A cyclist in London has raised concerns about the way footage of
incidents on the road can be reported, using his own case as an example
of how reports can fall through the cracks as police forces "follow procedure" and are "drowning under cases".
https://road.cc/content/news/cyclist-bemoans-police-reporting-system-303831
Avatar
Bungle_52 | 685 posts | 22 min ago
1 like
From the article : "The police concluded that the rest of the conduct
did not warrant charging or prosecution. So the driver will get a talking
to and remain 'on the system'."
Unfortunately this is a good outcome. The fact that the driver is "on the system" should make it easier to deal effectively with them if they do it again which may at least have an effect on their future behaviour. The
police could easily have blamed the cyclist for shouting at the driver as
in NMOTD 806 (https://road.cc/content/news/nmotd-806-driver-reverses-cyclist-and-runs-...)
and done nothing. I am appalled to have to say that this is an improved outcome and a step in the right direction.
How on earth have we got to this state of affairs.
swldx...@gmail.com <swldxer1958@gmail.com> wrote:
Avatar
Bungle_52 | 685 posts | 22 min ago
1 like
From the article : "The police concluded that the rest of the conduct
did not warrant charging or prosecution. So the driver will get a talking
to and remain 'on the system'."
Unfortunately this is a good outcome. The fact that the driver is "on the
system" should make it easier to deal effectively with them if they do it
again which may at least have an effect on their future behaviour. The
police could easily have blamed the cyclist for shouting at the driver as
in NMOTD 806 (https://road.cc/content/news/nmotd-806-driver-reverses-cyclist-and-runs-...)
and done nothing. I am appalled to have to say that this is an improved
outcome and a step in the right direction.
How on earth have we got to this state of affairs.
Self-appointed vigilantism?
Spike <aero.spike@btinternet.invalid> wrote:
swldx...@gmail.com <swldxer1958@gmail.com> wrote:
Avatar
Bungle_52 | 685 posts | 22 min ago
1 like
From the article : "The police concluded that the rest of the conduct
did not warrant charging or prosecution. So the driver will get a talking >>> to and remain 'on the system'."
Unfortunately this is a good outcome. The fact that the driver is "on the >>> system" should make it easier to deal effectively with them if they do it >>> again which may at least have an effect on their future behaviour. The
police could easily have blamed the cyclist for shouting at the driver as >>> in NMOTD 806
(https://road.cc/content/news/nmotd-806-driver-reverses-cyclist-and-runs-...)
and
done nothing. I am appalled to have to say that this is an improved
outcome and a step in the right direction.
How on earth have we got to this state of affairs.
Self-appointed vigilantism?
Vine-atism 😀
Gortoncycling | 1 post | 22 hours ago
1 like
Similar but different experience. I filmed a driver (or a new rangerover) using their phone. They took exception did a hasty U turn, drove through
a red light, mounted the pavement got out approached me before throwing
water at me and then the water bottle. Reported it both as a traffic
offence and an assault. CPS discontinued the assault apparently as it
wasn't clear from the footage that it was me being assaulted even though there was reflection in the car window, am I expected to turn the camera on myself?!
Ended up with a half arsed apology letter and honestly the hoop jumping
to even get the footage to the police being asked to come into a station, then to email it, then I uploaded it to 3 different file sharing sites as well as attaching it to the email as apparently they couldn't download it.
A previous case I had a driver unbuckling their seatbelt asking to fight
me after I witnessed him on their phone. The polices response was to tell
me not to engage at all with drivers, which is hard to do when you're
stopped next to them and they wind their window down and talk to you. It seems Assault although it can apply to verbal threats too, doesn't apply
if you are in a motor vehicle, and deliberately swerving with 2t of steel
at someone on 2 wheels is just standard driving and not attempted murder.
My experience is that the police (at least around me) largely only care
about obvious mobile phone reports. Go through a red light; warning
letter, Turn left through a green man pedestrian crossing where it is
right turn only; nothing, Pull a U turn at a junction where it is ahead
only; nothing, park on crossing zigzags, warning letter.
Hirsute replied to Johny | 8032 posts | 1 hour ago
3 likes
Oh another newbie with a stupid agenda.
1 look up what a vigilante is
On Friday, September 15, 2023 at 4:18:00 PM UTC+1, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:
Hirsute replied to Johny | 8032 posts | 1 hour ago
3 likes
Oh another newbie with a stupid agenda.
1 look up what a vigilante is
perce replied to Johny | 476 posts | 1 hour ago
2 likes
No, I think vigilantism is encouraged by courts handing out lenient
sentences time and time again.
SPOT ON.
This is the heart-stopping moment a dad tries to stop a motorist driving
over a zebra crossing as four young children pass.
https://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/midlands-news/watch-stunned-dad-forced-stand-18200838
QUOTE: "But the driver continued to speed out. My partner banged on the bonnet and said: 'What are you doing? There’s children here. "He still continued. ENDS
He "banged on the bonnet ", eh? Don't the cry baby drivers consider that
an "assault" upon their person, even though they have a steel cage around them? Poor lambs.
Sysop: | Keyop |
---|---|
Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
Users: | 483 |
Nodes: | 16 (3 / 13) |
Uptime: | 230:30:07 |
Calls: | 9,612 |
Calls today: | 10 |
Files: | 13,686 |
Messages: | 6,155,331 |