Switching off someone else's ignition

Spicy_McHaggis

ilikewatch wrote: »

It might see you in court, but if you could show that the hand got broken whilst you tried to defend yourself and your property from what you assumed to be a carjacker , then you would hopefully walk out of court a free man.

It would see you in court.

Joe_Horner

So, cyclist is cut up, sees red and tries to confront the driver at the first opportunity rather than just getting on with his journey and (possibly) reporting later.

It's called road rage, no matter how "calmly" it's done. You could probably add tresspass on the driver's property (although that's civil rather than criminal). Cyclist should definitely take a chill pill, and possibly find a different way to travel if he can't control his emotions.

ilikewatch

Strider590 wrote: »

Let's not get hung up on knife law, pedantic people please do one.
The question is whether the law views a motor vehicle as a public space and it does.
Any area where the public readily have access IS considered a public area, whether there's a car on top of it or not.

If a car is a "public space" why do the police need a warrant to search a car even when it is parked on public land?

Spicy_McHaggis

ilikewatch wrote: »

If a car is a "public space" why do the police need a warrant to search a car even when it is parked on public land?

Because he's wrong.

ilikewatch

Spicy_McHaggis wrote: »

It would see you in court.

It might see you in court - if an offence was reported, if the police could identify you and if the CPS thought it was worth pursuing, and then even if it went to court you would have a very good chance of walking away a free man.

runningben16

Personally, I would never drive through a built-up area like that with the doors unlocked anyway

Spicy_McHaggis

ilikewatch wrote: »

It might see you in court - if an offence was reported, if the police could identify you and if the CPS thought it was worth pursuing, and then even if it went to court you would have a very good chance of walking away a free man.

Well let's assume you were identified and a complaint was made it would see you in court for any injury above a Section 47 Assault as that's the limit self defence can be decided on without a trial.

Tobster86

Some more clarification then; the ignition was simply switched off.

And with respect to gilbert and sullivan, tykesi and Joe Horner; please don't get on your moral high horses until you've actually seen what happened; because it's pretty impressive.

Car_54

ilikewatch wrote: »

The cyclist was almost certainly operating the car without insurance when he interfered with the ignition.
.

That's stretching the definition of "operating", and in any event that's not an offence.

The law prohibits "using" a motor vehicle without insurance, and he certainly wasn't using it .

Spicy_McHaggis

Tobster86 wrote: »

Some more clarification then; the ignition was simply switched off.

And with respect to gilbert and sullivan, tykesi and Joe Horner; please don't get on your moral high horses until you've actually seen what happened; because it's pretty impressive.

As this is all in your head why no play out the ending you want?