Jim the Bicycler, unfortunately, can sometimes be rather reckless. And as a result of his reckless cycling he hit Joe the Pedestrian, then fled. There is no doubt that Jim is fully responsible for the collision.
Joe had been carrying his laptop and some expensive, yet fragile jewelry he had wanted to give to his girlfriend. Both the laptop and jewelry were destroyed in the collision.
Joe has an unfortunate tendency to hold a grudge and, sometimes, act outside of the law. He found out Jim's address, gathered his pals and they all ambushed Jim. Jim was beaten up very severely and even permanently maimed. Jim heard, "If you cannot cycle properly I'll make certain you're never able to cycle at all".
As a result of his criminal assault Joe is now tried before court and faces sever punishments. Notwithstanding this, can Joe still sue Jim for the damage Jim had caused as a result of the collision? Can Joe demand that Jim pays him compensation for the destroyed laptop and jewelry?
Or did Joe forfeit his right to seek compensation as a result of his arbitrary punishment? Perhaps it can be claimed that Jim shouldn't be punished twice for the collision he had caused and since he's already been beaten up and maimed it would no longer be just to demand that Jim pay damages?
