I just dispute that he was any more dangerous. People could run out from any side of the road into traffic on either side of the road. If the refuge wasnt there he would be expected to use the other side of the road as an overtake.
But the fact that the refuge is there means that other road users will treat that location differently. When someone crosses the road in one go they tend to look both ways; when they know that they only need to go half way and can then take refuge then they might be more inclined only to look one way. The fact that there is a refuge there makes it somewhat different to crossing to the other side of the road when there is no refuge.
After all, we could claim that driving through a red light when the driver can't see anyone else on the road is a similar comparison, or, perhaps, driving the wrong way up a one-way street.
Indeed, one has to consider that in deliberately transgressing the rules of the road the driver is, in effect, putting out the message that those rules do not apply to him/her...which leads me to wonder how many other rules they are happy to break?
the driver demonstrated that he/she could not control their vehicle in accordance with the highway code and thus, at the very least, is in need of some re-eduction.