Another comedy Dash Cam video

Cobra said:
Fair enough but I can't find any evidence for the fact that its cause by an argument with a lorry, if he was feeling un well at the time he shouldn't have continued to drive,
but gone home or at least pulled into MKGH just off J13.

The NHS say's
A pulmonary embolism is often caused by a blood clot travelling up from one of the deep veins in your legs to your heart and lungs.
A blood clot in one of the deep veins of the legs is known as deep vein thrombosis (DVT). DVT can occur for no apparent reason,
but it often develops after long periods of inactivity, such as during a long-haul flight or if you're ill in hospital.
Click to expand...

Yes. If you wanted to fake an injury for compo following a prang, a pulmonary embolism wouldn't be the best choice. It's too easily diagnosed/ruled out.
 
Cobra said:
Fair enough but I can't find any evidence for the fact that its cause by an argument with a lorry, if he was feeling un well at the time he shouldn't have continued to drive,
but gone home or at least pulled into MKGH just off J13.

The NHS say's
A pulmonary embolism is often caused by a blood clot travelling up from one of the deep veins in your legs to your heart and lungs.
A blood clot in one of the deep veins of the legs is known as deep vein thrombosis (DVT). DVT can occur for no apparent reason,
but it often develops after long periods of inactivity, such as during a long-haul flight or if you're ill in hospital.
Click to expand...

Thanks Chris, saved me saying this! P E is not something that is instant.
 
ZoneV said:
Yes. If you wanted to fake an injury for compo following a prang, a pulmonary embolism wouldn't be the best choice. It's too easily diagnosed/ruled out.
Click to expand...
What ever we say, or think about this, one things certain, there are many other forums / social media sites also discussing this, as per the various links that have been shared,
he is getting a hell of a lot of free publicity across the web, from this incident
 
Cobra said:
What ever we say, or think about this, one things certain, there are many other forums / social media sites also discussing this, as per the various links that have been shared,
he is getting a hell of a lot of free publicity across the web, from this incident
Click to expand...

Yes, that's beyond doubt. Doesn't by itself mean it was deliberate though.

Good old British cynicism. Where would we be without it? :D
 
Cobra said:
No agenda, I was agreeing with you certainly in part, that meeting your God is a final and long term solution to all problems ;)
Click to expand...

Only pullin your snakliness............
 
viv1969 said:
:LOL: Pretty sure he'll charge you an hourly rate for that!
Click to expand...

Well hes got no legs so .............O I see, mmm well I am not sure I am up for pullin that? do snakes have em? suppose they must....:eek:

Do You object to your avatar being festivised...........?
 
Last edited:
LASTOLITE said:
Well hes got no legs so .............O I see, mmm well I am not sure I am up for pullin that? do snakes have em? suppose they must....:eek:

Do You object to your avatar being festivised...........?
Click to expand...


yes, but she doesn't have to look at it! :D

...but we can still see Mog with his earrings!
 
Last edited:
LASTOLITE said:
Well hes got no legs so .............O I see, mmm well I am not sure I am up for pullin that? do snakes have em? suppose they must....:eek:

Do You object to your avatar being festivised...........?
Click to expand...

Mog may have been nabbed for a grinchmas ad....but my sad Mog isn't going festive :p
 
Last edited:
ZoneV said:
You're disputing the cause of the damage to the car and seem to be suggesting it wasn't caused by a collision with the lorry. I'm asking you, if the damage wasn't caused by the lorry, what do you think caused it?

I see nothing in those things you listed that helps me answer the question. :)
Click to expand...

A small dent, with no scrape marks, which would be there if the vehicles were moving at different speeds at the time of collision. Who knows how the dents were made but they are not consistent with his description. Also consider a 48 ton vehicle colliding at speed with a 1 ton vehicle. I'd suggest the smaller vehicle would move considerably using the laws of physics, which didn't happen in the video, but the video footage would be consistent with someone trying to make the most out of the situation, a little jink of the car to make a suggestion of contact on the video. The usual actions of a driver would see the lorry moving across and slow, brake, or even swerve to the inside lane. Do you think that having slowed significantly (sorry video now deleted but showed him slowing in front of the lorry to 48mph and putting on hazards) that theres indication he sped up once the lorry took an avoiding action to put his car in a position to suit his requirement for footage? Theres an interesting edit missing that bit on the video thats left.

I suggest someone wanting to promote a brand of vigilantism and righteousness might act as shown on the video, might withdraw a longer video when comments are made that it shows his actions were less than honorable, might also have other videos showing him placing his vehicle alongside lorries in blind spots.

These are suggestions. Who knows what happened as we have one side of the story, heavily editted. Guilt under British law has to be proven beyond reasonable doubt. With the drivers actions during this and the longer video now withdrawn and his descriptions of his further actions, I'd suggest theres reasonable doubt to his side of the story.

Whats a shame under current trial by internet is that a driver has been sacked just before Christmas.

Don't get me wrong. With the lack of traffic police around these dashcams can catch irresponsible drivers, it's just I question the motives and edited footage remaining in this case.
 
Last edited:
The Lorry Driver may be a "nut" ................. BUT from what has been reported, directly and indirectly, the guy is a ....... t w a t .......... simple as that

I did not think t w a t was a swear word ....... sorry if it is
 
Last edited:
Nod said:
Although etymologically speaking, they have just the one but it's split into two...
Click to expand...
Yes, of course if you want to split penis hairs its a bi-lobed reproductive organ.
But I guess most people are not actually interested in the finer points :p
 
Oddly, I am! I love useless facts as well as words and their origins. Then again, I've never been most people!!! :D
 
Byker28i said:
A small dent, with no scrape marks, which would be there if the vehicles were moving at different speeds at the time of collision. Who knows how the dents were made but they are not consistent with his description. Also consider a 48 ton vehicle colliding at speed with a 1 ton vehicle. I'd suggest the smaller vehicle would move considerably using the laws of physics, which didn't happen in the video, but the video footage would be consistent with someone trying to make the most out of the situation, a little jink of the car to make a suggestion of contact on the video. The usual actions of a driver would see the lorry moving across and slow, brake, or even swerve to the inside lane. Do you think that having slowed significantly (sorry video now deleted but showed him slowing in front of the lorry to 48mph and putting on hazards) that theres indication he sped up once the lorry took an avoiding action to put his car in a position to suit his requirement for footage? Theres an interesting edit missing that bit on the video thats left.

I suggest someone wanting to promote a brand of vigilantism and righteousness might act as shown on the video, might withdraw a longer video when comments are made that it shows his actions were less than honorable, might also have other videos showing him placing his vehicle alongside lorries in blind spots.

These are suggestions. Who knows what happened as we have one side of the story, heavily editted. Guilt under British law has to be proven beyond reasonable doubt. With the drivers actions during this and the longer video now withdrawn and his descriptions of his further actions, I'd suggest theres reasonable doubt to his side of the story.

Whats a shame under current trial by internet is that a driver has been sacked just before Christmas.

Don't get me wrong. With the lack of traffic police around these dashcams can catch irresponsible drivers, it's just I question the motives and edited footage remaining in this case.
Click to expand...

Have you seen the footage from the side cam? What do you think made the impact sound as the lorry pulled in on the car?

Chris (Cobra) has driven HGVs and believes the damage is perfectly reasonable. What do you make of that?

In all honesty, I think you're reading far too much into this.
 
Last edited:
Lol. Well you're entitled to your opinion and I'm entitled to mine, but I've explained my explanation in detail. You've just dismissed it without explaining why..
Now I've never driven big trucks, but have a healthy respect for their skills and professionalism, far more than a self righteous driver with an extra agenda and some incriminating, but deleted videos.
But you're welcome to express you're opinion. Just that I (and possibly 99% of others on the internet) believe you may, just possibly be mistaken in you view. :)
 
Byker28i said:
Lol. Well you're entitled to your opinion and I'm entitled to mine, but I've explained my explanation in detail. You've just dismissed it without explaining why..
Now I've never driven big trucks, but have a healthy respect for their skills and professionalism, far more than a self righteous driver with an extra agenda and some incriminating, but deleted videos.
But you're welcome to express you're opinion. Just that I (and possibly 99% of others on the internet) believe you may, just possibly be mistaken in you view. :)
Click to expand...

The trouble is your theory holds absolutely no water as I've repeatedly demonstrated. The idea that the damage wasn't caused by the lorry (despite the evidence), and somehow got there in some other way (despite a complete lack of evidence supporting that theory) is a flight of pure fantasy.

Anyway, you're entitled to your opinion, however ridiculous it is. :)

Shall we say Elvis caused the damage and call it quits? :)
 
Last edited:
Nod said:
Although etymologically speaking, they have just the one but it's split into two...
Click to expand...

Storing that little bit of info away for later pub quiz use!
 
ZoneV said:
The trouble is your theory holds absolutely no water as I've repeatedly demonstrated. The idea that the damage wasn't caused by the lorry (despite the evidence), and somehow got there in some other way (despite a complete lack of evidence supporting that theory) is a flight of pure fantasy.

Anyway, you're entitled to your opinion, however ridiculous it is. :)

Shall we say Elvis caused the damage and call it quits? :)
Click to expand...

But there's no scrape to the paintwork, which there would be if a moving vehicle contacted another moving slowly. You just wouldn't get such a small dent with no damage to the paintwork. It's such a huge area of the lorry to make such a little tiny dent, on a motorway, with a 6-10mph speed difference? It would take a very clinical strike by the lorry driver to achieve that.

We need to urgently find him and employ him as a precision bombing pilot in the airforce over syria

But, you have your opinion, I have mine, that's fine, I won't argue further.
 
Last edited:
Byker28i said:
But there's no scrape to the paintwork, which there would be if a moving vehicle contacted another moving slowly. You just wouldn't get such a small dent with no damage to the paintwork. It's such a huge area of the lorry to make such a little tiny dent, on a motorway, with a 6-10mph speed difference? It would take a very clinical strike by the lorry driver to achieve that.

We need to urgently find him and employ him as a precision bombing pilot in the airforce over syria

But, you have your opinion, I have mine, that's fine, I won't argue further.
Click to expand...

There is another picture clearly showing scrapes though.... Posted. Couple of times earlier in the thread.
 
viv1969 said:
There is another picture clearly showing scrapes though.... Posted. Couple of times earlier in the thread.
Click to expand...
Small dent shown is on the rear offside wing, where a lorry possible would hit, but without touching the wing mirror. Other picture didn't look like scratches, but reflections?
 
Yup you're right small dent on the front wing, wheel is turned, dent and scratches on the rear, however, on the front dent, how come the wing mirror doesn't move on the video at any time? You'd have thought that have been in the way
Both dinks could possibly come from separate parking incidents and look consistent with that.

I'm just not convinced the video footage even with the editing, shows the story as described.
 
Last edited:
Byker28i said:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ynch-mob-catch-drivers-use-mobiles-wheel.html
Click to expand...
Of course that won't encourage other motorists to take pictures of others on their camera phone while driving will it :rolleyes:

Byker28i said:
Yup you're right small dent on the front wing, wheel is turned, dent and scratches on the rear,
Click to expand...
If you look at the video 20-24 seconds, the latter end, the angle the lorry pulls in, its quite conceivable that the "light board" on the trailer could have caused the scrapes.
Its about the right height and the arse end of the trailer "waggles" in and out quite quickly.

But he's certainly not doing himself any favours with all the "anti motorist" video's and comments that are appearing that's for sure.
 
I'll bow to your knowledge of trailers, seems strange he's claiming two bits of damage to the vehicle on two different wings, front and rear.
From the rear facing camera, you could see he was slowing in lane two with his hazards going as the lorry in lane 1 was catching reasonable quickly as well. For that I'd assume the lorry driver thought he had an issue, then pulled to lane 3 to avoid.
Suddenly the the lorry in lame 1 backs away and the car is now doing a similar speed to the lorry in lane 3 as it comes across. Did the lorry in lane 1 brake to allow the car to exit to the hard shoulder, or did the car driver accelerate to stop the lorry moving back across. Did the lorry driver think he was clear? Why did he stay in lane 2 to make it appear he was hit ( car doesn't move?) rather than move across.

There's so many questionable moments in both the videos and the story, combined with his actions and the other video of him placing his car in a position of two lanes closing into one with the lorry.
 
Byker28i said:
I'll bow to your knowledge of trailers, seems strange he's claiming two bits of damage to the vehicle on two different wings, front and rear.
Click to expand...
I'm not saying that it did happen that way, but certainly from the front damage its possible.
The rear damage less likely so, due to the angle of the trailer as he ( lorry) is pulling out.
I would suggest that the rear lights would have been the first to be hit.
Although I did have someone, years ago, "key" the side of their car on my tie hooks while driving a flat bed and they came in at me, ( changing lanes) realised I was there, and pulled away to the right again.
Again minimal damage. just a few scratches.

Byker28i said:
or did the car driver accelerate to stop the lorry moving back across.
Click to expand...
Again, I'd say possibly, I've seen it happen many times before, after a car driver has got the arse with a lorry.


Byker28i said:
There's so many questionable moments in both the videos and the story,
Click to expand...
Definitely and I guess we will never know what was going through his mind, or the lorry drivers at the time, a touch of road rage from both maybe?
 
Double page spread in the Sunday times, police witness and it's spokesman mentioned well. Setup after he was nearly killed by a hgv according to the article. Costs £156 to join and you can submit footage and they'll try to get the insurance company to reduce your premium because you are a member with a camera.

So, very good publicity just before commercialmas
 
Byker28i said:
Setup after he was nearly killed by a hgv according to the article.
Click to expand...
If that's true then he wants prosecuting for playing games on the M1.
And the false article(s) that followed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top