[Closed] Cyclist knocked off his bike and abused

Id have a go if your link worked?

Yep linky not working..

I cannot answer that question.

[url= http://www.theguardian.com/environment/bike-blog/video/2013/aug/08/nottingham-police-cyclist-video ]working link[/url]

Well in z1ppy

tinybits - Member
Id have a go if your link worked?

Go on then. Have a go..!

Oops, link working now - a bit more coverage:

[url= http://www.theguardian.com/environment/bike-blog/2013/aug/08/nottingham-police-cyclist-video ]http://www.theguardian.com/environment/bike-blog/2013/aug/08/nottingham-police-cyclist-video[/url]

Unbelievable. Would love to know how they came to that conclusion

Party his fault in that he was riding a bike on the road? That really is shocking IMO

Classic case of car trying to go inside a traffic island at the sametime as a cyclist.

How is it the cyclists fault? EVERYTIME I approach a traffic island I have to literally ensure a car doesn't try blatting ahead to then squeeze into the kerb by using road positioning/hand signal (i.e. indicate right) OR 'hold there' signal.

If he/a car did hit me there. Its one of those ([b]Rare[/b]) situations that if the motorist didn't immediately apologise I'd do abit of road rage myself.

Times like this I wish that the police were more open about the decision making processes that they go through.

The Police are moronic ****s would be my best guess

looked like he was riding pretty far out from the kerb, also rode straight out at junction onto main road.

also, why do people have video camera's on when riding on the road.
blame/claim culture perhaps?

They ride with cameras for evidence in case of such an incident - with the hope it'll show who's to actually blame. In this case it didn't seem to make any difference.

also, why do people have video camera's on when riding on the road.

Maybe on the assumption that without video evidence, more accidents would be blamed on the cyclist?

blame/claim culture then yeah?

looked like he was riding pretty far out from the kerb,

his positioning is up to him and given the road was fine

also rode straight out at junction onto main road.

was nothing to do with it

"looked like he was riding pretty far out from the kerb, also rode straight out at junction onto main road.

also, why do people have video camera's on when riding on the road.
"
no not blame/claim culture certainly not on the cyclists front BLAME yes ... . blame the car driver. - because people have no respect for others.

and if im honest - i am thinking of fitting front and rear cameras to my car for similar reasons - hell id put them on a motorbike too if i had one.

also at traffic islands like that which i encounter 5 or 6 of on my commute i ride very far out from the kerb ensuring a car cannot go through with me as there is no room (and there are signs on them saying "Do not overtake cyclists here")

also, from the video, you could not see where he was on the road, or where the car was also.
did he swerve to miss a pothole? who knows.

[quote=ton ]looked like he was riding pretty far out from the kerb, also rode straight out at junction onto main road.

Looked to me like he was too close to the kerb, encouraging overtaking. Also, he did actually look when riding onto the main road. It's a bit confusing as the cameras can't swivel its lens to mimic the human eye.

😯

also, from the video, you could not see where he was on the road, or where the car was also.
did he swerve to miss a pothole? who knows.

He was signalling to turn right, and moved out into the road to turn.

It looks to me like he was adopting primary position as he passed traffic islands - as someone who lost two front teeth due to being squeezed off the road by a bus at a traffic island I'd do exactly the same 🙂

Also; he clearly has a good view of the road as he approached the corner and there was nothing coming - it's a good 10 seconds from him taking the corner to being overtaken by the first car.

As it says in the article - how was he supposed to have any idea that the red car was part of the funeral procession ? And even given that it was; it in no way excuses the drivers behaviour...

the car was behind and didn't overtake properly, they are at fault, not him.

his road position is irrelevant.

what the actual * needs to happen before the *ing POLICE protect cyclists?

i commute by bike as i can't afford a car, i wish i could.

the BCF / CTC should be all over this like a ****ing pack of rats - where are they?

Times like this I wish that the police were more open about the decision making processes that they go through.

The police sergeant explained it pretty well I thought:

Also to be considered is that the vehicle that collided with you was the second vehicle following a hearse and limousine as part of a funeral cortege. Whilst you had the right of way in accordance with the Highway Code and Road Traffic Act a road user should be aware of traffic conditions around him/her. This would include any emergency vehicles at junctions that have an exemption in law regarding speed limits and traffic signs that whilst they still have to be prepared to stop at red lights for example, the drivers depend on the courtesy of other road users to allow precedence.

In the same manner, I would personally expect that if I were to see a hearse being driven with a coffin in the rear that there would be other vehicles following and I would allow the cortege to proceed by giving way even though I actually had the right of way. This is also something that the court would consider as mitigation were we to prosecute the driver in your case.

-- Source: http://www.theguardian.com/environment/bike-blog/2013/aug/08/nottingham-police-cyclist-video

no saying it was his fault, just that everything is not clear cut in such situations.

and by the way, i have been commuting by bike to work for 31 years.

Partly at fault for not giving that mouthy slag a slap!

and in fairness to the police - the driver got sent on an awareness course and the passenger got a caution - it's not like he got told 'it's your fault so we aren't going to do anything'

Odd conclusion by the Cops, yet again.
Wonder what would happen if I took Boris (or some other MP) out with my car. Apparently nothing?

also rode straight out at junction onto main road.

So basically it's partly his fault for not getting out of the way of the funeral procession.

That is ****ing mental.

The cyclist was 100% in the right, but it didn't stop him been knocked off.

The Police Sargent was quite correct in his assumptions, although I'd disagree with his statement that the cyclist should have waited.

In the end, "there is no point in been dead, right?"

It's up to the car to pass safely not for the cyclist to pull over, going to a funeral is not a valid excuse for trying to drum up more business for the cemetery. If the funeral procession wanted to stay together none of them should have gone past on that stretch of road.

and in fairness to the police - the driver got sent on an awareness course and the passenger got a caution

Frankly they should be in prison, they hit someone with over a ton of metal and then blamed the victim. In this case the police (and CPS?) are absolute ****ers for backing them up.

Scorf go and suck your grandmother's penis.

Remarkably polite folk on the Guardian website! 😀

The police sergeant explained it pretty well I thought:

2 problems with that statement:

you had the right of way in accordance with the Highway Code and Road Traffic Act

and

I would personally expect

So the law doesn't come into it, and it's based around what he would personally expect to happen... so the Police just make up the law to suit whatever they like?

Actually I was watching thinking if I was passed by a hearse I'd immediately pull over.

Not saying it wasn't the drivers fault, just that there will obviously be people following in cars who are upset and its just an act of common courtesy to let them pass.

he says in the video, he was indicating to turn right, and obviously moved across, I presume to turn at the junction after the island.

He is not at fault one bit, he's indicated, he looked behind and moved across. The car behind has to give way to him, end of.

also, how would he know a red hatchback is part of a funeral?

To be honest, I agree with the police sergeant. If it was me, I would have had a look back and pulled into let all of the funeral cars pass.

However, being an inconsiderate cock isn't a crime, where as knocking someone off their bike deliberately is. I would therefore prosecute the driver with dangerous driving.

[i]The police sergeant explained it pretty well I thought:[/i]

Yeah, he explained it BUT HE WAS WRONG.

Anyway, the writer of the blog sums it all up pretty well for me.

funeral cars to be fitted with blue lights and sirens then i expect ?

i always let funeral processions through junctions etc in the car but it is the overtaking vehicles responsibility to ensure its done safely in all situations.

To be honest, I agree with the police sergeant. If it was me, I would have had a look back and pulled into let all of the funeral cars pass.

as I said before, how do you know a red hatchback is a funeral car?

just a good job the fella was unhurt eh? 😀

''Also to be considered is that the vehicle that collided with you was the second vehicle following a hearse and limousine as part of a funeral cortege. Whilst you had the right of way in accordance with the Highway Code and Road Traffic Act a road user should be aware of traffic conditions around him/her. This would include any emergency vehicles at junctions that have an exemption in law regarding speed limits and traffic signs that whilst they still have to be prepared to stop at red lights for example, the drivers depend on the courtesy of other road users to allow precedence.

In the same manner, I would personally expect that if I were to see a hearse being driven with a coffin in the rear that there would be other vehicles following and I would allow the cortege to proceed by giving way even though I actually had the right of way. This is also something that the court would consider as mitigation were we to prosecute the driver in your case.''

what strikes me is that the police dont seem to take the level of risk into account more. the cyclist could have been badly hurt but the (delightful) driver and passenger in the car were at no risk of harm at all

as I said before, how do you know a red hatchback is a funeral car?

Well they were close to the procession so you would have waited for them to pass before rejoining traffic anyway

Eh - the fact that it was just behind a couple of limos and a herse and that the folk were wearing funeral clothes.

The driver was sent on an awareness course

The passenger was cautioned for the abuse

The police explained why they took the decisions they did.

I'm not really seeing a problem here. Non-story

You wouldn't know a red hatchback was part of the procession, but had he pulled in to let the hearses past (which definitely are part) then the next safest place to pull out looks like it would have been after the red hatchback, which was only 2 cars behind the hearses.

He was not in the wrong - the driver was, but like others on here as soon a hearse passed me on a road like that I would have pulled in.

I liked the article on a whole though, it seemed to be pretty well grounded. Refreshing from a lot of the subtle anti-cyclist rubbish that seemed to come out of the Emma Way/Daisy Abela/silver BMW rubbish.

The comments on the Daily Mails writeup of the Daisy one has me fuming at the mouth in seconds:

http://www.****/news/article-2384794/I-purposely-run-LOL-Police-probe-motorists-tweet-row-cyclist.html

It's a shame that you need a camera to even have a chance of fighting your case. He was hit from behind, near a traffic island, blatantly the driver behind at fault.

radtothepowerofsik, i concur.

You concur that deliberately knocking someone off a bike is merely an "awareness course" offence?

how do you know to pull over for a hearse, if it's behind you?

(or am i the only one without eyes in the back of my head?)

While it's not the right of people following a cortege to just overtake blindly, I've seen so much bad driving by idiots at the back of the funeral convoy trying to keep together in traffic that I'd be more wary than usual of stupid overtakes.

Cortege etiquette seems to be a rather variable thing in towns and cities these days. I'm not sure we all stop and doff our caps these days - although an older cyclist did do exactly that for my wife's sister's hearse last year, which was quite touching.

The driver was sent on an awareness course,
I'm not really seeing a problem here. Non-story

At the end of the day the driver ran over someone that they knew was there. Personally I don't think being sent on a course is an appropriate response.

I'm not really seeing a problem here. Non-story

So the cyclist was hurt, and in pain for a few months (according to him) after being deliberately hit by a car driver. Yet he is told he was partly to blame, and other other party walks away. Sounds like the UK justice system to me.

MSP....you seriously think that they delideratley drove into him to knock him off?

give you head a shake ffs 🙄

I almost got hit in exactly yhe same way a few weeks ago, indicated to turn right and was almost hit/overtaken through a ghost island by some idiot leaning on the horn...who lives over the road from me.

We've had words, he had no idea I was the cyclist, and the argument about right to the road/him paying road tax was defused me pointing out my car and motorbike.

He even apologised at the end of it!

We don't know how badly he was injured but he's on his feet straight away. I don;t think it was that bad - nothing like venice beach the other day.

Perhaps a driving ban would have been more appropriate, but like the policeman said there are mitigating circumstances.

ton - Member

MSP....you seriously think that they delideratley drove into him to knock him off?

yes, the driver had time to lean on the horn, they had time to slow down a tiny bit, they didn't.

Partly at fault for not giving that mouthy slag a slap!

i very much doubt that they drove straight into the driver just to knock him off.
i doubt it very very much.

If you drive to a funeral with no concern for the lives of others then just when the **** do you give a shit!

Hmmm, I live in Nottingham, and was verbally abused by an in idiot in a very similar red 306 on my way home yesterday. Wish I'd bothered to remember the number plate now...

[quote=ton ]i very much doubt that they drove straight into the driver just to knock him off.
i doubt it very very much.

Based on that vid my vote would be that they did indeed deliberately crash into the bike.

I see both sides. I'm not sure I'd see a hearse behind me but once one passed, I'd look and probably pull in to avoid holding the cortege up. But he wasn't obliged to, and it was still up to the driver to pass safely, and then when he didn't, to not be a cock about it.

I'm actually more disturbed by the police inferring that being in a cortege gives mitigation. Say the main part crossed a traffic light junction and the lights then change, the red car nips across to stay with the cortege and hits another car as a result. Because by the police's assertion, the car he hits is partly culpable by not spotting that a car that jumps the lights was going to do so? Really?

MSP....you seriously think that they delideratley drove into him to knock him off?

Maybe wasn't deliberate, but what else were they trying to do? They've seen him, they've tried to squeeze into a gap that isnt there and knocked him off. Pretty clear that their at fault and totally responsible for him getting knocked off.

Eh - the fact that it was just behind a couple of limos and a herse and that the folk were wearing funeral clothes.

Looked like a pretty decent gap to me. I wouldn't of presumed that they were part of the precession. On top of that, I'm impressed you can tell what clothes folk are wearing when they're driving behind you.

Identifying how many cars are in the cortege through a quick glance over the shoulder would be a bit difficult, especially if the cyclist is also expected to recognise "funeral clothes".

If he had pulled over and waited, how many cars should he allow to pass, a funeral cortege could be 20 cars long or 5 and it could already be interspersed with other traffic bu the time it reached him.

IMO the driver is completely at fault, a complete lack of understanding of how another road user behaves, and another great reason for me to ride ont he roads as little as possible - they are full of twunts.

i very much doubt that they drove straight into the driver just to knock him off.
i doubt it very very much.

[i]Looked like a pretty decent gap to me. I wouldn't of presumed that they were part of the precession. On top of that, I'm impressed you can tell what clothes folk are wearing when they're driving behind you.[/i]

Agreed.

Bye thread

So recently we have had:
Sun was in my eyes
I was looking at a lorry on the other side of the road (for more than 8 seconds)
I was part of a funeral precession

However you can jump into the water and stop a boat race and end up in more trouble...

The next thing we'll get is 'I am a hired hitman and hit him off his bike to kill him' - OK sir don't do it again, spend a morning with tea and coffee and a few powerpoint slides and you can be on your way.

This country is ****ed up.

Since when has a funeral cortege had any rights over and above other road users??

The driver drove dangerously to try and keep up with an informal convoy.

To be honest, funeral processions REALLY grind my gears as I live and work near a large crematorium, so traveling anywhere during the day becomes a nightmare.

I regularly overtake them, and until they have Police outriders and a change of law, I personally would not treat a hearse, or any other cars following, any differently from any other road user. Why the hell should I??

And for a Police officer to claim that this mitigates the driver in some way is utterly ridiculous!

I watch these films with a preconception that anyone who rides around filming their commute is probably an overly rightious asshat and riding like a cock, but in this circumstance I can't see he has done anything wrong(apart from knowing he was turning right and not riding further out and allowing the car to squeeze him in the firsrt place). What is the point of those islands - just seem to be another oportunity for disaster.

At the same time

I regularly overtake them, and until they have Police outriders and a change of law, I personally would not treat a hearse, or any other cars following, any differently from any other road user. Why the hell should I??

also marks you out as a bit of an arse. And I lived near a crem too so had more than my fair share of hearse related delays.

My main concern is that the cyclist [i]"has spent seven years as a cycle instructor and as a volunteer leader of public bike rides"[/i] but still allows cars to squeeze past him at pinch points.

[b]Take the primary[/b] - like what it says in the book!

(For the record I think he was deliberately hit but the police are probably correct in that a jury would show sympathy to the mourners so nothing would stick in court)

The Police are pretty usless in these situations, speaking from personal experiance.

theotherjonv - Member

I'm actually more disturbed by the police inferring that being in a cortege gives mitigation. Say the main part crossed a traffic light junction and the lights then change, the red car nips across to stay with the cortege and hits another car as a result. Because by the police's assertion, the car he hits is partly culpable by not spotting that a car that jumps the lights was going to do so? Really?

no, not really.

unless a cyclist was hit...

(For the record I think he was deliberately hit but the police are probably correct in that a jury would show sympathy to the mourners so nothing would stick in court)

If those pricks were so bereft that they can't drive safely, they shouldn't be on the road. There's no excuse for using a car as a weapon, drugs, drink, grief, non justify potentially killing a guy on a bike!!!

Since when have the police decided the outcome of the jury? I thought it was at least the CPS who decided whether to take a case to court?

Maybe there is a filtering system where the local police can decide in the case of a "minor" collision how to act?

Maybe there is a filtering system where the local police can decide in the case of a "minor" collision how to act?

of course there is, people get cautioned without further recourse to the courts all the time.

Have a read about the case on Road.cc where the "chav"(my interpretation of limited facts) got hit by a bus and is now facing assualt charges because a passenger got injured by the buses emergency stop.

It would be funny if it wasn't people being killed and seriously injured day in and day out!

Jesus wept.

The actual vehicles of the funeral procession had passed (even if they had special status). How are you supposed to know that a red hatchback a couple of cars back is part of that same procession and not just a car? And then what, once you've examined their clothing and deduced they are indeed going to the funeral - just fling yourself out of the way? The decision absolutely beggars belief. No reason not to wait and then over take after the traffic island.

It always strikes me as amazing that angry drivers who get so upset about being held up by cyclists are willing to get out of their vehicles and have a fight/shout abuse at the poor sod they've just knocked off. Way to go and save yourself more time you ****.