-
From that I taken that a verbal warning is a bad idea and will count again you if the worst happens.
Riding like a cunt is what counts against you. I think the judge was trying to illustrate that if you have time to shout at someone twice there was ample opportunity for a more appropriate reaction. Even if brklss.
Brun-
Was he riding like *unt (front brake aside) 18mph in the 30 mph limit. He had 3.5 to react and brake/swerve, drivers are generally given about 2.5 seconds to react in these type of situations to a dithering ped dancing about the lane. Witness say they heard one shout and looked up to see the impact charlie say he shout twice. braked, and swerved, seams reasonable to me can't say I would have done much different in the circumstances.
HousecatHST
If you can be arsed, the judges summing up is interesting as to whats expected of a cyclist in these circumstances.
https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/sentencing-remarks-hhj-wendy-joseph-qc-r-v-alliston.pdf
You shouted at her twice to (in your own words) ‘get out of the
fucking way’. She reached almost the centre of the road but could not go further
because of on-coming traffic. On your own account you did not try to slow any more
but, having shouted at her twice, you took the view she should get out of your way.
You said in evidence ‘I was entitled to go on’. That meant threading a path between
her in the middle of the road and a parked lorry on your left.
From that I taken that a verbal warning is a bad idea and will count again you if the worst happens.
As an aside the judges comments regarding her not being able to go any further because of on coming traffic in the other lane always boils my piss. No suggestion that they should have know she was in danger, no suggestion that they should be performing an emergency stop.