Fixie rider in court following pedestrian fatality (London, UK, 2015)

Scott_C
Posts: 537
Joined: Fri Jan 10, 2014 10:49 am
Location: Perth, WA

Re: Fixie rider in court following pedestrian fatality (London, UK, 2015)

Postby Scott_C » Wed Sep 27, 2017 2:19 pm

fat and old wrote:The ACTUAL offense he was charged with.

"Whosoever, having the charge of any carriage or vehicle, shall by wanton or furious driving or racing, or other wilful misconduct, or by wilful neglect, do or cause to be done any bodily harm to any person whatsoever, shall be guilty


By riding an illegal cycle did Charlie engage in "wilful misconduct or wilful neglect"? I'm happy for somebody to give me a legal reason why that is wrong, and will gladly change my outlook on the fairness of the conviction on its legal merits when that is done.


The only thing I will note is that, by my reading, the crime requires the bodily harm to be done as a consequence of the wilful misconduct or neglect.

Removing some of the conditional clauses from the law and concentrating on the misconduct aspect:
"Whosoever, having the charge of any vehicle, shall by wilful misconduct, do any bodily harm to any person whatsoever, shall be guilty...


In this case it is appropriate to argue a scenario that even if the rider had a front brake they could not have avoided the collision when the pedestrian allegedly stepped back in front of them and therefore the bodily harm was not caused by the misconduct. Under the Australian Road Rules you could also make a case that the vehicle had no duty to give-way to the illegally crossing pedestrian so a lack of brakes is immaterial when he had no duty to use them.

I give up on understanding the application of the UK Highway Code as in this case a section of the road rules that appears advisory has been seemingly been used in the sentencing remarks to establish that the cyclist had a duty of care to avoid the pedestrian despite there being numerous advisory sections of the Highway Code that the pedestrian has ignored in choosing to cross where they did which have seemingly been ignored in determining the cyclist's liability. The ruling in this case appears to treat every bit of the road as if it was a zebra crossing with pedestrians free to step out whenever they want.

For what it is worth, from the evidence I have seen reported I think he was probably guilty of the offence, and had it occurred where the pedestrian had right of way I would find the sentencing appropriate I just feel the sentence is excessively high when the pedestrian has created the risk event by stepping out into the roadway without yielding to vehicles.

fat and old
Posts: 2799
Joined: Sat Aug 30, 2014 12:06 pm
Location: Mill Park

Re: Fixie rider in court following pedestrian fatality (London, UK, 2015)

Postby fat and old » Wed Sep 27, 2017 3:18 pm

Scott_C wrote:
fat and old wrote:The ACTUAL offense he was charged with.

"Whosoever, having the charge of any carriage or vehicle, shall by wanton or furious driving or racing, or other wilful misconduct, or by wilful neglect, do or cause to be done any bodily harm to any person whatsoever, shall be guilty


By riding an illegal cycle did Charlie engage in "wilful misconduct or wilful neglect"? I'm happy for somebody to give me a legal reason why that is wrong, and will gladly change my outlook on the fairness of the conviction on its legal merits when that is done.


The only thing I will note is that, by my reading, the crime requires the bodily harm to be done as a consequence of the wilful misconduct or neglect.

Removing some of the conditional clauses from the law and concentrating on the misconduct aspect:
"Whosoever, having the charge of any vehicle, shall by wilful misconduct, do any bodily harm to any person whatsoever, shall be guilty...


In this case it is appropriate to argue a scenario that even if the rider had a front brake they could not have avoided the collision when the pedestrian allegedly stepped back in front of them and therefore the bodily harm was not caused by the misconduct.


Yeah, I get it. If the ped stepped out and he had no chance to stop, then yeah.....fair call I think. I guess it hinges on whether he had a realistic amount of time/space to stop if a front brake was used? If not then I can see that argument. Maybe it's legally correct too. Sounds like it, but I'm a dumbass labourer. :lol:

uart
Posts: 895
Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2016 9:15 pm
Location: Newcastle

Re: Fixie rider in court following pedestrian fatality (London, UK, 2015)

Postby uart » Wed Sep 27, 2017 3:29 pm

hamishm wrote:He did, after all, kill someone while riding a bike that he had deliberately and consciously made unroadworthy


When is this lie going to stop being repeated. He did not remove ANY brakes from the bike. It was sold from new as a track bike without any brakes (though Charlie bought it secondhand). It didn't even come with any mounting points to hang brakes from. It was a track bike pure and simple.

It shows what a great job that the prosecution did to throw mud at him, when even after 11 pages and on a cycling website that people are still reciting the garbage that was used to tar him instead of the facts.

And he loved stunt riding and really risky behavior too! Oh hang on, no, he once watched a movie that contained stunt riding and risky behavior. But hey, what's the difference - and who needs facts when you've got a prosecution that good and a turkey as unlikable as young Charlie. :?:
Last edited by uart on Wed Sep 27, 2017 10:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.

BJL
Posts: 454
Joined: Fri Nov 30, 2012 6:45 pm

Re: Fixie rider in court following pedestrian fatality (London, UK, 2015)

Postby BJL » Wed Sep 27, 2017 4:42 pm

uart wrote:
And he loved stunt riding any really risky behavior! Oh hang on, no, he once watched a movie that contained stunt riding and risky behavior. But hey, what's the difference - and who needs facts when you've got a prosecution that good and a turkey as unlikable as young Charlie. :?:


Maybe he even watched E.T. :shock:

Philistine
Posts: 86
Joined: Mon Apr 18, 2016 1:57 pm

Re: Fixie rider in court following pedestrian fatality (London, UK, 2015)

Postby Philistine » Wed Sep 27, 2017 5:36 pm

uart wrote:
hamishm wrote:He did, after all, kill someone while riding a bike that he had deliberately and consciously made unroadworthy


who needs facts when you've got a prosecution that good and a turkey as unlikable as young Charlie. :?:


I thought we were all cyclists on this forum and would tend to see things from a cyclists perspective. Now I am not so sure.

This was a freak accident that could have happened to any one of us. The rider was travelling slowly - the prosecution claimed about 18 mph (which is hardly setting the bitumen on fire, even if the number was not exaggerated). Most of the time you would expect nothing worse than cuts and bruises to either participant - but the pedestrian hit her head and died! So someone has to pay. If the cyclist was riding an unroadworthy bike then charge him with that. But from where I sit, he did absolutely nothing wrong in the lead-up to the accident, and his lack of brakes had zero effect on the outcome.

fat and old
Posts: 2799
Joined: Sat Aug 30, 2014 12:06 pm
Location: Mill Park

Re: Fixie rider in court following pedestrian fatality (London, UK, 2015)

Postby fat and old » Wed Sep 27, 2017 7:20 pm

uart wrote:It was sold from new as a track bike without any brakes (though Charlie bought it secondhand). It didn't even come with any mounting points to hang brakes from. It was a track bike pure and simple.


No brakes aye? :lol: See how easy it is to let your own beliefs get in the way of facts?

User avatar
Mulger bill
Super Mod
Super Mod
Posts: 28899
Joined: Sun Sep 24, 2006 2:41 pm
Location: Sunbury Vic

Re: Fixie rider in court following pedestrian fatality (London, UK, 2015)

Postby Mulger bill » Wed Sep 27, 2017 10:19 pm

BJL wrote:
fat and old wrote:
Is the braking achieved on a fixie using your legs as efficient as that achieved through a friction brake in good condition? Lets use this case as a measurement....32kmh speed, call the bike/rider total weight around 85kg (10 kg for bike, 70 kg for the young fella).

Not that having a rear brake by UK standards really matters.



Well that's another point of contention, the 'condition' of the brakes. Next they'll be measuring your brake pads, measuring the thickness of the wheel rim brake track, wiping the brake tracks with forensic chemicals to make sure they were absolutely spotless and as a last resort claim that riding in wet conditions amounts to 'wanton or furious riding' as your brakes don't perform as well in the wet.

This has been nothing more than a witch hunt. If they prosecuted motorists to the same degree, they'd have to build another prison to house all the motorists who kill on the roads. Has a motorist ever been put in jail over a road death they caused by driving a vehicle with worn suspension? What about worn brakes or bald tyres? We know the last one is a get out of jail card. What about people with dodgy eyesight or slower reaction times like the elderly who continue to keep driving despite knowing the risks? What about those who refuse to drive according to the conditions and hoon around winding mountain roads? Is any of that 'dangerous driving' ?

Not in this world it ain't. These things all come under the banner of 'innocent people going about their business'. But cyclists? OH NO, those devil worshiping, human sacrifice performing demon lords of the underworld masquerading as doped up green hippies with a superiority complex need to be rooted out and severely punished for daring to ride a bike in an age where a dangerous, arrogant, selfish, expensive polluting form of transport is king.


Yep, this. Witch hunt.

I'm not in any way defending any of the young fellers actions, indeed I thinks he was extremely imprudent in riding that bike in those conditions but the case demonstrated HERE clearly demonstrates the media bias which, I really feel helped drive the judges actions.. Bald tyres, poor conditions but no Wanton or furious charges, no manslaughter and no jail time even tho 4 times the deaths occurred and there would appear to be zero contribution by the riders to the impact except their existence.
...whatever the road rules, self-preservation is the absolute priority for a cyclist when mixing it with motorised traffic.
London Boy 29/12/2011

human909
Posts: 8156
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 11:48 am

Re: Fixie rider in court following pedestrian fatality (London, UK, 2015)

Postby human909 » Wed Sep 27, 2017 11:52 pm

Most of the issues raised and questions asked even those specifically directed towards me have been satisfactorily responded to by others. So I won't repeat the good responses made by Mulger bill, Scott_C, uart and Philistine.

Like has been said this has been a witch hunt from the very beginning. The Jury and the Judge extracted their pound of flesh.

fat and old wrote:Is the braking achieved on a fixie using your legs as efficient as that achieved through a friction brake in good condition? Lets use this case as a measurement....32kmh speed, call the bike/rider total weight around 85kg (10 kg for bike, 70 kg for the young fella).

First off forget the word efficient. Try effective.

A skilled fixie riding can have excellent brake modulation bringing the brakes up to or beyond the tyre grip. AKA they can be just as effective as a mechanical rear brake. Conceivably more effective because of the very obvious braking force feedback. (If your tyres lock up on a mechanical brake you don't get tactile feedback on your braking hand, on a fixie you get tactile feedback.)

At very high speeds a fixie riding might start to struggle to reach strong rear braking. But very high I mean >70kph....

uart
Posts: 895
Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2016 9:15 pm
Location: Newcastle

Re: Fixie rider in court following pedestrian fatality (London, UK, 2015)

Postby uart » Thu Sep 28, 2017 12:28 pm

fat and old wrote:No brakes aye? :lol: See how easy it is to let your own beliefs get in the way of facts?

Ok, well if we are going to be clever, then how about this argument. Since the method of acceleration and the method of braking are exactly the same (force through the rider's legs) on a fixed wheel bike, then if he had no means of braking then he also had no means of acceleration. If he had no means of acceleration then he wasn't moving. Therefore the whole incident never happened.

User avatar
hamishm
Posts: 414
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2009 11:31 pm

Re: Fixie rider in court following pedestrian fatality (London, UK, 2015)

Postby hamishm » Thu Sep 28, 2017 2:40 pm

Philistine wrote:This was a freak accident that could have happened to any one of us. The rider was travelling slowly - the prosecution claimed about 18 mph (which is hardly setting the bitumen on fire, even if the number was not exaggerated). Most of the time you would expect nothing worse than cuts and bruises to either participant - but the pedestrian hit her head and died! So someone has to pay. If the cyclist was riding an unroadworthy bike then charge him with that. But from where I sit, he did absolutely nothing wrong in the lead-up to the accident, and his lack of brakes had zero effect on the outcome.


I'm a cyclist but I don't believe cyclists can do no wrong. I see cyclists do stupid and illegal things all the time. If you were driving a car with impaired (unroadworthy) brakes (and you knew it), and you hit and killed a pedestrian in the same circumstances, would you expect to go unpunished too?

human909
Posts: 8156
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 11:48 am

Re: Fixie rider in court following pedestrian fatality (London, UK, 2015)

Postby human909 » Thu Sep 28, 2017 3:02 pm

hamishm wrote:I'm a cyclist but I don't believe cyclists can do no wrong. I see cyclists do stupid and illegal things all the time. If you were driving a car with impaired (unroadworthy) brakes (and you knew it), and you hit and killed a pedestrian in the same circumstances, would you expect to go unpunished too?


CAUSATION

If I stepped out in front of a semi-trailer giving it no time to react and it was later found that its brakes were also roadworthy then I would not expect the driver to be charged with manslaughter or anything else.

What everybody seems to be forgetting is the fundamental cause of the incident was the pedestrians actions.

NASHIE
Posts: 429
Joined: Tue Jun 04, 2013 9:16 pm
Location: Perth, WA

Re: Fixie rider in court following pedestrian fatality (London, UK, 2015)

Postby NASHIE » Thu Sep 28, 2017 7:34 pm

human909 wrote:A skilled fixie riding


A skilled fixie (track bike racer) would not ride a track bike on the road in peak hour traffic. Everyone down the track and I'm sure on this forum that races or has raced a track bike thinks this kid is a moron for doing so. Big differance between riding your fixie with your brand name shoes on flats etc and pulling one up in racing conditions with cleats or toe straps etc.

Hopfully some good comes from this and others will mount front brakes, courier companys will check bikes etc etc........probably wishfull thinking :roll:

User avatar
warthog1
Posts: 6798
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 4:40 pm

Re: Fixie rider in court following pedestrian fatality (London, UK, 2015)

Postby warthog1 » Thu Sep 28, 2017 8:03 pm

NASHIE wrote:
human909 wrote:A skilled fixie riding


A skilled fixie (track bike racer) would not ride a track bike on the road in peak hour traffic. Everyone down the track and I'm sure on this forum that races or has raced a track bike thinks this kid is a moron for doing so. Big differance between riding your fixie with your brand name shoes on flats etc and pulling one up in racing conditions with cleats or toe straps etc.

Hopfully some good comes from this and others will mount front brakes, courier companys will check bikes etc etc........probably wishfull thinking :roll:


That may be your opinion.
Theorising that others feel the same is an attempt to add weight to your opinion.

As pointed out multiple times already, the pedestrian's actions were the root cause of the collision.
The cyclist is a less than likable member of an out-group and has been handed a disproportionate penalty as a result.

NASHIE
Posts: 429
Joined: Tue Jun 04, 2013 9:16 pm
Location: Perth, WA

Re: Fixie rider in court following pedestrian fatality (London, UK, 2015)

Postby NASHIE » Thu Sep 28, 2017 8:17 pm

warthog1 wrote:The cyclist is a less than likable member of an out-group and has been handed a disproportionate penalty as a result.


LOL...... in your opinion

BJL
Posts: 454
Joined: Fri Nov 30, 2012 6:45 pm

Re: Fixie rider in court following pedestrian fatality (London, UK, 2015)

Postby BJL » Thu Sep 28, 2017 8:30 pm

NASHIE wrote:
warthog1 wrote:The cyclist is a less than likable member of an out-group and has been handed a disproportionate penalty as a result.


LOL...... in your opinion


In the opinion of a lot of people. When you can demonstrate that motorists are treated just as harshly, then you can have you 'LOL'.

User avatar
biker jk
Posts: 5754
Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2009 6:18 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: Fixie rider in court following pedestrian fatality (London, UK, 2015)

Postby biker jk » Thu Sep 28, 2017 8:32 pm

warthog1 wrote:
NASHIE wrote:
human909 wrote:A skilled fixie riding


A skilled fixie (track bike racer) would not ride a track bike on the road in peak hour traffic. Everyone down the track and I'm sure on this forum that races or has raced a track bike thinks this kid is a moron for doing so. Big differance between riding your fixie with your brand name shoes on flats etc and pulling one up in racing conditions with cleats or toe straps etc.

Hopfully some good comes from this and others will mount front brakes, courier companys will check bikes etc etc........probably wishfull thinking :roll:


That may be your opinion.
Theorising that others feel the same is an attempt to add weight to your opinion.

As pointed out multiple times already, the pedestrian's actions were the root cause of the collision.
The cyclist is a less than likable member of an out-group and has been handed a disproportionate penalty as a result.


If the penalty is disproportionate (and I don't believe it is) this is more plausibly attributed to the moron's decision to ride around with out a front brake. That is truly irresponsible and dangerous.

NASHIE
Posts: 429
Joined: Tue Jun 04, 2013 9:16 pm
Location: Perth, WA

Re: Fixie rider in court following pedestrian fatality (London, UK, 2015)

Postby NASHIE » Thu Sep 28, 2017 8:40 pm

warthog1 wrote:
As pointed out multiple times already, the pedestrian's actions were the root cause of the collision.


Round in circles again, and i don't think anyone is disputing that. But some seem adamant that the fact he had severely reduced braking abilities had no relevance to the final outcome. And the fact he was a bike rider he has been treated differently to a car driver. That's my point of difference.

Is he a good guy.....don't no, is he a member of an out group....wouldnt have a clue. Did he ride a track bike that was involved in a crash that resulted in death.....yes. Does he deserve 18 months prison......probably not, but if the UK system is like ours he will spend a few months in boot camp.

BJL
Posts: 454
Joined: Fri Nov 30, 2012 6:45 pm

Re: Fixie rider in court following pedestrian fatality (London, UK, 2015)

Postby BJL » Thu Sep 28, 2017 8:45 pm

biker jk wrote:
If the penalty is disproportionate (and I don't believe it is) this is more plausibly attributed to the moron's decision to ride around with out a front brake. That is truly irresponsible and dangerous.


Maybe but a pedestrian walking out onto the road without ANY regard for the traffic on the road and/or complete oblivion to his/her surroundings is also irresponsible and dangerous. But the penalty IS disproportionate in regards to what a motorist would have received under exactly the same circumstances. All they would have got is a fine for driving an un-roadworthy vehicle. To bring up manslaughter charges in the first place is a clear indication that the cyclist involved was NEVER going to receive a fair trial and the comments from the judge confirm that.

Witch hunt is all this is.

NASHIE
Posts: 429
Joined: Tue Jun 04, 2013 9:16 pm
Location: Perth, WA

Re: Fixie rider in court following pedestrian fatality (London, UK, 2015)

Postby NASHIE » Thu Sep 28, 2017 8:46 pm

BJL wrote:
In the opinion of a lot of people. When you can demonstrate that motorists are treated just as harshly, then you can have you 'LOL'.


Not disputing that you can bring up all sorts of injustices. but you do seem to have a real us and them, which is not my stance on the road.

BJL
Posts: 454
Joined: Fri Nov 30, 2012 6:45 pm

Re: Fixie rider in court following pedestrian fatality (London, UK, 2015)

Postby BJL » Thu Sep 28, 2017 8:58 pm

NASHIE wrote:
BJL wrote:
In the opinion of a lot of people. When you can demonstrate that motorists are treated just as harshly, then you can have you 'LOL'.


Not disputing that you can bring up all sorts of injustices. but you do seem to have a real us and them, which is not my stance on the road.


Let's stick to the subject at hand.

So you are disputing that motorists are treated more leniently than cyclists on the roads? Well, any updates on the Mike Hall fatality? Or any of the other cycling fatalities that have occurred on Australian roads in the last 12 month? Didn't think so. All swept under the carpet.

User avatar
warthog1
Posts: 6798
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 4:40 pm

Re: Fixie rider in court following pedestrian fatality (London, UK, 2015)

Postby warthog1 » Thu Sep 28, 2017 9:05 pm

biker jk wrote:
warthog1 wrote:
NASHIE wrote:
A skilled fixie (track bike racer) would not ride a track bike on the road in peak hour traffic. Everyone down the track and I'm sure on this forum that races or has raced a track bike thinks this kid is a moron for doing so. Big differance between riding your fixie with your brand name shoes on flats etc and pulling one up in racing conditions with cleats or toe straps etc.

Hopfully some good comes from this and others will mount front brakes, courier companys will check bikes etc etc........probably wishfull thinking :roll:


That may be your opinion.
Theorising that others feel the same is an attempt to add weight to your opinion.

As pointed out multiple times already, the pedestrian's actions were the root cause of the collision.
The cyclist is a less than likable member of an out-group and has been handed a disproportionate penalty as a result.


If the penalty is disproportionate (and I don't believe it is) this is more plausibly attributed to the moron's decision to ride around with out a front brake. That is truly irresponsible and dangerous.


Given this moron was driving around with bald tyres

https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2006/aug ... port.world

and recieved this penalty; The driver in a crash that killed four cyclists when his car spun out of control was yesterday fined £180 and given six penalty points on his licence.

I would argue it damn well is disproportionate.

User avatar
warthog1
Posts: 6798
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 4:40 pm

Re: Fixie rider in court following pedestrian fatality (London, UK, 2015)

Postby warthog1 » Thu Sep 28, 2017 9:09 pm

NASHIE wrote:
warthog1 wrote:
As pointed out multiple times already, the pedestrian's actions were the root cause of the collision.


Round in circles again, and i don't think anyone is disputing that. But some seem adamant that the fact he had severely reduced braking abilities had no relevance to the final outcome. And the fact he was a bike rider he has been treated differently to a car driver. That's my point of difference.

Is he a good guy.....don't know, is he a member of an out group....wouldnt have a clue. Did he ride a track bike that was involved in a crash that resulted in death.....yes. Does he deserve 18 months prison......probably not, but if the UK system is like ours he will spend a few months in boot camp.



There is the point about who you attribute blame to. The stupid izombie walks out onto a roadway without looking and the cyclist is deemed at fault despite her being oblivious to her surroundings and his warnings. It is not an unreasonable expectation that a person crossing a road into the path of traffic would halt progress at a loud yelled warning. Did he even attempt to stop, would any brake have made a difference? I would have yelled a warning also in that situation.

He is a cyclist in an English speaking country. What rock have you been living under?
Of course he is a member of an outgroup.
With regard to the penalty have a look at my post above.
Last edited by warthog1 on Thu Sep 28, 2017 9:19 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
biker jk
Posts: 5754
Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2009 6:18 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: Fixie rider in court following pedestrian fatality (London, UK, 2015)

Postby biker jk » Thu Sep 28, 2017 9:16 pm

warthog1 wrote:
biker jk wrote:
warthog1 wrote:
That may be your opinion.
Theorising that others feel the same is an attempt to add weight to your opinion.

As pointed out multiple times already, the pedestrian's actions were the root cause of the collision.
The cyclist is a less than likable member of an out-group and has been handed a disproportionate penalty as a result.


If the penalty is disproportionate (and I don't believe it is) this is more plausibly attributed to the moron's decision to ride around with out a front brake. That is truly irresponsible and dangerous.


Given this moron was driving around with bald tyres

https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2006/aug ... port.world

and recieved this penalty; The driver in a crash that killed four cyclists when his car spun out of control was yesterday fined £180 and given six penalty points on his licence.

I would argue it damn well is disproportionate.


I'm sure this has been covered previously so I don't know why you repeated the claim given the bald tyres were not found to have contributed to the crash.

NASHIE
Posts: 429
Joined: Tue Jun 04, 2013 9:16 pm
Location: Perth, WA

Re: Fixie rider in court following pedestrian fatality (London, UK, 2015)

Postby NASHIE » Thu Sep 28, 2017 9:20 pm

warthog1 wrote:
He is a cyclist in an English speaking country. What rock have you been living under?
Of course he is a member of an outgroup.
With regard to the penalty have a look at my post above.


Sorry but i don't consider myself a member of an out group. And as tragic as it was the case you refer is irrelevant to this case.

User avatar
warthog1
Posts: 6798
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 4:40 pm

Re: Fixie rider in court following pedestrian fatality (London, UK, 2015)

Postby warthog1 » Thu Sep 28, 2017 9:29 pm

biker jk wrote:
I'm sure this has been covered previously so I don't know why you repeated the claim given the bald tyres were not found to have contributed to the crash.


The fixie rider is apparently the biggest b@st@rd on the face of the earth for riding an "unroadworthy bike without a front brake".
The fact remains he was driving an unroadworthy vehicle and he killed 4 people who were not at fault.
But hey lets give him a slap on the wrist with a wet lettuce. They were only cyclists after all, they shouldn't have been there. We the jury and I the judge, are all drivers too. Such a distasteful episode could have happened to us also.
Would the penalty have been any different had the car aquaplaned on a wet road. I bloody doubt it very much.

Return to “General Cycling Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Arbuckle23, Philistine