.
Thanks for that. I still ask the question if they don't have information and the key witness was struck from behind, how can they conclude recklessness?
Point of order:
I think you mean "motorised vehicle/bike interactions".
Good point, well made
Well, no. It seems like they treated it as an alleged assault, which is different to presumption. In other words, they have investigated the case according to what the victim has alleged, that doesn't mean they reached that conclusion and investigated accordingly. A lack of supporting evidence means they closed the case without confirming the allegation.