A jury has acquitted a theatrical agent whose clients include Lord of the Rings star Sir Ian McKellen of assault following an incident last year in which he drove at Mike van Erp – known on social media as CyclingMikey – and carried him on the bonnet of his Range Rover for around 20 metres.
The incident happened at a junction on the Outer Circle in London’s Regent’s Park that has earned the nickname ‘Gandalf Corner’ due to road safety campaigner van Erp stepping into the carriageway to stop motorists who ignore a bollard with a keep left arrow on it and drive on the wrong side of the road to try and get ahead of queueing traffic.
On the morning of 9 September last year, van Erp was positioned at that location with a helmet camera and a selfie-stick when Paul Lyon-Maris, aged 60, attempted to drive round the bollard in his Range Rover on the wrong side of the road.
Video shown in court, and now uploaded to CyclingMikey’s YouTube channel, shows Lyon-Maris claiming that he was running late for a doctor’s appointment, although he admitted during the trial that it was in fact an appointment with a physiotherapist.
James Dean, prosecuting, had told the court that the theatrical agent had “used his car as a weapon” during the incident, driving it at van Erp who ended up on the bonnet.
“The car continued, still on the wrong side of the road, towards the junction and turned right on the Outer Circle where it stopped around 20 yards (18 metres) to the left with Mr van Erp on the bonnet,” the prosecutor explained.
Lyon-Maris had admitted at an earlier magistrates’ court hearing to driving the wrong side of the keep left sign, but insisted that van Erp “threw himself on my bonnet.”
The jury took just under four hours to find the driver not guilty of dangerous driving and common assault, returning its verdict at lunchtime today.
The judge in the case, Recorder Jonathan Bellamy, said after the verdict had been returned: “I wish Mr Lyon-Maris luck in his profession and elsewhere.”
During this week’s trial, he told the court that while he acknowledged that it was “risky” to step out in front of motor vehicles, “I look at it in the same way as taking the keys off a drink driver – I want to stop the immediate harm.”
On his profile on Twitter, van Erp – who was a teenager when his father was killed by a drunk driver – says that he has “reported 1,000 drivers for 800 successful prosecutions in the last four years or so.”
He has more than 90,000 followers on YouTube, where his videos have amassed in excess of 47 million views in aggregate.
High-profile celebrities he has caught breaking the law on camera include the former world champion boxer Chris Eubank, and film director, Guy Ritchie.
One unsuccessful prosecution came earlier this year, however, when the Crown Prosecution Service decided at the last moment to drop a charge against former Chelsea and England footballer Frank Lampard, who now manages Everton, relating to using a handheld mobile phone while driving.
Writing on Twitter today after he had been unofficially told of the verdicts, van Erp said “I feel sick,” adding that “the video will be up soon enough, then you’re welcome to draw your own conclusions.”
The video will be up soon enough, then you’re welcome to draw your own conclusions.
— CyclingMikey (@MikeyCycling) October 13, 2022
81 thoughts on “Video: Sir Ian McKellen’s agent cleared of assaulting CyclingMikey”
Rather disappointing.
Rather disappointing.
Dreadful result. However
Dreadful result. A jury of motorists peers no doubt. Havent seen the video yet but I cant see how it could possibly not be a crime the way it is described.
I hope the guys lawyer cost him a packet.
However this piece doesnt make sense. The bolded he refers to Mikey but the context makes it refer to the judge.
The judge in the case, Recorder Jonathan Bellamy, said after the verdict had been returned: “I wish Mr Lyon-Maris luck in his profession and elsewhere.”
During this week’s trial, he told the court that while he acknowledged that it was “risky” to step out in front of motor vehicles, “I look at it in the same way as taking the keys off a drink driver – I want to stop the immediate harm.”
Secret_squirrel wrote:
All that could be proved was that he drove dangerously. We all know that isn’t sufficient for someone to be found guilty of dangerous driving – the surprising thing was that it was even prosecuted as such.
So, it appears rich people
So, it appears rich people can drive where they like with no fear of consequences.
I don’t know how rich the
I don’t know how rich the lady who did a similar manouvre with the insulate britain protestors, but she did lose her license for dangerous driving. Although she did plead guilty as well so maybe had a worse defence solicitor.
hawkinspeter wrote:
Oh yes, it’s common knowledge!
Why am I in no way surprised?
Why am I in no way surprised?
It’s a ‘war on motorists’ I tell ya
FYI Frank Lampard manages
FYI Frank Lampard manages Everton, not Villa
It really is time that we
It really is time that we considered reforming the legal system to stop relying so much on juries, they are an absolute lottery. Mikey could have had a jury of twelve cyclists and a resounding guilty verdict, or a jury of a dozen cabbies and an equally resounding not guilty verdict. The French system in which most cases are considered and adjudicated upon by a tribunal of professional legal experts with very substantial specific training for the role would seem to make much more sense than our current legal tombola. It would also (not that this should be a prime consideration in the justice system) considerably reduce costs compared to the current system where the state has to pay the wages of jurors for the duration of their service.
Your spot on. Most Juror’s
Your spot on. Most Juror’s are no doubt Motorists, so there is then the feeling from them that it could be them one day. Its a shame the victim doesn’t have a say on whether its a jury or trial by 3 judges.
I would love to have been a
I would love to have been a fly on the wall in the jury room. Reminds me of 12 Angry Men, the original of course, not the remake.
Well, presumably it went like
Well, presumably it went like “This guy has taken a camera out to challenge people, so he’s a vigilante and a nutter. And the guy in the car’s an important type – clearly his time is money. Plus the oddball could just have got out of the way, but then he obviously threw himself on the bonnet – what a twerp. Finally, no harm done, so why are we wasting our time here?”
He should’ve let him leave
He should’ve let him leave the scene. Then the driver would’ve been fined.
Should be a very, very long
Should be a very, very long ban for that.
Mr Lyon-Maris has basically
Mr Lyon-Maris has basically faced no sanction – been found not guilty – for driving into someone. Not driving into them by accident, but entirely on purpose.
Because he was running late.
Late for a medical
Late for a medical appointment …… which was a physiotherapist.
AlsoSomniloquism wrote:
do you think he gets a discount for referals?
One wonders how many Gandalf
One wonders how many Gandalf Corner drivers will now be tempted to run CyclingMickey over because they now believe it is legal?
“In Sussex, Paul and Robin
“In Sussex, Paul and Robin have horses and dogs, and house guests with children. But when in London, they live a different life,”
You don’t say!
https://www.houseandgarden.co.uk/gallery/caroline-holdaway-robin-muir
Incredible. In the previous
Incredible. In the previous article it said that Lyon’s defense was he kept driving forward because he was afraid of Mikey. Yet in the footage you can clearly see him driving forward while Mikey is on the bonnet of his car and he is gesturing and tapping his watch. He wasn’t scared, he was angry at being delayed for a few seconds. And somehow the court still accepted this utter cnuts lie of a defence.
I’m with Mikey. A pedestrian
I’m with Mikey. A pedestrian would have walked out looking the other way as the arrows and road text tell them to, this is reckless driving. Maybe one day we will also see ‘crimes against humanity’ charges for reckless greenhouse gas emission.
I wonder whether CM would
I wonder whether CM would have got off with it if he’d ridden his bike into Paul Lyon-Maris, while riding on the wrong side of the road, and was videod doing it.
Wow, this giuy is actually
Wow, this guy is actually using his 1.5t car as an assault weapon, and gets away with it.
I wonder daily more in what kind of a world we’re actually living…
Well over 2 tonnes. The
Well over 2 tonnes. The latest Range Rover design has to use light weight materials, not for handling, but to avoid being classed as a goods vehicle at over 3 tonnes.
2.3 T vehicle.
2.3 T vehicle.
In a Mikey video from 3 years ago, the police officer volunteers that that corner is dangerous due to the illegal driving.
Rich man gets off charge as they have done for a few hundred years.
I am not surprised to be
I am not surprised to be honest. I understand CM’s motivation but I am not convinced his methods do cyclists any favours. Film those breaking the law by going the wrong side of the keep left sign and submit to the police. Shout warnings to any pedestrian or cyclists in their path. Stick a big billboard on the approach saying “800 people successfully prosecuted for going the wrong side….”. Same result, probably more effective as everyone sees the billboard, no reliance on YouTube and no need for endangering oneself.
I would happily help crowdfund a billboard for that purpose.
He’d need planning permission
He’d need planning permission for that.
Campaign for more enforcement rather than leaving the public to assist the police.
You are right about the
You are right about the planning unfortunately. Just looked at the location (I probably should have done that before suggesting a billboard ) and not a chance of getting permission. Unfortunately also diddley squat chance of the police doing their job effectively and having enough sustained enforcement to get the word out that cutting that corner isn’t worth the risk so I won’t be wasting my energy on that front. I still don’t condone CM’S methods though. Not sure what the answer is, but I am convinced it isn’t the way CM currently operates.
PP has to be implemented by
PP has to be implemented by the landowner, anyway.
And I think that is under Royal Park jurisdiction, who have already refused to install a camera there for aesthetic reasons.
Cycling Micky wasn’t doing
Cycling Micky wasn’t doing much cycling in that clip. The guy is a professional bellend and looks for drama. He wouldn’t be doing this if it wasn’t for YouTube. I also imagine he picks and chooses who he messes with.
How can he see who is in the
How can he see who is in the car?
Correct, he would not be doing this without YouTube.
He would not be doing it if there was proper enforcement.
I would not need to submit stuff to Essex police if there was proper enforcement.
Without YouTube, drivers would not be aware that they can be caught on video and potentially prosecuted.
He wouldn’t be posting videos
He wouldn’t be posting videos if there weren’t an internet. However I suspect he’d be doing some kind of reporting crap and dangerous driving however due to his personal history / stated motivation.
If he’s choosy about who he messes with then his criteria seem very odd. Chris Eubank? This dude?
Always easy to spot shit
Always easy to spot shit drivers by who CM annoys.
I don’t understand why the
I don’t understand why the relevant authorities don’t put CM out of a job – by doing theirs. Obviously a camera would just be seen as a cost of motoring by some of these offenders, but some one-way claws might cost them where it hurts – time, inconvenience and aggravation.
The Crown Estates Paving
The Crown Estates Paving Commission, which controls the roads in Regent’s Park, refuse to install a camera because it wouldn’t be in keeping with the 18th/19th century character of the area. When asked (as I have) whether allowing high levels of motorised traffic on the roads in a park is in keeping with said character, they’re oddly silent.
Rendel Harris wrote:
Is that true? That is so ridiculous!
A sympathetic design could
A sympathetic design could enhance the area.
I did suggest to them that
I did suggest to them that perhaps they could have a gentleman in a frock coat, knee britches and tricorn hat painting exquisite enamel miniatures of malefactors to be used in evidence, but for some unfathomable reason I think they decided I was taking the piss.
Because the Met are too busy
Because the Met are too busy whinging about lack of resources despite having a record number of warranted officers.
It has put me off McKellen,
It has put me off McKellen, keeping a pillock like that as his agent
He has a few other A-listers
He has a few other A-listers too.
Being a self entitled prick who’s full of their own importance helps when negotiating multi-million dollar acting gigs for clients. Who knew ?♂️
van Erp “threw himself on my
van Erp “threw himself on my bonnet.”
AND
“He head butted my fist”
This shows how important it
This shows how important it is to be rich, have influential friends & be in the right lodge, oh & being in a vehicle when you commit crime helps too.
Unless the judge accepts a
Unless the judge accepts a majority verdict, it only takes one Mail reading petrol-head on a jury to get you off pretty much any driving charge or anything relating to assaulting, beating or murdering a cyclist.
As long as you’ve got the money to get a lawyer who knows how to press the right buttons, and get the case seen in the right court then you’ve got a pretty good chance that one of your 12 randoms will do the honours for you and then brag about it in the pub for the rest of their life.
If not just the one, two or
If not just the one, two or three to have “reasonable” doubt.
Velo-drone wrote:
Please dont talk bollocks about legal processes – it undermines them. We get enough of that from our politicians.
It is not correct to say one jurist “gets them off”. The choices are Unanimous verdict (for or against) majority verdict for or against (as requested by Judge) or hung jury.
There is no scenario where one jurist “gets them off” unless you count 1 hyper-persuasive individual in the jury room – which by design of the justice system we will never know about.
Yet another case where the
Yet another case where the motorist gets away with it. This just looks like we cyclists can just get knocked off, run over, side swiped etc etc and the drivers get off scott free. When will the justice system atcually start issuing sentences which are seen as deterrents? and then this sort of shit atcually stops happening
I wonder what the attitude
I wonder what the attitude of the jury would have been if it wasn’t someone identified as a cyclist – say a concerned pedestrian or a driver who had been in a serious collision there?
Yet another case where the
Yet another case where the motorist gets away with it
There is no end to those- in Offending-Motorist-Paradise Lancashire, this close pass at great speed by BMW BU21 FGM won’t receive any response at all from the b******s at Lancashire Constabulary whose opinions are that cyclists are asking for it by being on the roads and getting in the way when respectable fellow-BMW drivers are just trying to ‘press on’. There was a loud horn blast from oncoming Jag XJ, but he got a lot more clearance than I did as the BMW cut right in on me
obvioulsy it’s not possible
obvioulsy it’s not possible to know what the jury discussed but I do wonder if they saw Cycling Mikey as a provacateur or to use a tabloid term ‘vigilante’. That’s not an excuse for the driving but it may be a reason the driver got off. The point is that the Outer Ring should not be open to through traffic.
12 jurers? Only possibly only
12 jurers? Only possibly only one – if that – a regular cyclist? I can see why they let off the psycho in a Range Rover.
Here is a link to the Metro
Here is a link to the Metro article : https://metro.co.uk/2022/10/13/celeb-agent-cleared-of-dangerous-driving-after-cyclist-jumped-on-bonnet-17557375/
Quote from the article : “Lyon-Maris admitted driving around the keep left sign but said he told the cyclist to ‘please’ get out of his way after he jumped on his bonnet.
Summing up, judge, Mr Jonathan Bellamy said:
‘The defendant is a man of previously good character.
‘The fact that he is 60 and of good character could mean he is less likely to commit the offences with which he has been charged.
‘He said he did not drive at Mr van Erp, but that he jumped onto the bonnet of his vehicle.’”
The title of the article is “Celeb agent cleared because vigilante cyclist jumped onto his Range Rover bonnet”
I’ll leave you to draw your own conclusions but I think I can see a possible reason why the jury cleared him.
Bungle_52 wrote:
He may have said ‘please’ after Mikey ‘jumped on his bonnet’ – however he also drove into Mikey repeatedly before Mikey was on his car’s bonnet.
Bungle_52 wrote:
I’m not a lip reader, but I’m pretty sure he wasn’t saying “Please”…
If he said that after Mikey
If he said that after Mikey was already on the bonnet, and then didn’t become stationary for a good 20 metres or so, then how did he expect him to get out of his way?
In what sane world is
In what sane world is repeatedly and deliberately driving a Range Rover into somebody carefully crossing the road NOT assault?!
Mikey wasnt crossing the road
Mikey wasnt crossing the road though. Stop putting up straw men.
(FWIW I have no problem with Mikey being Gandalf, but mischaracterising what he was doing isnt helpful.)
Secret_squirrel wrote:
Nope. He was literally crossing the road.
ChrisB200SX wrote:
Respectfully, no he wasn’t. This is what CM does, he waits until he sees someone driving down the wrong side of that traffic island and steps out into the road to block the carriageway in order to send them back to go round the legal side. Nothing wrong with that in my opinion, but he’s not crossing the road and I don’t think (though obviously I don’t speak for him) he would claim that he was.
ChrisB200SX wrote:
Says the person who has quite clearly not watched the video.
CM is physically a soft
CM is physically a soft “target” so to someone driving a vehicle at him he would seem incapable of causing damage to their vehicle if they came into contact so they have no qualms about driving into him, also the driver will say to themself ” he’ll get out of the way when I drive at him”. If however, there was a perception that their intimidatory driving could damage or scratch their vehicle or cause serious injury to a baby / toddler they’d think twice, so I suggest CM step into the path of the oncoming vehicle pushing a pram, one like an old fashioned Silver Cross would be hard to miss.
Whilst not condoning illegal
Whilst not condoning illegal actions by any road user including cyclists, is CM really doing anything positive for cyclists, I say not. Despite what he might say, the reality is he is just another antagonist who is trying to boost his YouTube channel. If he wasn’t he would be putting his efforts into promoting safety instead of provocation.
As a jury has found against CM maybe he should think about his actions.
YMFB wrote:
And a warm welcome to another first time poster with a negative point of view, what a shock…
CM isn’t actually trying to do anything for cyclists and doesn’t claim to be (excepting the fact that of course we all benefit from safer roads), he is trying to stop drivers breaking the law in a dangerous manner. The fact that he sometimes does so using a bicycle is incidental.
Personally I think they lose
Personally I think they lose points for not starting with “As a cyclist myself…” 😉
That’s because I’m not just a
That’s because I’m not just a cyclist…
Rendel Harris wrote:
it was only negative if you condone CM actions. I’m looking for positive attitude to improve road safe for all, not as a keyboard/YouTube warrior or just when I’m riding my bicycle.
try it sometime
You don’t think that calling
You don’t think that calling out people for using their mobiles whilst driving or choosing to drive the wrong way up a one-way road or jumping a huge queue into oncoming traffic because they’re late for a dentist appointment… You don’t think that any of that is “promoting safety”?
Erm – so how do you define “promoting safety” in those situations?
@Brooksby that’s not
@Brooksby that’s not promoting safety. If you don’t understand perhaps trying learning a little about it.
So, again, how would you
So, again, how would you define “promoting safety”? If what van Erp does, isn’t?
Should he just walk past on the other side and it to the police to keep an eye out for miscreants? (cos we know how that would work out…)
As a jury has found against
As a jury has found against CM maybe he should think about his actions
As you are a dimwit, maybe you should think about a more suitable place for your views
Grow up, you don’t know me,
Grow up, you don’t know me, just like I dont know you.
I think we all know you, or
I think we all know you, or at least we all know your type. Kudos for not trying to hide your nastiness and rudeness from the start though, most try to create a reasonable persona first then get into their real agenda, you’ve gone full gas from the off.
I don’t think I’ve been nasty
I don’t think I’ve been nasty or rude and there’s no need for me to hide behind anything as I don’t have an agenda. I will shortly be off for a ride in the countryside so have a nice day.
Let’s hope some arse in a
Let’s hope some arse in a Range Rover doesn’t run you down then because they will be citing this wretched case as a precedent “he was in my way, so I knocked him out of the way, officer.”
“that’s quite all right sir, you be on your way now. Well, sonny I hope you’ve learned your lesson. The ambulance will be here in about 6 hours, so try not to freeze or bleed to death.”
No agenda, just a thin grasp
No agenda, just a thin grasp of the facts.
They haven’t found against
They haven’t found against him at all. They have found against the Crown who thought driving along with someone on the bonnet for 20-30 metres is an offence. The actual action of driving the wrong side of the pedestrian refuge AND cutting the corner was pleaded guilty to by the driver. And it is that action that CM is trying to draw attention to originally and stop. If the driver had reversed back and joined the queue correctly, he wouldn’t have even been charged for that.
You claim he provokes
You claim he provokes motorists into driving on the wrong side of the road at a junction ignoring a keep left instruction.
How does he do this ?
Mikey wasn’t on trial btw The driver was.
Crikey! They’re swarming!!
Crikey! They’re swarming!!
At least 3 dimwits active on one topic at the same time
wtjs wrote:
They’re just seizing an opportunity where the law has let down Mikey, as if that’s a good thing. I’d say that Mikey’s record on prosecutions speaks for itself.
wtjs wrote:
That’s little unfair – they’re just those with a very noticably different (emotional) bias, which then directs their choice of facts, interpretation and indeed logic. That’s a human universal! It’s noticable here because the unusual concentration of people who’ve plenty of direct experience of the down-sides of motoring, the danger posed by drivers and the inconveniences for cyclists.
Plus the odd contrarian / WUM.
Unfortunately when your viewpoint is at odds with what you can see that leads to a belief in “alternative facts” or wacky explanations. “He punched my fist with his face! He was threatening me by retreating! He provoked me into the illegal act I committed 20 seconds before I encountered him!” (OK that one was icing).
Another vigilante
Another vigilante
https://www.bournemouthecho.co.uk/news/23036029.residents-fear-death-due-illegal-parking-wareham/
A MAN has been left frustrated with drivers who frequently and illegally park their vehicles at a pedestrian crossing in Wareham.
Wareham resident James Fletcher also fears that if it continues, someone else will lose their life – just years after a three-year-old boy died in 2018.
Please, think of the drivers.