Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

Video: Cyclist uses bike to smash car windscreen after claiming motorist veered into cycle lane

Incident happened close to Manchester Royal Infirmary as Tracey Leng was on way to visit her seriously ill mother

Dashcam footage has emerged of a cyclist lifting his bike and smashing the windscreen of a car, with the driver saying that the rider had claimed that she had driven in a cycle lane.

Video of the rider breaking the windscreen of Tracey Leng’s car was posted to Twitter by BBC North West Tonight, with the Manchester Evening News publishing a longer video of the incident.

It happened as Mrs Leng, aged 50, drove with her husband to visit her mother, 69, who is seriously ill in Manchester Royal Infirmary and is due to undergo potentially life-saving surgery this week.

As Mrs Leng waited at traffic lights on Hathersage Road in Chorlton-upon-Medlock, the cyclist rode past her then turned around and approached the vehicle.

He twice seems to be about to ride away before turning around, the second time ending with him raising his bike and smashing the windscreen of Mrs Leng’s Skoda Octavia.

He then rode off through the Manchester Royal Infirmary site despite Mrs Leng – who denied she had veered into a cycle lane – and her husband attempting to follow him.

Greater Manchester Police have obtained a DNA sample from the saliva of the suspect, who spat at the vehicle, and officers are appealing for information to help track him down.

Mrs Leng told the Manchester Evening News: “We’re still in a state of shock about it.

“We don’t know why he was so angry. There was no clear cycle lane and even if there was I definitely wasn’t in it.

“He started shouting and swearing but as soon as we told him it was all being caught on the dashcam he totally flipped.

“We were totally numb after he threw the bike.

“There was a big loud crack, we didn’t if the whole window was going to shatter. It was really frightening, we didn’t know what he might do next.”

Mrs Leng said the timing could not be worse due to her mother’s impending surgery.

“Things are bad enough at the moment,” she said.

“It completely ruined Mother’s Day as we had to cancel a meal and cut short visiting my mum to deal with the police

“But more importantly my car is off the road now at a time when we really need it to get to the hospital

“I was just so uncalled for, I cannot understand why anyone would do something like that.”

Anyone who has information is requested to contact Greater Manchester Police on 101 quoting incident number 1873 of March 26 or the charity Crimestoppers, anonymously, on 0800 555 111.

Simon joined road.cc as news editor in 2009 and is now the site’s community editor, acting as a link between the team producing the content and our readers. A law and languages graduate, published translator and former retail analyst, he has reported on issues as diverse as cycling-related court cases, anti-doping investigations, the latest developments in the bike industry and the sport’s biggest races. Now back in London full-time after 15 years living in Oxford and Cambridge, he loves cycling along the Thames but misses having his former riding buddy, Elodie the miniature schnauzer, in the basket in front of him.

Add new comment

82 comments

Avatar
spen | 7 years ago
3 likes

There is clearly a cycle lane but its only one of those waste of paint discretionary lanes which cars can enter leading to an equally useless advance stop line.  She certainly wasn't blocking the lane and he acted like a total dick.

Avatar
KevM | 7 years ago
12 likes

Not condoning the dick on a bikes behaviour but CSI and DNA evidence? Really? Bit overkill isn't it? Considering the frequency we see videos of drivers almost killing cyclists with police statements that no action is deemed necessary.

Avatar
pjm60 replied to KevM | 7 years ago
1 like

Yeah she's in the cycle lane and up for an argument, but you can't smash someone's windscreen because they said nasty words. Totally unnecessary confrontation on both sides, but no justification for the cyclists actions.

 

KevM wrote:

Not condoning the dick on a bikes behaviour but CSI and DNA evidence? Really? Bit overkill isn't it? Considering the frequency we see videos of drivers almost killing cyclists with police statements that no action is deemed necessary.

It'll literally just be swobbing the spit and running through the system. 

Avatar
ChrisB200SX replied to pjm60 | 7 years ago
4 likes
pjm60 wrote:

It'll literally just be swobbing the spit and running through the system. 

But the fact that they called out a SOCO for this is ridiculous.

Avatar
Jackson | 7 years ago
16 likes

When police do nothing in cases of car drivers assaulting and killing cyclists, I find it hard to get too bothered about this. Of course it's sad people feel they have to take the law into their own hands, but next time a car driver knocks one of us off let's see if they put the CSI DNA testing people on the case to catch the driver.

Avatar
Grahamd | 7 years ago
5 likes

No doubt the police will allocate a lot of resources and public appeals for information to track down cyclist, yet will take no action against driver in cycle lane. 

We cannot condone the cyclists actions, what a fool to risk damaging his bike.

 

Avatar
Ush | 7 years ago
9 likes

I see a lot of the usual pro-cycling types are popping up to suggest that the driver must have done something wrong to provoke such a reaction.  That stretches the bounds of credulity.

In addition I would like to draw to your attention that SHE HAD A SICK MOTHER so no matter what she might have done she ought to be extended extra consideration and exemption from traffic rules.

People's inability to understand this reminds me of these videos https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8yqJni5nl9w

Avatar
Mackadoo replied to Ush | 7 years ago
15 likes
Ush wrote:

In addition I would like to draw to your attention that SHE HAD A SICK MOTHER so no matter what she might have done she ought to be extended extra consideration and exemption from traffic rules.

Eh??

My dad's dead what exemptions can I get?

Stupid from the cyclist, but thats a really dumb comment Ush.

Avatar
Jackson replied to Mackadoo | 7 years ago
5 likes
Mackadoo wrote:
Ush wrote:

In addition I would like to draw to your attention that SHE HAD A SICK MOTHER so no matter what she might have done she ought to be extended extra consideration and exemption from traffic rules.

Eh??

My dad's dead what exemptions can I get?

Stupid from the cyclist, but thats a really dumb comment Ush.

It's sarcasm. What has happened to the English, you used to excel in it.

Avatar
Mackadoo replied to Jackson | 7 years ago
3 likes
Jackson wrote:
Mackadoo wrote:
Ush wrote:

In addition I would like to draw to your attention that SHE HAD A SICK MOTHER so no matter what she might have done she ought to be extended extra consideration and exemption from traffic rules.

Eh??

My dad's dead what exemptions can I get?

Stupid from the cyclist, but thats a really dumb comment Ush.

It's sarcasm. What has happened to the English, you used to excel in it.

Apologies to Ush-sorry! Just watched the video, I did wonder, maybe I should have wondered a bit more. 

Avatar
Ush replied to Mackadoo | 7 years ago
6 likes
Mackadoo wrote:

Apologies to Ush-sorry! Just watched the video, I did wonder, maybe I should have wondered a bit more. 

No problem.  Sarcasm isn't best suited to the internet.   Geniunely sorry about your Dad. It could be any of us.  

Avatar
oldstrath replied to Ush | 7 years ago
10 likes
Ush wrote:

I see a lot of the usual pro-cycling types are popping up to suggest that the driver must have done something wrong to provoke such a reaction.  That stretches the bounds of credulity.

What actually stretches the bounds of credibility is that the cyclist did this without her having done something wrong and potentially frightening.

Ush wrote:

 

In addition I would like to draw to your attention that SHE HAD A SICK MOTHER so no matter what she might have done she ought to be extended extra consideration and exemption from traffic rules.

 

If she was too concerned about her sick mother she should not have been driving at all. Having a sick mother is very sad, but not a free pass to break traffic laws.

Avatar
Yorkshire wallet replied to Ush | 7 years ago
8 likes
Ush wrote:

I see a lot of the usual pro-cycling types are popping up to suggest that the driver must have done something wrong to provoke such a reaction.  That stretches the bounds of credulity.

In addition I would like to draw to your attention that SHE HAD A SICK MOTHER so no matter what she might have done she ought to be extended extra consideration and exemption from traffic rules.

People's inability to understand this reminds me of these videos https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8yqJni5nl9w

Please be sarcasm. Please be sarcasm. Please be sarcasm. 

 

Avatar
kitsunegari replied to Ush | 7 years ago
0 likes
Ush wrote:

I see a lot of the usual pro-cycling types are popping up to suggest that the driver must have done something wrong to provoke such a reaction.  That stretches the bounds of credulity.

In addition I would like to draw to your attention that SHE HAD A SICK MOTHER so no matter what she might have done she ought to be extended extra consideration and exemption from traffic rules.

Like any such reaction, the perpetrator should no longer be allowed to use the roads.

What you're suggesting - that someone should have special dispensation from the law due to having a sick mother - is sheer lunacy at best though. What an idiotic comment.

And the fact that the media uses it as an excuse on behalf of the driver shows how wrong peoples attitudes are.

Avatar
oozaveared replied to Ush | 7 years ago
2 likes
Ush wrote:

I see a lot of the usual pro-cycling types are popping up to suggest that the driver must have done something wrong to provoke such a reaction.  That stretches the bounds of credulity.

In addition I would like to draw to your attention that SHE HAD A SICK MOTHER so no matter what she might have done she ought to be extended extra consideration and exemption from traffic rules.

People's inability to understand this reminds me of these videos https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8yqJni5nl9w

Just about the most idiotic post I have ever seen.  The guy should not have either spat or smashed her windscreen just take that as read.

"I see a lot of the usual pro-cycling types are popping up to suggest that the driver must have done something wrong to provoke such a reaction."

Indeed she had her own dash cam shows her driving in the cycle lane that she says she didn't know was there and she wasn't in. So that's due care and attention or just plain lying.  The sound has been removed and the suspicion is that she was well on the horn whilst driving up a cycle lane.   If you had been cycling along in a cycle lane and some mad lunatic drives up it scaring the bejesus out of you with a horn then it might get you quite angry. 

Then we have this rubbish:

"In addition I would like to draw to your attention that SHE HAD A SICK MOTHER so no matter what she might have done she ought to be extended extra consideration and exemption from traffic rules."

Any particular ones?  or just all of them.  How does that work for  everyone else on the road.  She or anyone else feeling anxious or worried can just do what they like in a car and tell the cops they were feeling a bit sad or worried about their Nan or their kids, or their partner or maybe their dog has worms or something. 

1 How was the angry cyclist supposed to know she had a sick mother.  Has she got a sticker on the car? 

2 If she's too emotionally upset to drive properly then she shouldn't be driving a car

3 If you claim you shouldn't be prosecuted for traffic violations or bad driving because you are too emotionally upset to take responsibility then you should get prosecuted first for the offence and then secondly for driving whilst not psychologically fit to do so.

check the advice:

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/psychiatric-disorders-assessing-fitness-to-d...

None of this excuses the cyclist for spitting and smashing her windscreen.

 

Avatar
oozaveared replied to oozaveared | 7 years ago
1 like
oozaveared wrote:
Ush wrote:

I see a lot of the usual pro-cycling types are popping up to suggest that the driver must have done something wrong to provoke such a reaction.  That stretches the bounds of credulity.

In addition I would like to draw to your attention that SHE HAD A SICK MOTHER so no matter what she might have done she ought to be extended extra consideration and exemption from traffic rules.

People's inability to understand this reminds me of these videos https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8yqJni5nl9w

Just about the most idiotic post I have ever seen.  The guy should not have either spat or smashed her windscreen just take that as read.

"I see a lot of the usual pro-cycling types are popping up to suggest that the driver must have done something wrong to provoke such a reaction."

Indeed she had her own dash cam shows her driving in the cycle lane that she says she didn't know was there and she wasn't in. So that's due care and attention or just plain lying.  The sound has been removed and the suspicion is that she was well on the horn whilst driving up a cycle lane.   If you had been cycling along in a cycle lane and some mad lunatic drives up it scaring the bejesus out of you with a horn then it might get you quite angry. 

Then we have this rubbish:

"In addition I would like to draw to your attention that SHE HAD A SICK MOTHER so no matter what she might have done she ought to be extended extra consideration and exemption from traffic rules."

Any particular ones?  or just all of them.  How does that work for  everyone else on the road.  She or anyone else feeling anxious or worried can just do what they like in a car and tell the cops they were feeling a bit sad or worried about their Nan or their kids, or their partner or maybe their dog has worms or something. 

1 How was the angry cyclist supposed to know she had a sick mother.  Has she got a sticker on the car? 

2 If she's too emotionally upset to drive properly then she shouldn't be driving a car

3 If you claim you shouldn't be prosecuted for traffic violations or bad driving because you are too emotionally upset to take responsibility then you should get prosecuted first for the offence and then secondly for driving whilst not psychologically fit to do so.

check the advice:

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/psychiatric-disorders-assessing-fitness-to-d...

None of this excuses the cyclist for spitting and smashing her windscreen.

 

 

My apologies to Ush.  I didn't realise this was sarcasm.  I just thought it was trolling.  Should have looked more carefully.

 

Avatar
beezus fufoon replied to oozaveared | 7 years ago
1 like
oozaveared wrote:
oozaveared wrote:
Ush wrote:

I see a lot of the usual pro-cycling types are popping up to suggest that the driver must have done something wrong to provoke such a reaction.  That stretches the bounds of credulity.

In addition I would like to draw to your attention that SHE HAD A SICK MOTHER so no matter what she might have done she ought to be extended extra consideration and exemption from traffic rules.

People's inability to understand this reminds me of these videos https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8yqJni5nl9w

Just about the most idiotic post I have ever seen.  The guy should not have either spat or smashed her windscreen just take that as read.

"I see a lot of the usual pro-cycling types are popping up to suggest that the driver must have done something wrong to provoke such a reaction."

Indeed she had her own dash cam shows her driving in the cycle lane that she says she didn't know was there and she wasn't in. So that's due care and attention or just plain lying.  The sound has been removed and the suspicion is that she was well on the horn whilst driving up a cycle lane.   If you had been cycling along in a cycle lane and some mad lunatic drives up it scaring the bejesus out of you with a horn then it might get you quite angry. 

Then we have this rubbish:

"In addition I would like to draw to your attention that SHE HAD A SICK MOTHER so no matter what she might have done she ought to be extended extra consideration and exemption from traffic rules."

Any particular ones?  or just all of them.  How does that work for  everyone else on the road.  She or anyone else feeling anxious or worried can just do what they like in a car and tell the cops they were feeling a bit sad or worried about their Nan or their kids, or their partner or maybe their dog has worms or something. 

1 How was the angry cyclist supposed to know she had a sick mother.  Has she got a sticker on the car? 

2 If she's too emotionally upset to drive properly then she shouldn't be driving a car

3 If you claim you shouldn't be prosecuted for traffic violations or bad driving because you are too emotionally upset to take responsibility then you should get prosecuted first for the offence and then secondly for driving whilst not psychologically fit to do so.

check the advice:

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/psychiatric-disorders-assessing-fitness-to-d...

None of this excuses the cyclist for spitting and smashing her windscreen.

 

 

My apologies to Ush.  I didn't realise this was sarcasm.  I just thought it was trolling.  Should have looked more carefully.

 

dude, you can't write 10,000 words of unjust criticism and then just a single line of apology!

Avatar
Ush replied to oozaveared | 7 years ago
4 likes
oozaveared wrote:

My apologies to Ush.  I didn't realise this was sarcasm.  I just thought it was trolling.  Should have looked more carefully.

The horrible thing is that there actually a number of people capable of believing and expressing the exact thoughts I was trying to parody.  I am sure we've all been in conversations at work or in the pub where someone has actually made similar arguments.

I wouldn't do what the cyclist did here... but I have little doubt that the Oh-Look-At-Poor-Little-Me woman posting this video was involved in something pretty heinous just before the video starts.

Avatar
atgni | 7 years ago
9 likes

"There was no clear cycle lane and even if there was I definitely wasn’t in it."
DNA test for insured property damage.

No sound, I suspect they were blowing the horn.

Still pretty dumb to throw bikes at cars.

Avatar
hawkinspeter | 7 years ago
3 likes

Hopefully the dashcam footage would show what happened before the incident, but the video is showing as not available on the Manchester Evening News site. Seems like spitting is a stupid thing to do if you want to not be found, but then I don't condone damaging your bike against cars either.

Avatar
StuInNorway replied to hawkinspeter | 7 years ago
5 likes
hawkinspeter wrote:

Hopefully the dashcam footage would show what happened before the incident, but the video is showing as not available on the Manchester Evening News site. Seems like spitting is a stupid thing to do if you want to not be found, but then I don't condone damaging your bike against cars either.

 

Video worked now, seems to clearly show the car in the cycle lane, but still in no way condones using the bike as a weapon. The fact they've removed the audio hints at someone not wanting the "entire" truth being known to the public.  

Avatar
hawkinspeter replied to StuInNorway | 7 years ago
0 likes
StuInNorway wrote:

Video worked now, seems to clearly show the car in the cycle lane, but still in no way condones using the bike as a weapon. The fact they've removed the audio hints at someone not wanting the "entire" truth being known to the public.  

I tried it in a different browser and it worked. It does look like the car was encroaching the bike lane and I must admit that I've often had words with drivers like that. Luckily common sense has prevailed before the situation escalated - it's always better to just cycle off and cool down.

Having helmet cams can be helpful as it means you don't need to confront bad drivers - you can rely on having good footage and send it to the police later on if the evidence is clear enough.

Pages

Latest Comments