This is terrifying.

[portlock seagull]

It seems that one or two people have had one quick look at the vid (or none) and have launched into a game of hypotheticals, and pontification, based upon guesswork, what they have learned about the laws from a flatmate or someone down the pub, and then run with it like it is a discussion about whether or not Skalak can do anything more than cross the ball. FFS - look at the video again a few times, engage the brain, and take note - through a desire to cause serious injury or merely through the sort of 'instinct' that has the odd person pushing glasses into people's faces in a wine bar (other news, passim), someone's life was put deliberately at risk. It may or may not be hard to prove the point in court (especially if there is a jury and it is populated by likeminded 'only need one look and I can make up my mind' types) but, FFS, sometimes I can't believe the stuff I read on here

This this and this again. I truly worry what planet people are on, the sort of rationale being offered up on here is why evil *******s get off Scott free on numerous occasions. Why are SO many people's brains wired SO utterly wrongly? That question to any of the joggers defendants seeking to explain away how this might have accidentally happened? Sake...

 

[dazzer6666]

He was obviously a TORY

First thought I had when I saw it was that he looks a bit like Cameron....................

 

[dazzer6666]

It seems that one or two people have had one quick look at the vid (or none) and have launched into a game of hypotheticals, and pontification, based upon guesswork, what they have learned about the laws from a flatmate or someone down the pub, and then run with it like it is a discussion about whether or not Skalak can do anything more than cross the ball. FFS - look at the video again a few times, engage the brain, and take note - through a desire to cause serious injury or merely through the sort of 'instinct' that has the odd person pushing glasses into people's faces in a wine bar (other news, passim), someone's life was put deliberately at risk. It may or may not be hard to prove the point in court (especially if there is a jury and it is populated by likeminded 'only need one look and I can make up my mind' types) but, FFS, sometimes I can't believe the stuff I read on here

This

On the front page of The Standard too so someone's going to recognise him soon.

As a runner - note NOT jogger- I'm saddened there's someone like that in our community. My fellow runners are generally the best people there are so this is doubly sickening.

There's no defending it at all. He clearly makes a move towards the woman and shoves her.

Once you are committed to a sudden move you can't pull out of it at speed but that's why we always run in a straight line as a rule, and get annoyed with those elastic dog leads on the seafront or "moving trip hazards" if you like. So to do that could easily be prosecuted because he's done something extremely unnatural that could also be a danger to himself.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

All of this

Wonder which bank he works for

I'm a jogger (or runner if it makes [MENTION=616]Guinness Boy[/MENTION] happier ), AND work for a bank, AND have voted Tory in the past AND very regularly run in London (I did today in fact - from Canary Wharf to Tower Bridge and back, dodging multiple tourists, office workers and other assorted individuals on the sometimes very narrow pavements through Shadwell etc ). It has never, though, occurred to me to push a pedestrian out of the way, let alone into moving traffic. Running in London is a bit of a pain for obvious reasons, but you just need to be aware of people, bikes, cars, delivery drivers etc etc, the same as you would anywhere else - I give everyone a wide berth if I can as I can't predict what people will do and most of the time it would be me that would come off second best.

Some people are just ***** - whether they run, what way they vote, or where they work is irrelevant. Hope they catch the tw*t.

 

[Guinness Boy]

Some people are just ***** - whether they run, what way they vote, or where they work is irrelevant. Hope they catch the tw*t.

All of this too


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Questions]

Do we know why he's been classified as a "jogger" and not as a "runner"?

God, if caught he might get off on a technicality then.

 

[dazzer6666]

Do we know why he's been classified as a "jogger" and not as a "runner"?

Well Duh.......

Baggy grey tee shirt, cheap baggy shorts, unclear brand of nondescript trainers and doesn't look like he has a GPS watch, no lycra in sight, no flouro colours........what other evidence do you need FFS ??

 

[Guinness Boy]

Well Duh.......

Baggy grey tee shirt, cheap baggy shorts, unclear brand of nondescript trainers and doesn't look like he has a GPS watch, no lycra in sight, no flouro colours........what other evidence do you need FFS ??

Now you mention it I was looking at the angle of attack, the poor lady knocked to the floor and the bus. When you focus in on his attire, he's clearly an imposter. I feel slightly better.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[dazzer6666]

Now you mention it I was looking at the angle of attack, the poor lady knocked to the floor and the bus. When you focus in on his attire, he's clearly an imposter. I feel slightly better.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Probably never even heard of Strava, Gu Gels or SCaps either and has no idea what a Michigan or Reducing Ladder session looks like.

 

[marlowe]

Living in London - you see cctv all over the place - but not so liberally on bridges generally; practically speaking where would you attach them?

Not being that familiar with Putney Bridge I have no idea but the list in the link I provided clearly indicates the presence of cctv on Putney Bridge. I expect the most likely location is either end. Other bridge related cctv cameras listed for Wandsworth, the borough in which Putney is located are:
315 Wandsworth Bridge South
316 Wandsworth Bridge North
501 Battersea Bridge South
502 Battersea Bridge North
511 Chelsea Bridge South
601 Putney Bridge
652 Footbridge Putney bridge Fulham side
653 Alleyway Putney bridge Fulham Side
654 footbridge static
655 foot bridge static
So clearly the presence of a bridge does not preclude the situating of a cctv camera.
As well as those there are about 250 council operated cctv cameras in the Wandsworth borough, which doesn't include all the privately operated ones which probably at least doubles that figure.
The footage in the video clip of the incident is clearly taken from a moving vehicle but no footage is provided from any static cctv cameras of the suspect entering or leaving the bridge or just prior to or after. Could it be that the police waited so long to take the necessary action to secure footage that by the time they had made up their minds to, any footage had been wiped. The incident occurred on 5th May, three months ago. Most cctv footage is wiped within a month if not before.

 

[neilbard]

It seems that one or two people have had one quick look at the vid (or none) and have launched into a game of hypotheticals, and pontification, based upon guesswork, what they have learned about the laws from a flatmate or someone down the pub, and then run with it like it is a discussion about whether or not Skalak can do anything more than cross the ball. FFS - look at the video again a few times, engage the brain, and take note - through a desire to cause serious injury or merely through the sort of 'instinct' that has the odd person pushing glasses into people's faces in a wine bar (other news, passim), someone's life was put deliberately at risk. It may or may not be hard to prove the point in court (especially if there is a jury and it is populated by likeminded 'only need one look and I can make up my mind' types) but, FFS, sometimes I can't believe the stuff I read on here

I agree with you 90%, but the point that I would like to take issue with is can Skalak actually cross the ball?

 

[Chinman3000]

They've found the **** http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-40889511

 

[Nigella's Cream Pie]

Can't think of any excuse to target her, unless of course he's a Chelsea fan and she was wearing a Fulham scarf, will be interesting to hear what he has to say

 

[Thunder Bolt]

The charge is suspicion of causing grievous bodily harm, so quite a hefty charge if it sticks.

 

[Cheeky Monkey]

They've found the **** http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-40889511

Chelsea address. We rest our case m'lud.

 

[Tom Hark Preston Park]

Being hung, drawn and quartered by social media beckons, and rightly so. ****

 

[Triggaaar]

The charge is suspicion of causing grievous bodily harm, so quite a hefty charge if it sticks.

He could have killed her. I'm not sure a jury would give him much leniency.

 

[Cheeky Monkey]

Being hung, drawn and quartered by social media beckons, and rightly so. ****

Has it done Fergus Beeley any long term harm? That one's gone very quiet.

 

[Tom Hark Preston Park]

Has it done Fergus Beeley any long term harm? That one's gone very quiet.

Yup. Had to Google him, same as everybody else would. All I can say is that that's 30 seconds of my so-called life I'll never get back

 

[Tom Hark Preston Park]

They've found the **** http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-40889511

Have they confirmed which bank he works for yet?

 

[dazzer6666]

Have they confirmed which bank he works for yet?

Who knows. Maybe the same one as the guy that was killed at London Bridge taking on the attackers there ?