Two arrested after BB gun attack leaves Sussex cyclist seriously injured

If they've been bailed it simply means that the investigation isn't complete and the investigators need more time to do so. In certain circumstances charges can be sought before an investigation is complete, called a threshold test decision however there are strict criteria set out by the  CPS for such a decision and there could be any number of reasons why that wasn't appropriate. The seriousness alone is not a reason for a threshold test decision unfortunately. 

I do wonder what the "serious injuries" were? You would have to be very lucky (or unlucky) to get someone in the eye. Typically you woul not sustain "serious injury" from the actual shot. The shot would likely have caused a fall, whih can obviously result in serious injury. Fuckin hate these vague articles.

Either way, a very serious offence. Not someone I would like to have allowed to roam the streets. Maybe one day an actual judge will get stabbed, ran over, asaulted, raped etc.  Straying off topic now but to think that this country used to actually hang it's worst criminals by the neck. Why'd we stop? Nowadays we put them in a room to share a toilet and and become a homosexual.  What so bad about making murderers dead?

Titanus wrote:

Straying off topic now but to think that this country used to actually hang it's worst criminals by the neck. Why'd we stop?

The fact that so many of them weren't guilty?  The Birmingham six would be dead now if you had your way, but they were completely innocent.  It's hard enough to pardon someone who's still alive, even more difficult if they aren't.

You might like to read the book "Arthur and George" by Julian Barnes to find out just how corrupt and mistaken our laughably called justice system is, and how regularly innocent people are convicted.  It details the story from a hundred years ago, but the system hasn't changed, and there are plenty of cases where the police decide someone is guilty and set out to prove it, Colin Stagg being fitted up for the murder of Rachel Nickell for instance.

Also

Titanus wrote:

Nowadays we put them in a room to ... become a homosexual.

This is not a thing.

bb guns can be very dangerous.

From the wiki below.

Most BB-firing airguns can shoot faster than 60 m/s (200 ft/s). Some airguns have the ability to fire considerably faster, even beyond 170 m/s (560 ft/s).[3][citation needed] Although claims are often exaggerated, a few airguns can actually fire a standard 0.177 caliber lead pellet faster than 320 m/s (1,000 ft/s), but these are generally not BB-firing guns.

A BB with a velocity of 45 m/s (150 ft/s) has skin-piercing capability, and a velocity reaching 60 m/s (200 ft/s) can fracture bone.[4] The potential exists for killing someone; this potential increases with velocity, but also rapidly decreases with distance. The effective penetrating range of a BB gun with a muzzle velocity of 120 to 180 m/s (390 to 590 ft/s) is approximately 18 m (60 ft). A person wearing jeans at this distance would not sustain serious injury. However, even at this distance a BB still might penetrate bare skin, and even if not, could leave a severe and painful bruise.

I do hope you are trolling because your views are uneducated beyond belief.

His "name" is a clear indication that he is an under-bridge living person. 

its quite possible tha he fell off and causing a significant injury.

the RSCH is the major trauma centre for this area and also where the neurosurgical services are. if he had minor injuries he would have been pootled up to the conquest 3 miles up the road not the MTC at the other end of the county

doi - have worked in both

eburtthebike wrote:

Well done to the police for what appears to be fast decisive action, but I'm not sure why such an apparently dangerous individual is out on bail.

People are innocent until proven guilty, imprisoning innocent people is wrong (and expensive). Generally bail should be granted unless there are grounds for believing that the defendant will do a runner, commit further offences while on bail or interfere with witnesses.

I'd recommend reading The Secret Barrister if you're interested in how the law works.

Tom_77 wrote:

eburtthebike wrote:

Well done to the police for what appears to be fast decisive action, but I'm not sure why such an apparently dangerous individual is out on bail.

People are innocent until proven guilty, imprisoning innocent people is wrong (and expensive). Generally bail should be granted unless there are grounds for believing that the defendant will do a runner, commit further offences while on bail or interfere with witnesses.

I'd recommend reading The Secret Barrister if you're interested in how the law works.

...or they're a well-connected ex politician.

Or maybe they did it because they're a POS? People don't need political leanings to do bad things. I doubt they are even reading a paper or news website. People do bad things to other people, it's been going on for a while now.

Rick_Rude wrote:

Or maybe they did it because they're a POS? People don't need political leanings to do bad things. I doubt they are even reading a paper or news website. People do bad things to other people, it's been going on for a while now.

Eminently possible, but the daily drip feed of anti-cyclist rhetoric must have an effect.  As I've already said, we need some way of preventing these lies and smears so beloved of middle aged, podgy white men who aren't allowed to attack and insult women or coloured people any more.

eburtthebike wrote:

hate speech from podgy, ignorant, middle aged white men

Or, you could have just written "ignorant people", and not brought weight, age, race and sex into it at all, most of which I think actually fit the definition of hate speech. Ignorant people can be found in many different bodies.

srchar wrote:

eburtthebike wrote:

hate speech from podgy, ignorant, middle aged white men

Or, you could have just written "ignorant people", and not brought weight, age, race and sex into it at all, most of which I think actually fit the definition of hate speech. Ignorant people can be found in many different bodies.

Fair point, but the cycle-haters appear to be predominantly podgy, ignorant, middle aged white men.

eburtthebike wrote:

Fair point, but the cycle-haters appear to be predominantly podgy, ignorant, middle aged white men.

Like Katie Hopkins?

I think the bias towards middle aged white men is a general media bias in this country.

hawkinspeter wrote:

eburtthebike wrote:

Fair point, but the cycle-haters appear to be predominantly podgy, ignorant, middle aged white men.

Like Katie Hopkins?

I think the bias towards middle aged white men is a general media bias in this country.

Has the delightful KH blabbed anything stupendously stupid about cyclists recently?  All the recent anti-cycling cretins have been ignorant middle aged men, and mostly podgy.

I try not to pay them any mind, but just thought I'd throw in a counter-example (though she's not recent enough?).

eburtthebike wrote:

Fair point, but the cycle-haters appear to be predominantly podgy, ignorant, middle aged white men.

You say it's a fair point but you double down anyway. The anti-cycling lobby uses almost exactly the same sort of drivel when describing "most cyclists", by the way.

eburtthebike wrote:

... but the cycle-haters appear to be predominantly podgy, ignorant, middle aged white men.

In the interests of full disclosure, I am a predominantly podgy, middle aged white man (thought not ignorant).  And I am not a cycle-hater.

brooksby wrote:

eburtthebike wrote:

... but the cycle-haters appear to be predominantly podgy, ignorant, middle aged white men.

In the interests of full disclosure...

An image that brings queasiness to the stomach and disquiet to the mind. Please, wear a longer shirt - no such 'disclosure'!