"smash through" is not consistent with "avoid the collision". I don't see any evidence of your claim of smashing through. Did you embellish the story in your head and only realized you'd been fooling yourself when somebody asked for evidence? Isn't that a red flag that you may have been misled in many other aspects of this topic?

I think most people would describe forcibly going through a barricade as smashing through regardless of whether or not the pther guy moved.

Now you're claiming it was "forcible"? What does that mean? With the application of force? It's not forcible if there's no contact. You really did make a misleading claim about smashing through barricades which shows you are either trying to mislead people with false information or have been misled yourself.

> It's not forcible if there's no contact.

Lol, ok then. You can redefine words to mean different things than is commonly accepted all you want, but good luck trying that with a judge.