Shocking moment parent on school run drives into teacher who is flung from bonnet

[Bod]

This is the shocking moment a parent drove into a teacher outside a
school, carrying him on the bonnet before he is thrown to the ground.

The teacher was stood at the school’s gates and spoke with the driver
before he accelerated towards him when he turned his back to the vehicle.

The car continued to travel at speed after hitting the man, and narrowly
missed two children on bicycles.

Officers released the dramatic footage after the driver, Rainer Schoeman
was jailed for 10 months for ploughing into the staff member.

Schoeman, who was jailed at Guilford Crown Court on Friday, pleaded
guilty to causing actual bodily harm, dangerous driving, driving without
insurance and having no MOT.

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/shocking-moment-parent-on-school-run-drives-into-teacher-who-is-flung-from-bonnet-a3643447.html
--
Bod

[Nick]

It looks like there is a bit missing from the film. The bit just before
the car moves.

[Tony Dragon]

A more complete video here:-
http://www.getsurrey.co.uk/news/surrey-news/we-know-school-car-parking-13672749

Although this does not excuse what happened, it appears that the teacher
sat on the car and that provoked the incident.

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

[Nick]

On 26/09/2017 09:52, Tony Dragon wrote:

>
> Although this does not excuse what happened, it appears that the teacher
> sat on the car and that provoked the incident.
>

It makes little difference to my opinion of the teacher, driver or event.

It makes a hugely bad impression of the trustworthiness of the police
and the officers who released the doctored video.

[Tony Dragon]

The video would have been released to the media, the Standard doctored
it not the police, GetSurrey released the full video (or at least more).

[Nick]

On 26/09/2017 10:30, Tony Dragon wrote:
> On 26/09/2017 10:16, Nick wrote:
>> On 26/09/2017 09:52, Tony Dragon wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Although this does not excuse what happened, it appears that the
>>> teacher sat on the car and that provoked the incident.
>>>
>>
>> It makes little difference to my opinion of the teacher, driver or event.
>>
>> It makes a hugely bad impression of the trustworthiness of the police
>> and the officers who released the doctored video.
>>
>
> The video would have been released to the media, the Standard doctored
> it not the police, GetSurrey released the full video (or at least more).

If that is true the police should sue the Evening Standard. Who stated
officers released the video and make no mention that they doctored it.

[Simon Jester]

I suggest you go back and watch the entire video, not just the initial clip.

[James Wilkinson Sword]

Teachers are like that. They have a school unfit for purpose and don't let parents use the car park because it's not big enough. It was the teacher's fault and he deserved what he got, which was probably just a minor bruise to his buttocks.

--
My wife doesn't surf the net, she paddles.

[James Wilkinson Sword]

Indeed, it shows the fun bit first, then goes back and shows how the stupid teacher caused it.

--
Backup not found. A)bort, R)etry or P)anic?

[James Wilkinson Sword]

On Tue, 26 Sep 2017 09:52:17 +0100, Christie <chri...@thisisnotmyrealemail.com> wrote:

> Nick wrote:
>
>> On 26/09/2017 05:09, Bod wrote:
>>> This is the shocking moment a parent drove into a teacher outside a
>>> school, carrying him on the bonnet before he is thrown to the ground.
>>>

>>> The teacher was stood at the schoola??s gates and spoke with the driver

>>> before he accelerated towards him when he turned his back to the vehicle.
>>>
>>> The car continued to travel at speed after hitting the man, and narrowly
>>> missed two children on bicycles.
>>>
>>> Officers released the dramatic footage after the driver, Rainer Schoeman
>>> was jailed for 10 months for ploughing into the staff member.
>>>
>>> Schoeman, who was jailed at Guilford Crown Court on Friday, pleaded
>>> guilty to causing actual bodily harm, dangerous driving, driving without
>>> insurance and having no MOT.
>>>
>>> https://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/shocking-moment-parent-on-school-run-drives-into-teacher-who-is-flung-from-bonnet-a3643447.html
>>>
>>
>> It looks like there is a bit missing from the film. The bit just before
>> the car moves.
>

> Yes, the person walking along the pavement across the road magically
> advances a good few feet just before the car moves.

I can't see that - what is the timestamp at that point?

> It could be that the teacher was just standing in front of the car, as
> if to physically block the driver from entering the school entrance,
> the teacher then proceeds to sit on the car bonnet. This infuriates
> the driver, who just accelerates into the entrance with the teacher
> eventually being flung off the bonnet. So the driver didn't actually
> drive into the teacher as he was already sat on the car's bonnet.
>
> The video has been doctored to dramatise the incident - still a bit
> shocking, but not as much as made out.
>
> The two schoolboy cyclists, by the way, who witnessed this and who can
> quite clearly be seen in the video, were not harmed in this incident
> although they were put at some risk.

No harm done, who cares?

--
Five out of four Americans have trouble with fractions.

[James Wilkinson Sword]

On Tue, 26 Sep 2017 14:13:43 +0100, Christie <chri...@thisisnotmyrealemail.com> wrote:

> James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 26 Sep 2017 09:52:17 +0100, Christie <chri...@thisisnotmyrealemail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Nick wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 26/09/2017 05:09, Bod wrote:
>>>>> This is the shocking moment a parent drove into a teacher outside a
>>>>> school, carrying him on the bonnet before he is thrown to the ground.
>>>>>
>>>>> The teacher was stood at the schoola??s gates and spoke with the driver
>>>>> before he accelerated towards him when he turned his back to the vehicle.
>>>>>
>>>>> The car continued to travel at speed after hitting the man, and narrowly
>>>>> missed two children on bicycles.
>>>>>
>>>>> Officers released the dramatic footage after the driver, Rainer Schoeman
>>>>> was jailed for 10 months for ploughing into the staff member.
>>>>>
>>>>> Schoeman, who was jailed at Guilford Crown Court on Friday, pleaded
>>>>> guilty to causing actual bodily harm, dangerous driving, driving without
>>>>> insurance and having no MOT.
>>>>>
>>>>> https://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/shocking-moment-parent-on-school-run-drives-into-teacher-who-is-flung-from-bonnet-a3643447.html
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It looks like there is a bit missing from the film. The bit just before
>>>> the car moves.
>>>
>>> Yes, the person walking along the pavement across the road magically
>>> advances a good few feet just before the car moves.
>>
>> I can't see that - what is the timestamp at that point?
>

> It happens 26 secs in (at -0.18 on the video's strange timestamp).
> There is a woman walking along the pavement across the road (behind
> the car) at the start of the hedge she disappears at 26 seconds and
> then magically reappears beyond the end of the hedge fractionally
> later - she stops just before going out of shot to look at what's
> going on with the car and the teacher.

Did you fail to notice the bright white flash on the whole video, indicating passage of time? Presumably the teacher sits there for quite some time, which would bore the viewers.

>>> It could be that the teacher was just standing in front of the car, as
>>> if to physically block the driver from entering the school entrance,
>>> the teacher then proceeds to sit on the car bonnet. This infuriates
>>> the driver, who just accelerates into the entrance with the teacher
>>> eventually being flung off the bonnet. So the driver didn't actually
>>> drive into the teacher as he was already sat on the car's bonnet.
>>>
>>> The video has been doctored to dramatise the incident - still a bit
>>> shocking, but not as much as made out.
>>>
>>> The two schoolboy cyclists, by the way, who witnessed this and who can
>>> quite clearly be seen in the video, were not harmed in this incident
>>> although they were put at some risk.
>>
>> No harm done, who cares?
>

> No harm done to the schoolboy cyclists, no, but try telling the
> teacher no harm was done to him.

I doubt it, as another poster said, he was already contacting the bonnet with his arse when the car moved, so he was not hit. No harm will have been done to him.

> And the Law agreed with the teacher
> as the car driver was jailed after he pleaded guilty to causing actual

> bodily harm, dangerous driving, driving without insurance and having
> no MOT.

What the law thinks is not always correct.

--
Keyboard error - press any key to continue...

[JNugent]

On 26/09/2017 10:16, Nick wrote:

True. Especially since the (TV) news repoort I saw merely said that the
teacher had turned his back on the driver. Sitting on a car (or any
other similar physical contact) is highly provocative, but still
doesn't justify dangerous driving.

Perhaps both of them have learned a lesson.

[James Wilkinson Sword]

> I think we are both agreed that the teacher chooses to sit on the car
> bonnet. Yet the paper report (as in the link above) is trying to
> suggest to us that the car driver drove into the teacher. The report's
> headline is "Shocking moment parent on school run drives into teacher
> who is flung from bonnet". And the video accompanying the report has
> been shortened so it is more suggestive that the car was driven into
> the teacher rather than what actually happened (i.e. the teacher chose
> to sit on the car bonnet). The report and video as presented by the
> EveningStandard is disingenuous - that is the point being made in this
> thread.

I don't think the video is ambiguous, I can see him leaning back onto the bonnet, and then the car moves forwards.

But yes, the title is wrong, the car did not drive into him. Typical shoddy / provoking journalism of today.

>>>>> It could be that the teacher was just standing in front of the car, as
>>>>> if to physically block the driver from entering the school entrance,
>>>>> the teacher then proceeds to sit on the car bonnet. This infuriates
>>>>> the driver, who just accelerates into the entrance with the teacher
>>>>> eventually being flung off the bonnet. So the driver didn't actually
>>>>> drive into the teacher as he was already sat on the car's bonnet.
>>>>>
>>>>> The video has been doctored to dramatise the incident - still a bit
>>>>> shocking, but not as much as made out.
>>>>>
>>>>> The two schoolboy cyclists, by the way, who witnessed this and who can
>>>>> quite clearly be seen in the video, were not harmed in this incident
>>>>> although they were put at some risk.
>>>>
>>>> No harm done, who cares?
>>>
>>> No harm done to the schoolboy cyclists, no, but try telling the
>>> teacher no harm was done to him.
>>
>> I doubt it, as another poster said, he was already contacting the bonnet with
>> his arse when the car moved, so he was not hit. No harm will have been done to him.
>

> No harm will have been done to him then, you are right. The harm was
> done when he, the teacher, came flying off the bonnet as the car made
> it's first turn and he, the teacher, consequently went sprawling
> across the road. That was when the teacher occasioned the actual
> bodily harm for which the car driver was jailed, along with the other
> offences of dangerous driving, etc.

He fell off the car going at not much of a speed, same injuries as if he tripped up while jogging. Not the end of the world. And since he provoked the incident, I'd not punish the driver at all.

>> What the law thinks is not always correct.
>

> It's less than perfect... but then so are we all - it's the human
> condition.

It's a LOT less than perfect.

If I was in power we'd have just TWO laws:

1) Do not damage people.
2) Do not steal things.

That's all you need. Number 1 ranges from punching in the face to murder. Number 2 ranges from stealing a chocolate bar from Asda to a £million bank fraud. A simple scale would be written down, judges just stick to it depending on what was done.

--
In 1961, 87-year-old Harry Meadows, a resident at the Haslemere home for the elderly in Great Yarmouth, England, achieved late-in-life notoriety when he accidentally killed another 3 residents of his care home by dressing up as the grim reaper and peering through the residents' lounge window whilst holding a scythe.

The year before Harry's performance, another resident of the same home, the then 81-year-old Gladys Elton, for reasons best known to herself, had conceived the idea of performing a striptease for her fellow residents of the home; unfortunately such was the effect of Elton's performance that it caused the death of one resident by way of a cardiac arrest and the treatment for shock of five other residents.

[Simon Jester]

The report did not mention the length of the driving ban, I assume it is decades rather than years.

[James Wilkinson Sword]

On Tue, 26 Sep 2017 16:03:54 +0100, Simon Jester <sj81...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Tuesday, September 26, 2017 at 5:09:24 AM UTC+1, Bod wrote:
>> This is the shocking moment a parent drove into a teacher outside a
>> school, carrying him on the bonnet before he is thrown to the ground.
>>
>> The teacher was stood at the school’s gates and spoke with the driver
>> before he accelerated towards him when he turned his back to the vehicle.
>>
>> The car continued to travel at speed after hitting the man, and narrowly
>> missed two children on bicycles.
>>
>> Officers released the dramatic footage after the driver, Rainer Schoeman
>> was jailed for 10 months for ploughing into the staff member.
>>
>> Schoeman, who was jailed at Guilford Crown Court on Friday, pleaded
>> guilty to causing actual bodily harm, dangerous driving, driving without
>> insurance and having no MOT.
>>
>> https://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/shocking-moment-parent-on-school-run-drives-into-teacher-who-is-flung-from-bonnet-a3643447.html
>

> The report did not mention the length of the driving ban, I assume it is decades rather than years.

It shouldn't be, all he did was nudge someone.

--
Space is an illusion, disk space doubly so.

[Peeler]

On Tue, 26 Sep 2017 13:49:29 +0100, Birdbrain Macaw (now "James Wilkinson"),
the pathological attention whore of all the uk ngs, blathered again:

>
> No harm done, who cares?

Birdbrain, a LOT of harm was done to your "brain" already long time ago!
<BG>

--
More of Birdbrain Macaw's (now "James Wilkinson" LOL) inane crap:
"The car can never prevent the human from beating the crap out of it with a
tyre iron"
Message-ID: <op.y6iq1...@red.lan>

[Peeler]

On Tue, 26 Sep 2017 14:44:25 +0100, Birdbrain Macaw (now "James Wilkinson"),

the pathological attention whore of all the uk ngs, blathered again:

>> And the Law agreed with the teacher
>> as the car driver was jailed after he pleaded guilty to causing actual
>> bodily harm, dangerous driving, driving without insurance and having
>> no MOT.
>
> What the law thinks is not always correct.

Keep your sociopathic filth out of normally evolved humans' newsgroup, you
filthy wanker!

--
More from Scottish wanker Birdbrain Macaw's (now "James Wilkinson" LOL)
sociopathic "life":
"I go commando. Underpants are for people suffering from anal seepage."
MID: <op.y55mt...@red.lan>

[Peeler]

On Tue, 26 Sep 2017 13:48:11 +0100, Birdbrain Macaw (now "James Wilkinson"),

the pathological attention whore of all the uk ngs, blathered again:

>> Although this does not excuse what happened, it appears that the teacher
>> sat on the car and that provoked the incident.
>
> Teachers are like that. They have a school unfit for purpose and don't
> let parents use the car park because it's not big enough. It was the
> teacher's fault and he deserved what he got, which was probably just a
> minor bruise to his buttocks.

Tell that to the court, sociopath! <BG>

--
More of Scottish wanker Birdbrain Macaw's (now "James Wilkinson" LOL)
sociopathic "thinking":
"No, law abiding fuckwits follow the speed limit. Sensible drivers ignore
it and go slower or faster than it, according to the conditions."
MID: <op.y55ql...@red.lan>

[Peeler]

On Tue, 26 Sep 2017 13:48:45 +0100, Birdbrain Macaw (now "James Wilkinson"),

the pathological attention whore of all the uk ngs, blathered again:

> Indeed, it shows the fun bit first, then goes back and shows how the
> stupid teacher caused it.

YOU calling someone ELSE "stupid" again, you mentally deficient,
"permanently ill" cretin? LOL

--
Birdbrain Macaw's (now "James Wilkinson" LOL) sociopathic "mind" at work:
"If you need a speed limit sign to tell you how fast is safe to drive on a
road, you're a shit driver. Everybody should choose their own speed."
MID: <op.y2nq7...@red.lan>

[Peeler]

On Tue, 26 Sep 2017 15:50:21 +0100, Birdbrain Macaw (now "James Wilkinson"),

the pathological attention whore of all the uk ngs, blathered again:

>

> I don't think

Sounds plausible, Birdbrain!

--
More from Birdbrain Macaw's (now "James Wilkinson" LOL) sociopathic life:
"I refuse to go back to Tesco after I had a very loud argument with three
managers about whether I could go in shirtless on a baking hot summer's
day."
MID: <op.y6448...@red.lan>

[James Wilkinson Sword]

On Wed, 27 Sep 2017 09:57:37 +0100, Christie <chri...@thisisnotmyrealemail.com> wrote:

> James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 26 Sep 2017 15:41:31 +0100, Christie <chri...@thisisnotmyrealemail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
>>>

>>> ...

>>> No harm will have been done to him then, you are right. The harm was
>>> done when he, the teacher, came flying off the bonnet as the car made
>>> it's first turn and he, the teacher, consequently went sprawling
>>> across the road. That was when the teacher occasioned the actual
>>> bodily harm for which the car driver was jailed, along with the other
>>> offences of dangerous driving, etc.
>>
>> He fell off the car going at not much of a speed, same injuries as if he tripped up while jogging.
>> Not the end of the world. And since he provoked the incident, I'd not punish the driver at all.
>>
>>>> What the law thinks is not always correct.
>>>
>>> It's less than perfect... but then so are we all - it's the human
>>> condition.
>>
>> It's a LOT less than perfect.
>>
>> If I was in power we'd have just TWO laws:
>>
>> 1) Do not damage people.
>> 2) Do not steal things.
>>
>> That's all you need. Number 1 ranges from punching in the face to murder. Number 2 ranges from

>> stealing a chocolate bar from Asda to a ?million bank fraud. A simple scale would be written down,

>> judges just stick to it depending on what was done.
>

> I see. And, in your first law, damage to people would not include
> causing actual bodily harm, then.

I said it ranges from a punch to murder. So yes, bodily harm is obviously included.

> I mean as you have already dismissed
> that in the case of this teacher flung from a car bonnet.

What injury did he sustain? Was it as much as if the driver had punched him in the face? I doubt he even got a bruise. He was already on the car when it started moving, so the only impact was when he fell onto the ground, which doesn't cause much harm. People fall down every day without harm.

> It would
> have to be greater harm sustained than someone could pick up from
> having tripped while out jogging

Why do you say that? What speed was the car travelling when he "flew" off the bonnet? Jogging speed at most.

> (although, what's to stop a jogger
> tripping up and killing themselves?).

The low speed.

> Also, no consideration I notice,
> for the potential to do harm, so we would have to do without the
> charges of dangerous driving, driving without insurance and no MOT -
> on the grounds that no real harm was done and nothing was stolen.

Of course. If no harm was done, then there is no crime. Unless you want to predict the future.

> Then, what about things like attempted murder, for example? Wouldn't
> we only be able to charge competent murderers and not bungling ones?

I never discounted that as a crime. So, did the driver in the above link attempt to kill the teacher? How do you know what he was trying to do? Maybe he was just trying to scare him.

> In fact we'd only be able to charge competent law breakers who didn't
> damage people or steal things. That would mean those who didn't
> succeed with their dastardly plans, through incompetence or negligence
> or just good fortune on the part of their would-be victims, would get
> away scot free to try and make a better job of it on future occasions.
>
> Sorry, but maybe your two laws are going to need a bit more working on
> if you're ever going to get into power.

Already covered above. Stop waffling.

--
Murphy says to Paddy, "What ya talkin into an envelope for?" "I'm sending a voicemail ya thick sod!"

[Peeler]

On Sat, 07 Oct 2017 00:05:08 +0100, Birdbrain Macaw (now "James Wilkinson"),

the pathological attention whore of all the uk ngs, blathered again:

<FLUSH idiot's usual sick drivel unread>

--
Kerr Mudd-John about Birdbrain Macaw (now "James Wilkinson" LOL):
"It's like arguing with a demented frog."
MID: <op.yy3c0...@dell3100.workgroup>