A Belgian cyclist who went viral after he was filmed kneeing a little girl and knocking her to the ground as he rode past her has won his court case against her father for posting the footage online.

A court will determine in April next year how much compensation he is entitled to after he successfully argued he was defamed. He previously demanded €4,500 - roughly the price of his bike.

The footage was filmed by five-year-old Neia's dad, Patrick Mpasa, during their family walk in a nature reserve in Baraque Michel, Liege Province on Christmas Day 2020.

The cyclist was originally taken to court in Verviers for kneeing the child, only to be given a suspended sentence on the grounds that he had been criticised enough on social media. He was ordered to pay the girl's family a pitiful €1 in compensation.

The video shows him knocking into the youngster, causing her to topple over..

But the 62-year-old cyclist - who has not been named publicly - sued Mpasa for defamation.

In the video, the five-year-old girl is seen walking by her mother's side on the snow-covered path as the cyclist approaches them from behind.

Just as he rides alongside the girl, he extends his knee out, hitting the little girl and knocking her to the ground before continuing on his way unbothered.

The family believed it was not an accident, as the man did not stop to check if the girl was okay and carried on cycling down the path.

However, the court decided the cyclist was free to go because he had incurred enough criticism on social media over the incident.

But the story did not end there. Almost a year after the incident, the cyclist went back to court to sue the girl's father for defamation.

He did so on the grounds that the backlash the video received resulted in him feeling so threatened by the public he was scared to leave his own house..

Jacques Englebert, Mpasa's lawyer, said in response to the defamation suit at the time: 'We have the right to express ourselves. We have the right to post or have posted a video on the internet. In this case, we must check whether we have exceeded the limits of this freedom of expression.'

However, Englebert's arguments were not strong enough in court, and Mpasa has lost the case and could be ordered to pay compensation.

In the footage, which went viral online, the cyclist was seen emerging from a bend in the snowy road before knocking into the young girl and sending her toppling into the snow.

Furious father Patrick Mpasa, who had been filming his wife and two children, later shared the video on social media asking if people agreed that he was right to complain to the police.

Mpasa said he had chased after the man and managed to make him stop but the cyclist had been unrepentant.

'He explained what happened and asked us to withdraw the police complaint, but he showed no remorse and did not apologise,' said Mpasa at the time.

'A lot of people tell me that I should have hit him, but I don't agree and, in any case, I was in front of my children, which would have made things even worse for them. I also don't want a witch hunt, I just want him to apologise.'

The family soon filed a complaint with police and both the cyclist and any witnesses were asked to come forward.

During a court hearing on February 3, 2021, the cyclist claimed that the incident had happened because he had tried to keep his balance.

He said: 'When I was riding close to the girl, I felt my rear wheel sliding.. To avoid a fall, I balanced myself with a movement of my knee. I felt that I might have hit the girl, but did not immediately realise she had been knocked over.'

But the prosecution argued his statement seemed very unlikely.

He was simply annoyed by the people on the path whom he had to swerve around all the time,' they said. 'He gave the child a ''knee punch'' out of sheer annoyance because an obstacle was in his way for the umpteenth time.'

The local cyclist association described the man's behaviour as 'unacceptable', but the judge opted for lenient treatment, arguing that the man had no intention of harming the girl, the incident was minor and he had already been criticised on social media.

The judge went on to say that the cyclist had already spent time in custody when he was arrested, and ruled that the unnamed man must pay the girl's family a symbolic €1 (86p) in compensation for the incident.

While the cyclist had faced up to a year in prison, the court decided to hand him a suspended sentence, meaning he will not face any penalties for his actions so long as he does not reoffend.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12495985/Cyclist-kneed-five-year-old-girl-floor-Christmas-Day-blocking-path-successfully-sues-father-sharing-viral-footage.html

On 08/09/2023 02:18 pm, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:

> A Belgian cyclist who went viral after he was filmed kneeing a little girl and knocking her to the ground as he rode past her has won his court case against her father for posting the footage online.
> A court will determine in April next year how much compensation he is entitled to after he successfully argued he was defamed. He previously demanded €4,500 - roughly the price of his bike.
> The footage was filmed by five-year-old Neia's dad, Patrick Mpasa, during their family walk in a nature reserve in Baraque Michel, Liege Province on Christmas Day 2020.
> The cyclist was originally taken to court in Verviers for kneeing the child, only to be given a suspended sentence on the grounds that he had been criticised enough on social media. He was ordered to pay the girl's family a pitiful €1 in compensation.
> The video shows him knocking into the youngster, causing her to topple over.

> But the 62-year-old cyclist - who has not been named publicly - sued Mpasa for defamation.

Hope springs eternal in the breast of chavs on bikes, eh?

> In the video, the five-year-old girl is seen walking by her mother's side on the snow-covered path as the cyclist approaches them from behind.
> Just as he rides alongside the girl, he extends his knee out, hitting the little girl and knocking her to the ground before continuing on his way unbothered.
> The family believed it was not an accident, as the man did not stop to check if the girl was okay and carried on cycling down the path.
> However, the court decided the cyclist was free to go because he had incurred enough criticism on social media over the incident.

He'd been punished enough, IOW.

Not "punished unnecessarily", just enough. Well, in their view at least.

> But the story did not end there. Almost a year after the incident, the cyclist went back to court to sue the girl's father for defamation.

What lies had the child's father told about the chav on the bike?

> He did so on the grounds that the backlash the video received resulted in him feeling so threatened by the public he was scared to leave his own house.

As some might ask... is that a bad thing?

> Jacques Englebert, Mpasa's lawyer, said in response to the defamation suit at the time: 'We have the right to express ourselves. We have the right to post or have posted a video on the internet. In this case, we must check whether we have exceeded the limits of this freedom of expression.'
> However, Englebert's arguments were not strong enough in court, and Mpasa has lost the case and could be ordered to pay compensation.
> In the footage, which went viral online, the cyclist was seen emerging from a bend in the snowy road before knocking into the young girl and sending her toppling into the snow.
> Furious father Patrick Mpasa, who had been filming his wife and two children, later shared the video on social media asking if people agreed that he was right to complain to the police.
> Mpasa said he had chased after the man and managed to make him stop but the cyclist had been unrepentant.
> 'He explained what happened and asked us to withdraw the police complaint, but he showed no remorse and did not apologise,' said Mpasa at the time.

Why did he beg for the police complaint to be withdrawn?

because he was confident that it would not be upheld?
>
> 'A lot of people tell me that I should have hit him, but I don't agree and, in any case, I was in front of my children, which would have made things even worse for them. I also don't want a witch hunt, I just want him to apologise.'

And above all, that child's father didn't want to descend to the level
of a chav on a bike.

> The family soon filed a complaint with police and both the cyclist and any witnesses were asked to come forward.
> During a court hearing on February 3, 2021, the cyclist claimed that the incident had happened because he had tried to keep his balance.

Predictable Excuse # 321.

> He said: 'When I was riding close to the girl, I felt my rear wheel sliding. To avoid a fall, I balanced myself with a movement of my knee. I felt that I might have hit the girl, but did not immediately realise she had been knocked over.'
> But the prosecution argued his statement seemed very unlikely.

Gerraway.
>
> He was simply annoyed by the people on the path whom he had to swerve around all the time,' they said. 'He gave the child a ''knee punch'' out of sheer annoyance because an obstacle was in his way for the umpteenth time.'
> The local cyclist association described the man's behaviour as 'unacceptable',

Well... THERE'S a turn-up for the books. His behaviour is seen as
unacceptable even by other chavs on bikes.

> but the judge opted for lenient treatment, arguing that the man had no intention of harming the girl, the incident was minor and he had already been criticised on social media.

...."punished enough"...?

> The judge went on to say that the cyclist had already spent time in custody when he was arrested,

Nice one, Belgian police!

Could we get UK police forces to behave in the same way?

> and ruled that the unnamed man must pay the girl's family a symbolic €1 (86p) in compensation for the incident.
> While the cyclist had faced up to a year in prison, the court decided to hand him a suspended sentence, meaning he will not face any penalties for his actions so long as he does not reoffend.

Ask over in uk.legal.moderated.

A suspended sentence is NOT "no penalty".

It might well be widely regarded as wholly inadequate, but it is not
nothing.
>
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12495985/Cyclist-kneed-five-year-old-girl-floor-Christmas-Day-blocking-path-successfully-sues-father-sharing-viral-footage.html

Well, FCVO "successfully", so far.

JNugent <jnugent@mail.com> wrote:
> On 08/09/2023 02:18 pm, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>> A Belgian cyclist who went viral after he was filmed kneeing a little
>> girl and knocking her to the ground as he rode past her has won his
>> court case against her father for posting the footage online.
>> A court will determine in April next year how much compensation he is
>> entitled to after he successfully argued he was defamed. He previously
>> demanded €4,500 - roughly the price of his bike.
>> The footage was filmed by five-year-old Neia's dad, Patrick Mpasa,
>> during their family walk in a nature reserve in Baraque Michel, Liege
>> Province on Christmas Day 2020.
>> The cyclist was originally taken to court in Verviers for kneeing the
>> child, only to be given a suspended sentence on the grounds that he had
>> been criticised enough on social media. He was ordered to pay the girl's
>> family a pitiful €1 in compensation.
>> The video shows him knocking into the youngster, causing her to topple over.
>
>> But the 62-year-old cyclist - who has not been named publicly - sued Mpasa for defamation.
>
> Hope springs eternal in the breast of chavs on bikes, eh?
>
>> In the video, the five-year-old girl is seen walking by her mother's
>> side on the snow-covered path as the cyclist approaches them from behind.
>> Just as he rides alongside the girl, he extends his knee out, hitting
>> the little girl and knocking her to the ground before continuing on his way unbothered.
>> The family believed it was not an accident, as the man did not stop to
>> check if the girl was okay and carried on cycling down the path.
>> However, the court decided the cyclist was free to go because he had
>> incurred enough criticism on social media over the incident.
>
> He'd been punished enough, IOW.
>
> Not "punished unnecessarily", just enough. Well, in their view at least.
>
>> But the story did not end there. Almost a year after the incident, the
>> cyclist went back to court to sue the girl's father for defamation.
>
> What lies had the child's father told about the chav on the bike?
>
>> He did so on the grounds that the backlash the video received resulted
>> in him feeling so threatened by the public he was scared to leave his own house.
>
> As some might ask... is that a bad thing?
>
>> Jacques Englebert, Mpasa's lawyer, said in response to the defamation
>> suit at the time: 'We have the right to express ourselves. We have the
>> right to post or have posted a video on the internet. In this case, we
>> must check whether we have exceeded the limits of this freedom of expression.'
>> However, Englebert's arguments were not strong enough in court, and
>> Mpasa has lost the case and could be ordered to pay compensation.
>> In the footage, which went viral online, the cyclist was seen emerging
>> from a bend in the snowy road before knocking into the young girl and
>> sending her toppling into the snow.
>> Furious father Patrick Mpasa, who had been filming his wife and two
>> children, later shared the video on social media asking if people agreed
>> that he was right to complain to the police.
>> Mpasa said he had chased after the man and managed to make him stop but
>> the cyclist had been unrepentant.
>> 'He explained what happened and asked us to withdraw the police
>> complaint, but he showed no remorse and did not apologise,' said Mpasa at the time.
>
> Why did he beg for the police complaint to be withdrawn?
>
> because he was confident that it would not be upheld?
>>
>> 'A lot of people tell me that I should have hit him, but I don't agree
>> and, in any case, I was in front of my children, which would have made
>> things even worse for them. I also don't want a witch hunt, I just want him to apologise.'
>
> And above all, that child's father didn't want to descend to the level
> of a chav on a bike.
>
>> The family soon filed a complaint with police and both the cyclist and
>> any witnesses were asked to come forward.
>> During a court hearing on February 3, 2021, the cyclist claimed that the
>> incident had happened because he had tried to keep his balance.
>
> Predictable Excuse # 321.
>
>> He said: 'When I was riding close to the girl, I felt my rear wheel
>> sliding. To avoid a fall, I balanced myself with a movement of my knee.
>> I felt that I might have hit the girl, but did not immediately realise
>> she had been knocked over.'
>> But the prosecution argued his statement seemed very unlikely.
>
> Gerraway.
>>
>> He was simply annoyed by the people on the path whom he had to swerve
>> around all the time,' they said. 'He gave the child a ''knee punch'' out
>> of sheer annoyance because an obstacle was in his way for the umpteenth time.'
>> The local cyclist association described the man's behaviour as 'unacceptable',
>
> Well... THERE'S a turn-up for the books. His behaviour is seen as
> unacceptable even by other chavs on bikes.
>
>> but the judge opted for lenient treatment, arguing that the man had no
>> intention of harming the girl, the incident was minor and he had already
>> been criticised on social media.
>
> ..."punished enough"...?
>
>> The judge went on to say that the cyclist had already spent time in
>> custody when he was arrested,
>
> Nice one, Belgian police!
>
> Could we get UK police forces to behave in the same way?
>
>> and ruled that the unnamed man must pay the girl's family a symbolic €1
>> (86p) in compensation for the incident.
>> While the cyclist had faced up to a year in prison, the court decided to
>> hand him a suspended sentence, meaning he will not face any penalties
>> for his actions so long as he does not reoffend.
>
> Ask over in uk.legal.moderated.
>
> A suspended sentence is NOT "no penalty".
>
> It might well be widely regarded as wholly inadequate, but it is not
> nothing.
>>
>> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12495985/Cyclist-kneed-five-year-old-girl-floor-Christmas-Day-blocking-path-successfully-sues-father-sharing-viral-footage.html
>
> Well, FCVO "successfully", so far.

Well said on all those comments.

The video is still available online. In it you can clearly see the cyclist
look at the victim immediately before his knee comes out, perhaps a
surprising act if he felt his rear wheel sliding.

Perhaps he’ll get compo of 1 euro. Interesting to note that many didn’t
appreciate his actions.

Could the little girl sue for assault and compensation? I’d contribute if
that was crowdfunded.

--
Spike

On 08/09/2023 02:50 pm, Spike wrote:
> JNugent <jnugent@mail.com> wrote:
>> On 08/09/2023 02:18 pm, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>>> A Belgian cyclist who went viral after he was filmed kneeing a little
>>> girl and knocking her to the ground as he rode past her has won his
>>> court case against her father for posting the footage online.
>>> A court will determine in April next year how much compensation he is
>>> entitled to after he successfully argued he was defamed. He previously
>>> demanded €4,500 - roughly the price of his bike.
>>> The footage was filmed by five-year-old Neia's dad, Patrick Mpasa,
>>> during their family walk in a nature reserve in Baraque Michel, Liege
>>> Province on Christmas Day 2020.
>>> The cyclist was originally taken to court in Verviers for kneeing the
>>> child, only to be given a suspended sentence on the grounds that he had
>>> been criticised enough on social media. He was ordered to pay the girl's
>>> family a pitiful €1 in compensation.
>>> The video shows him knocking into the youngster, causing her to topple over.
>>
>>> But the 62-year-old cyclist - who has not been named publicly - sued Mpasa for defamation.
>>
>> Hope springs eternal in the breast of chavs on bikes, eh?
>>
>>> In the video, the five-year-old girl is seen walking by her mother's
>>> side on the snow-covered path as the cyclist approaches them from behind.
>>> Just as he rides alongside the girl, he extends his knee out, hitting
>>> the little girl and knocking her to the ground before continuing on his way unbothered.
>>> The family believed it was not an accident, as the man did not stop to
>>> check if the girl was okay and carried on cycling down the path.
>>> However, the court decided the cyclist was free to go because he had
>>> incurred enough criticism on social media over the incident.
>>
>> He'd been punished enough, IOW.
>>
>> Not "punished unnecessarily", just enough. Well, in their view at least.
>>
>>> But the story did not end there. Almost a year after the incident, the
>>> cyclist went back to court to sue the girl's father for defamation.
>>
>> What lies had the child's father told about the chav on the bike?
>>
>>> He did so on the grounds that the backlash the video received resulted
>>> in him feeling so threatened by the public he was scared to leave his own house.
>>
>> As some might ask... is that a bad thing?
>>
>>> Jacques Englebert, Mpasa's lawyer, said in response to the defamation
>>> suit at the time: 'We have the right to express ourselves. We have the
>>> right to post or have posted a video on the internet. In this case, we
>>> must check whether we have exceeded the limits of this freedom of expression.'
>>> However, Englebert's arguments were not strong enough in court, and
>>> Mpasa has lost the case and could be ordered to pay compensation.
>>> In the footage, which went viral online, the cyclist was seen emerging
>>> from a bend in the snowy road before knocking into the young girl and
>>> sending her toppling into the snow.
>>> Furious father Patrick Mpasa, who had been filming his wife and two
>>> children, later shared the video on social media asking if people agreed
>>> that he was right to complain to the police.
>>> Mpasa said he had chased after the man and managed to make him stop but
>>> the cyclist had been unrepentant.
>>> 'He explained what happened and asked us to withdraw the police
>>> complaint, but he showed no remorse and did not apologise,' said Mpasa at the time.
>>
>> Why did he beg for the police complaint to be withdrawn?
>>
>> because he was confident that it would not be upheld?
>>>
>>> 'A lot of people tell me that I should have hit him, but I don't agree
>>> and, in any case, I was in front of my children, which would have made
>>> things even worse for them. I also don't want a witch hunt, I just want him to apologise.'
>>
>> And above all, that child's father didn't want to descend to the level
>> of a chav on a bike.
>>
>>> The family soon filed a complaint with police and both the cyclist and
>>> any witnesses were asked to come forward.
>>> During a court hearing on February 3, 2021, the cyclist claimed that the
>>> incident had happened because he had tried to keep his balance.
>>
>> Predictable Excuse # 321.
>>
>>> He said: 'When I was riding close to the girl, I felt my rear wheel
>>> sliding. To avoid a fall, I balanced myself with a movement of my knee.
>>> I felt that I might have hit the girl, but did not immediately realise
>>> she had been knocked over.'
>>> But the prosecution argued his statement seemed very unlikely.
>>
>> Gerraway.
>>>
>>> He was simply annoyed by the people on the path whom he had to swerve
>>> around all the time,' they said. 'He gave the child a ''knee punch'' out
>>> of sheer annoyance because an obstacle was in his way for the umpteenth time.'
>>> The local cyclist association described the man's behaviour as 'unacceptable',
>>
>> Well... THERE'S a turn-up for the books. His behaviour is seen as
>> unacceptable even by other chavs on bikes.
>>
>>> but the judge opted for lenient treatment, arguing that the man had no
>>> intention of harming the girl, the incident was minor and he had already
>>> been criticised on social media.
>>
>> ..."punished enough"...?
>>
>>> The judge went on to say that the cyclist had already spent time in
>>> custody when he was arrested,
>>
>> Nice one, Belgian police!
>>
>> Could we get UK police forces to behave in the same way?
>>
>>> and ruled that the unnamed man must pay the girl's family a symbolic €1
>>> (86p) in compensation for the incident.
>>> While the cyclist had faced up to a year in prison, the court decided to
>>> hand him a suspended sentence, meaning he will not face any penalties
>>> for his actions so long as he does not reoffend.
>>
>> Ask over in uk.legal.moderated.
>>
>> A suspended sentence is NOT "no penalty".
>>
>> It might well be widely regarded as wholly inadequate, but it is not
>> nothing.
>>>
>>> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12495985/Cyclist-kneed-five-year-old-girl-floor-Christmas-Day-blocking-path-successfully-sues-father-sharing-viral-footage.html

Can't get that video unless I disable ad-blockers.

I remember seeing it before, though.
>>
>> Well, FCVO "successfully", so far.
>
> Well said on all those comments.
>
> The video is still available online. In it you can clearly see the cyclist
> look at the victim immediately before his knee comes out, perhaps a
> surprising act if he felt his rear wheel sliding.
>
> Perhaps he’ll get compo of 1 euro. Interesting to note that many didn’t
> appreciate his actions.
>
> Could the little girl sue for assault and compensation? I’d contribute if
> that was crowdfunded.
>

heonetoknow, Not London, United Kingdom, 1 hour ago

Good, Keep your children under control, most people don't think they are cuddly and cute.

Edmundro, London, United Kingdom, 25 minutes ago

Quite right. People should have better control over their offspring in shared use paths. You wouldnt let your little cherubs play in the road would you? The father only posted this in a sad attempt to damage the cyclists reputation instead of doing the decent thing in teaching their child a lesson about staying safe around others.

swldx...@gmail.com <swldxer1958@gmail.com> wrote:
> heonetoknow, Not London, United Kingdom, 1 hour ago
>
> Good, Keep your children under control, most people don't think they are cuddly and cute.
>
> Edmundro, London, United Kingdom, 25 minutes ago
>
> Quite right. People should have better control over their offspring in
> shared use paths. You wouldnt let your little cherubs play in the road
> would you? The father only posted this in a sad attempt to damage the
> cyclists reputation instead of doing the decent thing in teaching their
> child a lesson about staying safe around others.

The other side of that coin, which many Belgians appear to agree with (see
the cyclist whinging about his treatment at the hands of the public), is
that cyclists should be taught lessons about staying safe around others.

What’s sauce for the goose…

--
Spike

QUOTE: banjokid62, SEVENOAKS , United Kingdom, 4 hours ago

Only in Sunaks Britain you couldn't make it up. ENDS

IT WAS IN *BELGIUM*, YOU DAFT TWAT.
DIFFERENT LEGAL SYSTEM.

On 08/09/2023 04:28 pm, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:

> heonetoknow, Not London, United Kingdom, 1 hour ago
>
> Good, Keep your children under control, most people don't think they are cuddly and cute.
>
> Edmundro, London, United Kingdom, 25 minutes ago
>
> Quite right. People should have better control over their offspring in shared use paths. You wouldnt let your little cherubs play in the road would you? The father only posted this in a sad attempt to damage the cyclists reputation instead of doing the decent thing in teaching their child a lesson about staying safe around others.

Hey, heonetoknow and Edmundro!

I just wanted to let you know this... though others must have already
let you know...

You are self-centred nutters. *Anyone* who can support an assault by an
adult on a five-year old child - on a FOOTpath - is a self-centred nutcase.

We already knew about May Sun, and now you're another couple to add to
the filth list.

On 08/09/2023 05:39 pm, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:

> QUOTE: banjokid62, SEVENOAKS , United Kingdom, 4 hours ago
>
> Only in Sunaks Britain you couldn't make it up. ENDS
>
> IT WAS IN *BELGIUM*, YOU DAFT TWAT.
> DIFFERENT LEGAL SYSTEM.

Strange bedfellows...

KATE64, liverpool, 1 day ago

I agree with the decision. This is a decision based on moral principle. Sick of all this over sharing.
=================
THE JUDGE AGREES WITH YOU

swldx...@gmail.com <swldxer1958@gmail.com> wrote:
> KATE64, liverpool, 1 day ago
>
> I agree with the decision. This is a decision based on moral principle.
> Sick of all this over sharing.

> =================
> THE JUDGE AGREES WITH YOU

THE PEOPLE DON’T!

--
Spike

k420, London, United Kingdom, 21 hours ago

Thats hilarious. The mother saw the bike and clearly had time to move the kid. Good on him. And he got paid haha. Brilliant.

swldx...@gmail.com <swldxer1958@gmail.com> wrote:
> k420, London, United Kingdom, 21 hours ago
>
> Thats hilarious. The mother saw the bike and clearly had time to move the
> kid. Good on him. And he got paid haha. Brilliant.

The cyclist saw the family, and on a snowy and icy footpath failed to give
way to them. Little wonder that people took against him after his assault
of the little girl. Serves the moron right. Ha ha. Brilliant.

--
Spike

Zaranth, Bristol, United Kingdom, 1 day ago

Teepee12... Yes, 5-yrs-old, they're small and stupid and that's why they need parents to watch over them. Like that 5-yrs-old who got let go to the shops alone, climb a park trailer and fell off to his death when the driver was leaving. It's a dangerous world and if you're a parent remember you and your kids are not holy cows who can go wherever you want and getting in someone's way may get you killed.

swldx...@gmail.com <swldxer1958@gmail.com> wrote:
> Zaranth, Bristol, United Kingdom, 1 day ago
>
> Teepee12... Yes, 5-yrs-old, they're small and stupid and that's why they
> need parents to watch over them. Like that 5-yrs-old who got let go to
> the shops alone, climb a park trailer and fell off to his death when the
> driver was leaving. It's a dangerous world and if you're a parent
> remember you and your kids are not holy cows who can go wherever you want
> and getting in someone's way may get you killed.

Apples and oranges again.

A family out walking on a *foot*path has every right not to expect to be
assaulted by a cyclist.

A family who lets their 5yo wander off on their own is something different.

But in both cases the children can expect others to behave safely towards
them.

--
Spike

Knowing or Believing, Anytown, United Kingdom, 2 days ago

He did not knee her to the floor he nudged her out of the way. It was the safetst option if cyclist used brakes it could have been far worse.

swldx...@gmail.com <swldxer1958@gmail.com> wrote:
> Knowing or Believing, Anytown, United Kingdom, 2 days ago

> He did not knee her to the floor he nudged her out of the way. It was the
> safetst option if cyclist used brakes it could have been far worse.

So the cyclist had them in view for quite some distance, and in that time
never thought about slowing and stopping? All he could think of was an
assault (‘nudging’) on a little girl that knocked her to the floor?

He doesn’t deserve compo, he deserves jail. And be forbidden from riding a
bicycle.

Next time you’re out and about, try ‘nudging’ a police officer as you cycle
by.

--
Spike

bella08, London, United Kingdom, 2 days ago

The Mum stands there, doesn't pull the child aside ans then they blame the cyclist for trying to keep himself safe in icy conditions. Reprimand your child and apologise to the cyclist for poor parenting skills , for not moving the kid out of the way and for raising an entitled child who can't look left right to keep herself safe.

He did - he was cycling slowly, there was a guardian by her side who could gave pulled her out of the way , instead she watched with an entitled eye expecting the cyclist to move out of the way for her awfully spoilt child

swldx...@gmail.com <swldxer1958@gmail.com> wrote:
> bella08, London, United Kingdom, 2 days ago
>
> The Mum stands there, doesn't pull the child aside ans then they blame
> the cyclist for trying to keep himself safe in icy conditions.

If the cyclist was ‘trying to keep himself safe in icy conditions’, he
wouldn’t have been cycling on a footpath. Hint: the clue is in the name.

> Reprimand your child and apologise to the cyclist for poor parenting
> skills , for not moving the kid out of the way and for raising an
> entitled child who can't look left right to keep herself safe.

Don’t be ridiculous.

> He did - he was cycling slowly, there was a guardian by her side who
> could gave pulled her out of the way , instead she watched with an
> entitled eye expecting the cyclist to move out of the way for her awfully spoilt child

Since when were pedestrians compelled to jump out of the way of arrogant
cyclists on an icy footpath?

--
Spike

On 10/09/2023 15:48, Spike wrote:
> swldx...@gmail.com <swldxer1958@gmail.com> wrote:
>> bella08, London, United Kingdom, 2 days ago
>>
>> The Mum stands there, doesn't pull the child aside ans then they blame
>> the cyclist for trying to keep himself safe in icy conditions.
>
> If the cyclist was ‘trying to keep himself safe in icy conditions’, he
> wouldn’t have been cycling on a footpath. Hint: the clue is in the name.

Presumably the name is not actually 'footpath' in Belgium.

>
>> Reprimand your child and apologise to the cyclist for poor parenting
>> skills , for not moving the kid out of the way and for raising an
>> entitled child who can't look left right to keep herself safe.
>
> Don’t be ridiculous.
>
>> He did - he was cycling slowly, there was a guardian by her side who
>> could gave pulled her out of the way , instead she watched with an
>> entitled eye expecting the cyclist to move out of the way for her awfully spoilt child
>
> Since when were pedestrians compelled to jump out of the way of arrogant
> cyclists on an icy footpath?
>
I can only see 'snow-covered path' in the original post.

lenea R, Sydney, Australia, 2 days ago

Good on him. I love all the haters who think its ok to nudge a cyclist iwith a car at 100km/hr and want cyclist off the roads. So when the cyclist goes onto a cycle path and gives the dumb kid a little nudge to get her out of harms way at less than 5km/hr. You same fools are outraged!!!

swldx...@gmail.com <swldxer1958@gmail.com> wrote:
> lenea R, Sydney, Australia, 2 days ago
>
> Good on him. I love all the haters who think its ok to nudge a cyclist
> iwith a car at 100km/hr and want cyclist off the roads. So when the
> cyclist goes onto a cycle path and gives the dumb kid a little nudge to
> get her out of harms way at less than 5km/hr. You same fools are outraged!!!

“Please, Miss, he did it first, Miss”.

--
Spike

Worldgonenuts, TauntonAlbatera, 2 days ago

Good! About time too! Stop trial by social media. The video could have been evidence in a court room against the cyclist. STOP this trial by social media.

On 10/09/2023 11:18 am, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:

> Knowing or Believing, Anytown, United Kingdom, 2 days ago
>
> He did not knee her to the floor he nudged her out of the way. It was the safetst option if cyclist used brakes it could have been far worse.

You could have kept quiet, not supported the paedo-cyclist and not
proven yourself a paedo-supporter.

But you couldn't help yourself.

On 10/09/2023 05:03 pm, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:
> Worldgonenuts, TauntonAlbatera, 2 days ago
>
> Good! About time too! Stop trial by social media. The video could have been evidence in a court room against the cyclist. STOP this trial by social media...

....when it's a paedo-cyclist on trial?