Adult strategy

The video shows that this took place in a busy street in front of shops, where some shops sat forwards of the rest and narrowed the pavement.

Mr Young blocked the cyclist's progress - stood in his path and had an argument with him. There was a group of people with the cyclist who seemed allied, or if not connected, sympathetic to the cyclist. The cyclist turned to pass him. The assailant was behind the cyclist. Mr Young turned side on to the kerb, presumably continuing to be defiant. The assailant then aimed a punch at him. Mr Young was balancing on the edge of the pavement and easily felled.

I'm not defending the assault. I am cautioning against rigid interpretation.

People shouldn't cycle on the pavement. But they do. The police openly encourage it, because they sympathise with drivers that cyclists are a nuisance to traffic flow, and cyclists feel safer on the pavement. If you try to get the police to enforce cycling byelaws they make every excuse under the sun for not doing so.

In this case the cyclist seems to have been part walking and part riding the bike, as he was evidently with friends walking. There were several individuals, and obviously not the sort to tangle with. Mr Young was socially naive and probably didn't weigh up the issues. NT's would, if necessary, have stepped off the pavement to let the yobs pass by.

Mr Young acted confrontationally. The courts have to take that into account. OK his autism is a factor, but evidently his stance barring the cyclist's progress led to anger building up.

As I say I'm not defending the punch. I'm not defending pavement cycling (which I hate, it causes me much distress).

But I am saying that it wasn't unprovoked. Legally Mr Young should have backed off. Was he really just standing there calmly with his hands down. There's more to provocation than just body posture. Being on the spectrum, facial response can be just as provocative even if not so intended

And I'm afraid the reality is that the police and the courts are very leniant with punchy yobs. To be honest the police are afraid of provoking further aggression down the line.

We are at a disadvantage here. But in the NT world, Mr Young may be perceived as having contributed to the situation.

The video shows that this took place in a busy street in front of shops, where some shops sat forwards of the rest and narrowed the pavement.

Mr Young blocked the cyclist's progress - stood in his path and had an argument with him. There was a group of people with the cyclist who seemed allied, or if not connected, sympathetic to the cyclist. The cyclist turned to pass him. The assailant was behind the cyclist. Mr Young turned side on to the kerb, presumably continuing to be defiant. The assailant then aimed a punch at him. Mr Young was balancing on the edge of the pavement and easily felled.

I'm not defending the assault. I am cautioning against rigid interpretation.

People shouldn't cycle on the pavement. But they do. The police openly encourage it, because they sympathise with drivers that cyclists are a nuisance to traffic flow, and cyclists feel safer on the pavement. If you try to get the police to enforce cycling byelaws they make every excuse under the sun for not doing so.

In this case the cyclist seems to have been part walking and part riding the bike, as he was evidently with friends walking. There were several individuals, and obviously not the sort to tangle with. Mr Young was socially naive and probably didn't weigh up the issues. NT's would, if necessary, have stepped off the pavement to let the yobs pass by.

Mr Young acted confrontationally. The courts have to take that into account. OK his autism is a factor, but evidently his stance barring the cyclist's progress led to anger building up.

As I say I'm not defending the punch. I'm not defending pavement cycling (which I hate, it causes me much distress).

But I am saying that it wasn't unprovoked. Legally Mr Young should have backed off. Was he really just standing there calmly with his hands down. There's more to provocation than just body posture. Being on the spectrum, facial response can be just as provocative even if not so intended

And I'm afraid the reality is that the police and the courts are very leniant with punchy yobs. To be honest the police are afraid of provoking further aggression down the line.

We are at a disadvantage here. But in the NT world, Mr Young may be perceived as having contributed to the situation.