The courier who went viral in one of Jeremy Vine’s cycling videos last week has been suspended from work while his employer investigates after being seen swearing at the presenter as he cycled past.
The 50-year-old man, named as Tony in an interview with the Daily Mail, was filmed crossing the road in front of Vine — as the broadcaster rounded a van stopped in a bike lane — in a clip that has since been viewed more than 5.5 million times on Twitter.
As Vine passed, continuing his ride through Hammersmith in London, the man turns around, saying “Vine you p****” before some other inaudible dialogue.
I see the gentleman who shouted abuse at me in the street last week has now emerged in the Daily Mail, bizarrely, claiming it was necessary because I “rode my bike at him” in a way that caused him to panic.
Luckily I managed to find new footage of the incident on another camera. pic.twitter.com/bpziAJNw0C— Jeremy Vine (@theJeremyVine) April 29, 2023
The warehouse worker said he does not regret anything and “called him a p**** because he was acting like one”.
“He called me an Amazon driver when I don’t even work for them and I was on foot — and he nearly cycled into me,” Tony claimed. “He’d cycled around a white van which had pulled out of the junction and was trying to eye-ball the driver as he came past and so wasn’t concentrating on where he was going.
“I thought he was going to crash straight into me and I hurried up a bit over the road. On his video he only highlights the word “f***” but for some reason the audio of what I actually said to him is distorted — and what I really told him was ‘because you nearly f***ing hit me’.
“His face was covered with a scarf and he was wearing glasses but I knew immediately it was Jeremy Vine because he’s the only cyclist around here who has a giant camera poking out his head looking like some sort of Teletubby.”
The father of two explained that he has been suspended while his employers investigate the incident and received an email from work when the video went viral.
“I’d obviously been recognised and the email said my behaviour was not befitting of the company. It doesn’t look good to be honest,” he continued. “I’ve had that job for a couple of years and like it.
“I’m a private person, really, I don’t seek attention. I was going about my day minding my own business and he nearly careers into me at speed on his bike but acts like I’m the one with the problem.
“He’ll no doubt turn his attentions to the next motorist or pedestrian who winds him up but for me I could lose my livelihood on the back of all this. Ironically most of the comments people left were critical of him and not me and many said I actually had the right of way.”
In March, Vine criticised a London bus driver for making a right turn in front of him, forcing him to brake to avoid a collision. The footage, shared on the BBC and Channel 5 presenter’s social media, attracted similar attention to last week’s.
A month earlier Vine slammed a “garbage” Telegraph article that claimed cycling injuries have surged since a bike lane had been installed.
34 thoughts on “Courier who called Jeremy Vine a “p****” suspended by employer”
Very silly time/place to
Very silly time/place to cross the road, IMO… Good job Vine wasn’t driving a car.
brooksby wrote:
also very silly to go around the front of a van that’s trying to exit.
squidgy wrote:
Very silly time/place to cross the road, IMO… Good job Vine wasn’t driving a car.
— squidgyalso very silly to go around the front of a van that’s trying to exit.— brooksbyI agree. I’d say that Vine’s choice of manoeuvre (which he justifies in the later video linked above) is the riskier one.
Vine has to move well out of the cycle lane to get round. There is a car parked opposite the junction and the oncoming lane is empty. In that scenario I’d put money on the van driver pulling out as soon as he can. I’d not consider going round the front of the van unless the driver clocked me and waved me on.
Vine can say the driver is wrong for already being in the road but it’s irrelevant, it’s what people do.
Simon E wrote:
Delivery guy seems to be using the van as block to cross the road which I think is fair enough. He seems to be observant enough to see what’s going on. Vine just makes a small inconvenience a bit of an issue. I’d probably be thinking the same as the delivery guy.
squidgy wrote:
But remember, Tony’s argument is that he called Vine a p**** not for making something of nothing (a view which clearly a lot of people sympathise with), but for nearly hitting him.
squidgy wrote:
Are you sure that’s what you meant to write? Because it makes no sense at all.
Vine didn’t make any kind of issue of the guy crossing the road. The guy crossing the road made an issue of it by repeatedly swearing at Vine. He then made more of an issue by obviously lying to a newspaper about why he swore at Vine.
Think they meant Vine made an
Think they meant Vine made an issue out of the van blocking the cycle lane.
quiff wrote:
As I have said on here before … if we don’t make an issue of these things, nothing is ever going to change and drivers are going to, rightly it appears, think they can just get away with it.
But its a boiling the ocean
But its a boiling the ocean problem,pick the battles instead that will have greater change to make the roads safer for cycling is my view. Stuff like this is well down the priority list.
Having seen the video, if I
Having seen the video, if I was Tony’s employer, I’d sack him for lying.
Eburt is right. So is Vine.
Eburt is right. So is Vine.
Yes. The video clearly shows
Yes. The video clearly shows that Vine was no where near him but the guy chose to have a pop AND THEN doubled down on his stupidity by looking for his 5 minutes of fame in the Heil.
No sympathy here.
Forget the lying. Can him for
Forget the lying. Can him for stupidity. Anyone who tells this story knowing the guy you are telling it about is equipped with more cameras than MGM, one of which just might tell a different story than you are telling, is seriously stupid.
‘His face was covered with a
‘His face was covered with a scarf’…………no it wasn’t.
Must have him confused with
Must have him confused with someone else he hurled abuse at that day?
Car Delenda Est wrote:
Which makes you wonder if the whole story was wrong, and the cyclist who put him in fear of his life that day was some other cyclist (not Vine) but that he’d realised the Heil wouldn’t pay him for a story about Joe Bloggs…
“I’m a private person, really
“I’m a private person, really, I don’t seek attention”
Except when he thinks he can make a bit of money from the Mail???
Also, the cyclist coming out of the road behind him looks closer than JV.
Sorry, but he deserves everything he gets
kinderje wrote:
That was one of my first thoughts, too…
The two scumbags I observe
The two scumbags I observe here are the van driver for pulling out and blocking the cycle lane when there is a cyclist approaching along it, and the Daily Arsewipe editor for using it as an opportunity to fire up more hatred towards people who ride bikes. They also edited the video on their website to make it appear that Vine was closer to the courier, who is just an angry old man. I might have gone round the back of the van if I was cycling along that path, as the driver may have accelerated out into the road as he clearly wasnt looking for cyclists.
Scumbag for the van driver’s
Scumbag for the van driver’s a bit harsh. Could understand that if he pulled out later but he was pulled out well before vine got there, just Vine’s usual overreaction.
NotNigel wrote:
Except … you are not supposed to partly pull out of a side road and block a live traffic lane on the main road which is exactly what the van driver does here. You wait until it is clear to go and then go, the outside mark of the cycle lane is not an alternative Give Way line.
The driver was not dangerous,
The driver was not dangerous, just totally inconsiderate. Drivers think that a cycle lane is some form of advanced stop line. It was the equivalent of queuing over a pedestrian crossing. Perhaps London needs to introduce yellow box markings and cameras.
I thought Vine was stupid to claim going in front of the van was safe though. Never the right choice, especially if he believed the van driver hadn’t given consideration to the cycle lane.
As for the pedestrian, so distant as to be an irrelevance.
I’m abroad at the moment, and here it is like back in the 60s or 70s, where cyclists wander over road or pavement, migrate between pedestrian and vehicle mode as it suits and nobody blinks an eye. Close passing is a thing but the speeds are so slow on the roads that it is no big deal because at least the motorists are avoiding hitting the cyclists. It is very polite and tolerant.
Hopefully the suspension will
Hopefully the suspension will become permanent.
Civility costs nothing…
Civility costs nothing…
Neither does acting with
Neither does acting with consideration for other road users.
Without incivility Vine
Without incivility Vine wouldn’t have a TV/Radio career.
Hadnt been paying attention
Hadnt been paying attention to this so apologies if it might have been covered already.
but how does Vine square the fact he cites the van as an immediate hazard to him in the video, when it’s much much further away from him than the space he gives this Tony, where he effectively poses to his viewers what was Tonys problem I was nowhere near him gave home 10ft, instead of the might is right he uses in the van when it’s at least 30ft away ?
Also what’s with the I’ve just found another camera stuff, he forgot he had another insta cam on a pole on his bike !?
And no around the front of a van is not the safest option, the van driver is looking predominately left and only glancing right, as soon as they see a gap in traffic theyll go for it, they wont have seen you as you move through the a pillar, convergent bearing spots, and you’ll become a hood ornament. The safest option in that situation is to slow down or stop and just stare coldly at the driver till they get out the way.
To be fair, I don’t think
To be fair, I don’t think Vine does say the van is an immediate hazard – merely that the driver has ignored the priority that he (Vine) has (although you might read the ‘might is right’ line as suggesting differently).
I agree with the rest of your comment, though.
But a pedestrian crossing the
But a pedestrian crossing the road will always have priority over a cyclist, yet Vine makes it all about the space he had given the pedestrian made it safe, so why cant the van driver use the exact same logic ?
Awavey wrote:
There’s no comparison. The van driver blocked a cycle lane. Vine didn’t block a pedestrian lane. The van driver made Vine either stop or take evasive action; Vine did neither of those to the pedestrian. Vine had no impact whatsoever on the pedestrian’s journey; that clearly isn’t the case with the van and Vine’s.
Awavey wrote:
Err, maybe it’s because distance alone isn’t the point?
Oh hey look, what a clear and concise explanation of why distance alone isn’t the point and the van is a massive hazard. I can’t see how anyone could argue with that.
But Vine IS a prick. What’s
But Vine IS a prick. What’s the world coming to when you can’t call a prick a prick?
FrankH wrote:
On that basis that?
FrankH wrote:
Person A crosses the road dangerously and abuses someone passing them slowly and safely. Person A then writes to notoriously anti-cycling paper to complain that he’s the victim of something imagined, knowing this will result in more harm to cyclists and attitudes towards them. Person A is suspended by employer for bringing company into disrepute. You: “ViNe iS a pRIck!”