Driver saw red over yellow (From The Oxford Times)

"A charge of dangerous driving was dropped by the Crown Prosecution Service."

How about assault with a deadly weapon as an alternative?

What a prat, I hope his conviction affects his business and he goes bankrupt.

This guy is clearly an idiot, but its not unheard of for council staff to move people's cars when they need to paint a line - move the car back and then it gets a ticket!

Happened on Paradise St a few years back, I recall....

"A charge of dangerous driving was dropped by the Crown Prosecution Service."

Because the CPS like to be judge, jury and non-executioners.
Put the evidence before the judges you numpties and let THEM decide.

John Lamb wrote:
"A charge of dangerous driving was dropped by the Crown Prosecution Service."

Because the CPS like to be judge, jury and non-executioners.
Put the evidence before the judges you numpties and let THEM decide.

I agree in principle, but as we've seen all too often, the CPS present all the evidence, and the judges give the criminals a slap on the wrist, hence the levels of re-offending.

Restorative justice - let the council chap drive at the aggressor (only slowly of course).

EMBOX1 wrote:
This guy is clearly an idiot, but its not unheard of for council staff to move people's cars when they need to paint a line - move the car back and then it gets a ticket!

Happened on Paradise St a few years back, I recall....

Yeah but they didn't move his car this time, it had been sat there for quite a long time, meaning a lot of other people could park there as-well, since the yellow line was broken.

He got of lightly if you ask me, the council worker was only doing his job and some idiot comes along and could have potentially injured him very seriously !

Sid Hunt wrote:
"A charge of dangerous driving was dropped by the Crown Prosecution Service."

How about assault with a deadly weapon as an alternative?

Not really, he was going at walking pace, and gave the jobsworth a little warning, as the Gentleman said "stand in the road and expect to get hit" although in this case it was a tad over the top, the sentiment still applies, and do not forget this was all about the council ignoring residents and taking away their right to park outside their homes to give the cyclos a stupid lane.

Whopper w/o Pickle Cornmarket St wrote:

Sid Hunt wrote:
"A charge of dangerous driving was dropped by the Crown Prosecution Service."

How about assault with a deadly weapon as an alternative?

Not really, he was going at walking pace, and gave the jobsworth a little warning, as the Gentleman said "stand in the road and expect to get hit" although in this case it was a tad over the top, the sentiment still applies, and do not forget this was all about the council ignoring residents and taking away their right to park outside their homes to give the cyclos a stupid lane.

what a stupid comment! this 'art dealer' drove at someone who was doing their job, and injured him. that is, at the very least, assault. he should have lost his licence for dangerous driving

Whopper w/o Pickle Cornmarket St wrote:

Sid Hunt wrote:
"A charge of dangerous driving was dropped by the Crown Prosecution Service."

How about assault with a deadly weapon as an alternative?

Not really, he was going at walking pace, and gave the jobsworth a little warning, as the Gentleman said "stand in the road and expect to get hit" although in this case it was a tad over the top, the sentiment still applies, and do not forget this was all about the council ignoring residents and taking away their right to park outside their homes to give the cyclos a stupid lane.

"the council ignoring residents and taking away their right to park outside their homes"

No one 'has a right' to park on the highway.

No one has a right to drive a vehicle at anyone.

Whopper w/o Pickle Cornmarket St wrote:

Sid Hunt wrote:
"A charge of dangerous driving was dropped by the Crown Prosecution Service."

How about assault with a deadly weapon as an alternative?

Not really, he was going at walking pace, and gave the jobsworth a little warning, as the Gentleman said "stand in the road and expect to get hit" although in this case it was a tad over the top, the sentiment still applies, and do not forget this was all about the council ignoring residents and taking away their right to park outside their homes to give the cyclos a stupid lane.

The statement "stand in the road and expect to get hit" was made after the event.
What justification do you have for calling the workman a "jobsworth" ? , the resident concerned should think himself lucky not to have been given a more serious sentence with a record like his. Fine clothes and a classy line of business do not mean he is not a thug.

Whopper w/o Pickle Cornmarket St wrote:

Sid Hunt wrote:
"A charge of dangerous driving was dropped by the Crown Prosecution Service."

How about assault with a deadly weapon as an alternative?

Not really, he was going at walking pace, and gave the jobsworth a little warning, as the Gentleman said "stand in the road and expect to get hit" although in this case it was a tad over the top, the sentiment still applies, and do not forget this was all about the council ignoring residents and taking away their right to park outside their homes to give the cyclos a stupid lane.

Would you buy a lukewarm burger from a guy with an opinion like THIS?

John Lamb wrote:

Whopper w/o Pickle Cornmarket St wrote:

Sid Hunt wrote:
"A charge of dangerous driving was dropped by the Crown Prosecution Service."

How about assault with a deadly weapon as an alternative?

Not really, he was going at walking pace, and gave the jobsworth a little warning, as the Gentleman said "stand in the road and expect to get hit" although in this case it was a tad over the top, the sentiment still applies, and do not forget this was all about the council ignoring residents and taking away their right to park outside their homes to give the cyclos a stupid lane.

Would you buy a lukewarm burger from a guy with an opinion like THIS?

C'mon by his own admission the jobsworth was not hurt when he was "struck" it was because he didn't put his hands out to break his fall, you would get worse if a bike hit you. I wonder how much compo the jobsworth claimed out of our money, that is why it went this far. Where there's blame, there's a claim. By the way we bin all our luke warm burgers, quality control and health and safety, that is why we have 5 stars on the door, unlike a restaurant owner much publicised here who only managed 1 star at cafe tarifa.

"I wonder how much compo the jobsworth claimed out of our money" why would compansation be paid by 'us'?

Quite rightly the driver was ordered to pay compansation - that is from his own funds not the public purse. Also, the injured party can claim from the driver's insurance for injuries and costs incurred. I really can not understand how you can condone driving a car at a person.

This supposed "upper class" chinless wonder has a record for violent, belligerence. Check out the mail article on google where he took the police on after they recovered one of his precious books following a theft. He wanted it returned immediately and took issue with the fact it was required for evidential purposes. The man clearly thinks he's above the law. How will he next make the headlines? By kicking a beggar or by running over an old lady, a la Python's upper class twit of the year competition? Any one who thinks that this idiot was in the right in any way shape or form is just as big a moron as Greenwood.

Sid Hunt wrote:
"I wonder how much compo the jobsworth claimed out of our money" why would compansation be paid by 'us'?

Quite rightly the driver was ordered to pay compansation - that is from his own funds not the public purse. Also, the injured party can claim from the driver's insurance for injuries and costs incurred. I really can not understand how you can condone driving a car at a person.

Quite simple Mr Sid. Any compo paid will come from public funds (we pay) or if the acused is forced to pay it comes from his insurance (we pay through higher premiums) either way we lose. The jobsworth would have sustained more injuries if I had just pushed him over, this whole prosecution is just a waste of public money full stop. Just like the OCC Stasi persecuting MR Young. If you upset thee council then they will come for you, and they do not care how much of OUR money they waste.

Quote from article,

said his client’s car was going at “a very, very low speed” and he “never swore or raised his voice”. He said Greenwood’s long-term partner had left him in the days before the incident,

never swore or raised his voice, well-well-well, he didn't have to, the damage had already been done, and his objective achieved.

He said Greenwood’s long-term partner had left him in the days before the incident, , and pray what has that got to do with what was basically a bout of road rage aimed at the guy painting the line, his job, what he is paid to do. Didn't have the nouse, nerve or know how to have a go at the person who made the initial decision,

Should have had a minimum of 6 points on his licence, and made to retake his test, with his insurance company made aware of this court appearance. Load his policy and 200 hours community service and a heft fine, all this court has done has made it allowable for this sort of crime to be tolerated, disgraceful.

"Quite simple Mr Sid. Any compo paid will come from public funds (we pay) or if the acused is forced to pay it comes from his insurance (we pay through higher premiums) either way we lose. The jobsworth would have sustained more injuries if I had just pushed him over, this whole prosecution is just a waste of public money full stop. Just like the OCC Stasi persecuting MR Young. If you upset thee council then they will come for you, and they do not care how much of OUR money they waste."

Why do you believe that compensation is paid fronm public funds? If the offender has to pay compensation it is the offender who pays it. As for insurance, what is the point if it is not for the purpose it is intended?

If you had pushed him over you could expect (quite rightly) to be prosecuted for assault. What has this to do with OCC? Just because it involves an OCC employee doesn't make it a council matter.

KRC, that might possibly be an outcome but is the offender going to admit to his insurers that he deliberately drove at a pedestrian? If he does I doubt he will ever get insurance again. He has not been convicted of a driving offence so it would be easy for him to argue that it was, in fact, accidental. However, given the amazing level of arrogance he has displayed maybe he will proclaim it as a deliberate act - if he does I hope he is then prosecuted as he should have been.

This is, of course, assuming the injured party wants to persue a claim either through the insurers or the criminal injuries board. It might be that he is satisfied with the amount determined by the court (payable by the offender not the public) and that would be the end of the matter.

I would like to add to all the comments that in fact it was two "council workers" that were knocked over they only prosecuted on the one mentioned in the paper.