Road rage attack, police 'building' a case?
Discussion
Good old pistonheads.
To clean things up.
Police officer told us the year the offender was born, my FIL said he looked mid thirties, I said late 50's.
For those thinking my FIL is the issue, it wasn't a motorway, but a 3 lane road. FIL in lane 1, offender in lane 2. they where at some red traffic lights with the offender in the middle lane, about 1/2 a car length in front, they set off from the lights and after my FIL was filtering left, the other guy wanted to cut across his lane and turn left. The offender could have went 1/2 a mile up the road and turned right and ended up in the same place (slip road on the left takes them over a flyover) the guy tried to force his way in within 20-30 meters of the turning, when my FIL was already moving. He also had his van loaded so he wasn't going to slam on to let an idiot in.
Guy got upset he couldn't bully my FIL out the way, my FIL isn't the type of person to cut someone up or be aggressive, he's quite a relaxed driver and in 4 years of having a dash camera this is the only thing he's ever had.
Big question, if it was me or one of my BIL driving, would the guy have done it? I very much doubt it.
Yes my FIL would do it again,
To clean things up.
Police officer told us the year the offender was born, my FIL said he looked mid thirties, I said late 50's.
For those thinking my FIL is the issue, it wasn't a motorway, but a 3 lane road. FIL in lane 1, offender in lane 2. they where at some red traffic lights with the offender in the middle lane, about 1/2 a car length in front, they set off from the lights and after my FIL was filtering left, the other guy wanted to cut across his lane and turn left. The offender could have went 1/2 a mile up the road and turned right and ended up in the same place (slip road on the left takes them over a flyover) the guy tried to force his way in within 20-30 meters of the turning, when my FIL was already moving. He also had his van loaded so he wasn't going to slam on to let an idiot in.
Guy got upset he couldn't bully my FIL out the way, my FIL isn't the type of person to cut someone up or be aggressive, he's quite a relaxed driver and in 4 years of having a dash camera this is the only thing he's ever had.
Big question, if it was me or one of my BIL driving, would the guy have done it? I very much doubt it.
Yes my FIL would do it again,
strain said:
Yes my FIL would do it again,
Will he stand by that position in the witness box if asked?Well he doesn't sound like a relaxed driver if he will wilfully take a trade off of conflict over peace (for no appreciable gain) & there is every chance it or worse could happen again if he would happily do the same again.
This has cost him far more than simply letting the guy in would have already & for what?
Edited by vonhosen on Wednesday 23 January 16:47
vonhosen said:
strain said:
Yes my FIL would do it again,
Will he stand by that position in the witness box if asked?Then he has to expect there is every chance it or worse could happen again if he would happily do the same again.
There are too many psychotic profoundly dense cretins out there in the world and on the road. I just want to get home or to my destination safely.
If that involves 'losing' some kind of imaginary race that I wasn't knowingly part of in the first place then so be it.
strain said:
Yes my FIL would do it again,
Then he's a moron who I'd rather not share the road with.Imagine someone (maybe a new driver) makes a mistake and gets stuck outside FIL's truck. Instead of raising his right foot for a couple of seconds, FIL decides to take the power back from his unfulfilling life and "teach them a lesson". The new driver then panics and causes a huge, life-changing accident.
All because your FIL was an unhappy, intolerant tw*t.
BobSaunders said:
Ultimately, until you see the footage it's impossible to judge the situation.
Sounds like the other driver left it late, and then tried to aggressively merge leaving little to no room for a curtain sided van to react.
OP does state FIL 'refused' to let vehicle in, suggesting it was a conscious decision & within his power to do rather than something he simply was not physically able to do.Sounds like the other driver left it late, and then tried to aggressively merge leaving little to no room for a curtain sided van to react.
vonhosen said:
BobSaunders said:
Ultimately, until you see the footage it's impossible to judge the situation.
Sounds like the other driver left it late, and then tried to aggressively merge leaving little to no room for a curtain sided van to react.
OP does state FIL 'refused' to let vehicle in, suggesting it was a conscious decision & within his power to do rather than something he simply was not physically able to do.Sounds like the other driver left it late, and then tried to aggressively merge leaving little to no room for a curtain sided van to react.
This wasn't just about reaction times - it was his FIL "teaching a lesson" to someone he perceived to be in the wrong.
coldel said:
roadsmash said:
If you’re willing to use your 1-2 ton vehicle to stop someone’s maneavure then you should be equally willing to get out the car for a punch up.
If you’re not, then don’t antagonise others.
Very very simple.
Really? Jesus. So if you block someone who (lets assume has driven in a way to antagonise that person to block them in the first instance) then you should be willing to get out the car and be willing to be murdered by the other person. If you’re not, then don’t antagonise others.
Very very simple.
NEXT.
strain said:
Good old pistonheads.
To clean things up.
Police officer told us the year the offender was born, my FIL said he looked mid thirties, I said late 50's.
For those thinking my FIL is the issue, it wasn't a motorway, but a 3 lane road. FIL in lane 1, offender in lane 2. they where at some red traffic lights with the offender in the middle lane, about 1/2 a car length in front, they set off from the lights and after my FIL was filtering left, the other guy wanted to cut across his lane and turn left. The offender could have went 1/2 a mile up the road and turned right and ended up in the same place (slip road on the left takes them over a flyover) the guy tried to force his way in within 20-30 meters of the turning, when my FIL was already moving. He also had his van loaded so he wasn't going to slam on to let an idiot in.
Guy got upset he couldn't bully my FIL out the way, my FIL isn't the type of person to cut someone up or be aggressive, he's quite a relaxed driver and in 4 years of having a dash camera this is the only thing he's ever had.
Big question, if it was me or one of my BIL driving, would the guy have done it? I very much doubt it.
Yes my FIL would do it again,
How does blocking someone from switching lanes 20-30m of the junction tie in with your original post that said he blocked him for 1/2 a mile?To clean things up.
Police officer told us the year the offender was born, my FIL said he looked mid thirties, I said late 50's.
For those thinking my FIL is the issue, it wasn't a motorway, but a 3 lane road. FIL in lane 1, offender in lane 2. they where at some red traffic lights with the offender in the middle lane, about 1/2 a car length in front, they set off from the lights and after my FIL was filtering left, the other guy wanted to cut across his lane and turn left. The offender could have went 1/2 a mile up the road and turned right and ended up in the same place (slip road on the left takes them over a flyover) the guy tried to force his way in within 20-30 meters of the turning, when my FIL was already moving. He also had his van loaded so he wasn't going to slam on to let an idiot in.
Guy got upset he couldn't bully my FIL out the way, my FIL isn't the type of person to cut someone up or be aggressive, he's quite a relaxed driver and in 4 years of having a dash camera this is the only thing he's ever had.
Big question, if it was me or one of my BIL driving, would the guy have done it? I very much doubt it.
Yes my FIL would do it again,
" and the stayed side by side for 1/2 mile"
JimSuperSix said:
How does blocking someone from switching lanes 20-30m of the junction tie in with your original post that said he blocked him for 1/2 a mile?
" and the stayed side by side for 1/2 mile"
It doesn't." and the stayed side by side for 1/2 mile"
Not quite going the way the OP thought it would & we're not being told the full unbiased story.
If it happened at all.
JimSuperSix said:
How does blocking someone from switching lanes 20-30m of the junction tie in with your original post that said he blocked him for 1/2 a mile?
" and the stayed side by side for 1/2 mile"
From my reading of it, 1/2 mile up was the next opportunity for the rager to make the turn that he'd wanted to originally." and the stayed side by side for 1/2 mile"
Jag_NE said:
If you want to stand your ground be prepared to stand it.
Correct answer..... It's ok giving it Billy big b
ks but at some point you will get invited to a straightener.Easy thing is, leave your ego at home,let the impatient prick in.
Go home and relax in your garden or with wife/ friends.
Life's to short to school every prick out there.
So was the FIL hogging the rear bumper of the vehicle in front to stop the alleged road rager (61) change lanes?
If it was a heavily loaded van how come it was so quick from a standing start? It's not that slow that a gap to the vehicle in front didn't occur so the alleged road rager could change lanes into?
So the FIL couldn't slow to allow the alleged road rager to change lanes as the van was fully loaded, but was prepared to maintain a small gap to the vehicle in front, despite being heavily loaded and not being able to brake and slow to let someone in? It was OK to maintain such a small gap to the vehicle in front despite being heavily loaded as the FIL had better visibility over the vehicle in front and could see anything the vehicle in front may have to had brake for despite having their attention divided between driving a heavily loaded van and trying to stop the alleged road rage changer lanes?
So when the vehicles are stationary and the alleged road rager was half a car in front were they indicating left then?
I hope the police asked for the lead up footage to the incident and I wonder if any prosecution may be delayed because the conduct of the FIL may be called into question?
Surely any defence legal representative would ask why the FIL was intent on locking the alleged attacker out of the left hand lane for 1/2 mile and whether they thought their attention on the matter in hand, the driving of a heavily laden van, was distracted or divided by whatever the intention of the FIL was locking the alleged attacker out of the left lane?
'So the alleged attacker could have gone some distance down the road and turned right and got to the same destination, but equally you could have allowed him to change lanes. So FIL why didn't you allow him to change lanes and what was your intent when you made the conscious decision not to allow him to make the lane change?'
'So FIL, were you driving in such a manner to engineer some dispute that may result in some exciting dashcam footage?'
'So FIL do you think your dashcam footage shows you in a good light?'
'So FIL, why did this incident occur and how could it have been avoided?'
It reminds me of that Matthew Stockdale M1 nonsense, where Stockdale may've been intent on creating exciting footage to help peddle his dashcam wares before they became commoditised and widely available elsewhere.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-england-northampt...
How is it the fault of any PHer that the FIL drove like a bit of tool?
If it happened.
If it was a heavily loaded van how come it was so quick from a standing start? It's not that slow that a gap to the vehicle in front didn't occur so the alleged road rager could change lanes into?
So the FIL couldn't slow to allow the alleged road rager to change lanes as the van was fully loaded, but was prepared to maintain a small gap to the vehicle in front, despite being heavily loaded and not being able to brake and slow to let someone in? It was OK to maintain such a small gap to the vehicle in front despite being heavily loaded as the FIL had better visibility over the vehicle in front and could see anything the vehicle in front may have to had brake for despite having their attention divided between driving a heavily loaded van and trying to stop the alleged road rage changer lanes?
So when the vehicles are stationary and the alleged road rager was half a car in front were they indicating left then?
I hope the police asked for the lead up footage to the incident and I wonder if any prosecution may be delayed because the conduct of the FIL may be called into question?
Surely any defence legal representative would ask why the FIL was intent on locking the alleged attacker out of the left hand lane for 1/2 mile and whether they thought their attention on the matter in hand, the driving of a heavily laden van, was distracted or divided by whatever the intention of the FIL was locking the alleged attacker out of the left lane?
'So the alleged attacker could have gone some distance down the road and turned right and got to the same destination, but equally you could have allowed him to change lanes. So FIL why didn't you allow him to change lanes and what was your intent when you made the conscious decision not to allow him to make the lane change?'
'So FIL, were you driving in such a manner to engineer some dispute that may result in some exciting dashcam footage?'
'So FIL do you think your dashcam footage shows you in a good light?'
'So FIL, why did this incident occur and how could it have been avoided?'
It reminds me of that Matthew Stockdale M1 nonsense, where Stockdale may've been intent on creating exciting footage to help peddle his dashcam wares before they became commoditised and widely available elsewhere.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-england-northampt...
How is it the fault of any PHer that the FIL drove like a bit of tool?
If it happened.
Edited by carinaman on Wednesday 23 January 22:21
Happy New Year Red 4. Pleased you replied as I think your earlier post may've partially inspired my post.
I think you're correct on your last post.
I wonder why the FIL did it?
Would they have driven like that if they weren't in their van and it was a smaller vehicle or not their works van?
Would they have blocked anyone else making the same lane change? What if it was a lone mother with a couple of kiddies in the car or me that doesn't know the area and is reliant on instructions on a Sat Nav?
I think you're correct on your last post.
I wonder why the FIL did it?
Would they have driven like that if they weren't in their van and it was a smaller vehicle or not their works van?
Would they have blocked anyone else making the same lane change? What if it was a lone mother with a couple of kiddies in the car or me that doesn't know the area and is reliant on instructions on a Sat Nav?
Edited by carinaman on Wednesday 23 January 22:34
The OP's father in law sounds like the type of person who'll go poking random dogs with his finger to annoy them then call the authorities when one decides to bite him.
The other guy is obviously nuts and is totally in the wrong, but it's a good reminder not to wind up or antagonise strangers.
The other guy is obviously nuts and is totally in the wrong, but it's a good reminder not to wind up or antagonise strangers.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff