[Closed] cyclists vs the police

Playing devils advocate here but two wrongs don't make a right.

What if by positioning him/herself in front of the cycle box he was obstructing a pedestrian crossing or sticking out into the junction causing an obstruction to traffic or forcing pedestrians to have to go round them into the way of traffic.

Technically they have gone past the line that bounds the junction so have gone through a red light. Why not wait behind or to the side?

Harsh I know but with no photos of the junction to judge what effect the cyclist being too far forward had on other factors I have to side with the rules. How much is just? Some peoples definition of just differ greatly depending on what they have to gain/lose.

But I would like to know if the motorist was also stopped and fined.

Did the police also fine the driver? If they did both that would be all fair and dandy.

There seems to be a growing clamour to enforce rules on cyclists at a level that are routinely overlooked for motorists.

I do this all the time, whether there's a cycle box or not, the intention being that the driver knows I'm there and can see me.
I'd rather risk a fine than being squished.

This sounds like a tick box initiative by the police where one cop is at the lights and radios another up the road to say "fine the nodder with the pink helmet for breach of pithy law"

I would have expected the car driver to be fined and the cyclist to have positioned themselves behind the car.

doesn't surprise me in the least, and having read yesterdays story about one driver with 42 points and another with 36 and still driving, the continuous cases of cyclists being killed and drivers getting away with it. cf the couple in the audi whose killer was sentanced last week? with the penalties handed out for killing cyclists!

Cyclists are scum, vermin, etc. won't be long before the government introduce a bounty on every scalp presented to the courts. Read the comments from Pickles about how every town and every street should be opened up to cars, that nothing should be done to make towns a place to live, just a place to drive round.

I do it all the time, in fact I completely ignore the stop lines if they're 20+ meters back from the junction and just wait at the junction.

[quote=andyl ]
What if by positioning him/herself in front of the cycle box he was obstructing a pedestrian crossing or sticking out into the junction causing an obstruction to traffic or forcing pedestrians to have to go round them into the way of traffic.
+1

I'd like a few more details before I pass judgement.

I've stopped beyond the Stop line (whether or not there's a ASL) when I think it is safer to do so. However, I am also careful not to obstruct other road users.

If you're true cyclist, you wouldn't bother stopping in the green box, infact you wouldnt bother stopping at all. You'd just carry straight on through the red light. People need to MTFU when it comes to stuff like this.

Why didn't the cyclist just cycle off? It's not difficult to lose the Feds!

I can't see what the cyclist is appealing against. He stopped past the ASL therefore he committed the offence in question.

As someone's already said, two wrongs don't make a right.

A car stopped in an advanced cycle box isn't an offense in itself. If they past the vehicle stop line on amber, the cyclist stop line becomes the stop line they should obey.

I can't see what the cyclist is appealing against. He stopped past the ASL therefore he committed the offence in question.

+1.

He could have stopped behind the car. But then if the police were having a clampdown then why wasn't the driver also stopped and fined?

Cyclist sounds like an absolute rocket.

If one was (legitimately) filtering, one may not know until it was too late that the bike box was not free, which would be harsh to get a ticket for.

Also, a car can legitimately be parked in a bike box if the solid line was straddled while on green so a blanket fine on the car might not be appropriate either.

Peyote - Member
Why didn't the cyclist just cycle off? It's not difficult to lose the Feds!

That's always been a bug in my brain. Not been chased, but I really would be surprised if they [bike or car] can keep up with a fit MTBer hurtling down stairs, dropping off obstructions etc etc etc.

Anyone ever managed it?

Also, a car can legitimately be parked in a bike box

It [i]can[/i] be, but the linked article said it was there illegally so presumably it entered the box on amber or red.

So half a story, no idea if the driver was stopped so hard to tell.

In the end kids
Don't do the crime, if you can't do the time.

Unless I'm missing something a car stopped in the cycle box, and the cyclist then chose to cycle past the car and stop in front of it to prove a point. The police are never going to take kindly to this just as they won't take kindly to tailgating some middle lane hogger on the motorway to prove a point.

Ultimately though I guess the problem is none of us were present, so it's very difficult to come to some reasonable conclusion as to the rights or wrong of the case. The bloke might have a perfectly legitimate case, or he might be an antagonistic idiot, but I've no way of knowing really from that link

Also, a car can legitimately be parked in a bike box
It can be, but the linked article said it was there illegally so presumably it entered the box on amber or red.

So if the car was in the box illegally as it entered the box on an amber or red, surely the bike must also have passed the stop line on an amber or red so they were committing an offence.

Does anyone actually know for certain that the car driver wasn't fined for stopping In the box?

The car can cross the line on amber too if for instance it wasn't possible to stop.

What the car did is irrelevant. It could have been there legally. What the cyclist did was against the Highway Code, end of. Why are they even fighting this?

Actually, what the bike did was not against the Highway Code. They stopped in a safe place. Which in the incident was in front of the ASL

[quote=fourbanger ]What the car did is irrelevant. It could have been there legally. What the cyclist did was against the Highway Code, end of. Why are they even fighting this?

cause weeer oppressed by the piiigs maaan or some drivel like that.

Road users should be treated equally. Infringements should be punished.

You can't call for drivers to be hung and buggered while objecting to someone breaking traffic laws and then shock [insert expletive] horror getting done for it.

[quote=ibnchris ]Actually, what the bike did was not against the Highway Code. They stopped in a safe place. Which in the incident was in front of the ASL

You should step forward as the witness who obeserved it then 🙂

Does anyone actually know for certain that the car driver wasn't fined for stopping In the box?

He doesn't know.
[url] https://twitter.com/alepax85 [/url]

The car can cross the line on amber too if for instance it wasn't possible to stop.

Theoretically yes, but given the size of most ASLs it'd be interesting judgement to say "I couldn't stop at that line safely, but I [i]could[/i] stop safely at the line just 2 metres in front of it. " 🙂

mikewsmith, a car stopping in a cycle box isn't nescessarily an offense. This money would be better spent in other ways. Disappointed.

ooh, the contrary marys have arrived

Actually, what the bike did was not against the Highway Code.

You mean apart from the bit that says "You MUST stop behind the white ‘Stop’ line across your side of the road unless the light is green."

Surely the cyclist should have done a shoulder check for the police before breaking the law?. I'd never RLJ without a quick look to make sure there isn't a cop within sight.

If the cyclist broke the law in full sight of the police either because he didn't see them or because he didn't car they were there he hasn't got a leg to stand on.

Just like everyone drives at 70mph on the motorway when there is a traffic car about.

Theoretically yes, but given the size of most ASLs it'd be interesting judgement to say "I couldn't stop at that line safely, but I could stop safely at the line just 2 metres in front of it. "

It is very unlikely but that doesn't meet the beyond reasonable doubt threshold for a criminal charge.

[quote=fourbanger ]mikewsmith, a car stopping in a cycle box isn't nescessarily an offense. This money would be better spent in other ways. Disappointed.

My other point is that nobody actually knows really we have a He Said She Said scenario going on with a case that sounds weaker than stuff that got women burnt as witches.

I think there is a wider issue here about police attitude towards cyclists. But clearly this is not something many of you have witnessed. Which is good to hear

It is very unlikely but that doesn't meet the beyond reasonable doubt threshold for a criminal charge.

Indeed. But luckily in this case there appears to have been a police witness.

The CDF say

n August, Alex Paxton was issued with a fixed penalty notice (FPN) for failing to stop behind the Advanced Stop Line (ASL) at a set of traffic lights. He did not stop behind the line (i.e. in the cycle box) because a car was illegally positioned in the box. For his own safety he positioned himself ahead of the car, past the white line. A police officer witnessed this incident and radioed a colleague, who stopped Alex further down the road and gave him the FPN. This officer had not seen the alleged offence, so could not assess the greater risk Alex would have been in had he positioned himself behind the white line, and therefore did not accept Alex's justification of his actions.

The Highway Code encourages cyclists to 'use cycle routes, advanced stop lines, cycle boxes and toucan crossings unless at the time is it unsafe to do so'. Alex's adoption of a safer position is therefore entirely justified.

IMO the correct legal place to stop would have been behind the first car in line. In real life I might well do exactly what this cyclist did (after checking for the police) but if I was caught then that was the chance I took.

ibnchris - Member - Quote
I think there is a wider issue here about police attitude towards cyclists. But clearly this is not something many of you have witnessed. Which is good to hear

He did not stop behind the line (i.e. in the cycle box) because a car was illegally positioned in the box.

He did not stop behind the line (i.e. in the cycle box) because a car was illegally positioned in the box.

So, he should have stopped [i][b][u]legally[/u][/i][/b] behind the car.

My other point is that nobody actually knows really we have a He Said She Said scenario

If driver illegally entered the ASL (after red/amber) and both were fined then no worries, if the driver was let off but cyclist wasn't then yeah kick up a fuss.

I'm aware this is like a kid stamping his feet and shouting "not fair!" but you can also view it as one rule for cars another for bikes - which already seems to be the case 🙁

EDIT

So, he should have stopped legally behind the car.

*possibly

what are you supposed to do if you filter up the side of a traffic queue only to find the ASL blocked?

what are you supposed to do if you filter up the side of a traffic queue only to find the ASL blocked?

Wait. Then move off with the other traffic.

So, he should have stopped legally behind the car.

Which given that the car driver lacked the awareness to stop in the correct position would also seem the safer place to be.

Without wanting to pass comment on the rightness or wrongness of the fine, I'm curious as to the legality/fairness of being ticketed by a Policeman who did not observe (and could not have observed) the offence in the first place... how does that work?

Obviously it's perfectly possible for a Policeman to see a crime, radio ahead and another policeman to stop them, otherwise you'd have all sorts of madness going on, but isn't there some inherent she said/he said thing here?

If the guy on the bike had simply said "no I didn't" what would have happened?

Genuine question by the way, I'm not up to speed on the rules about Fixed Penalties and stuff like that.

I have to say I do this all the time. If someone's in a bike box, I usually stop in front of them and then move off slowly. I'm sure it doesn't help, but it does make me feel better.

Whats the point in an asl then?
If the car can stop in it, and we have to stay in the gutter, or get fined, its **** all use.
This smacks of a typical copper "i'm right your wrong" mentallity.

I'm curious as to the legality/fairness of being ticketed by a Policeman who did not observe (and could not have observed) the offence in the first place... how does that work?

The police did observe the offence. They saw the cyclist stop beyond the line. That was the offence that is being referred to here.

The car driver [i]may[/i] have committed an offence, it's true. In fact, they probably did, but the policeman may not have seen this.

Obviously it's perfectly possible for a Policeman to see a crime, radio ahead and another policeman to stop them, otherwise you'd have all sorts of madness going on, but isn't there some inherent she said/he said thing here?

The a huge number, maybe the majority, of non traffic cases reported by the police involve them charging someone for committing a crime not observed by the cop doing the charging. This is no different. Information from reliable witness(s) is enough. The cop doresn't need to have seen it happen.

Wait. Then move off with the other traffic.

Wait where? inside the ASL alongside the car? - possibly - but if you are turning right you have to get out into a stream of moving traffic.

If you have filterd up the right you are almost stranded in the middle of the road

Not trying to be controversial or anything but I think ASL cause more problems than they solve.

If someone's in a bike box, I usually stop in front of them

Which given that the car driver lacked the awareness to stop in the correct position would also seem the safer place to be.

This is an excellent point - although while filtering generally you can't stop behind anybody as it's nose to tail motor vehicles - you have to stop alongside.

[quote=D0NK ] In the car I'll stop far enough back to give the car room to reverse out of the ASL, no one ever has yet.
I do that too. It does sort of make them look a bit "stranded" 😆

Why didn't the cyclist just cycle off? It's not difficult to lose the Feds!

With the 5000mile head start you should be able to out run the 'Feds', especialy as they'd need to sort the extradition paperwork as well, the police might be harder though.

That's always been a bug in my brain. Not been chased, but I really would be surprised if they [bike or car] can keep up with a fit MTBer hurtling down stairs, dropping off obstructions etc etc etc.

a) you are not as gnarr as you think you are
b) what's to say the copper isn't fit, assuming it's a self selecting sample (those that want to ride a bike all day) of an already fitter than average section of the demographic.
c) even the least technicaly competent person in the world could probably ride down some steps.

Unless you are Martyn Ashton doing that gap jump/hop between multi storey buildings in Spain.

Peyote - Member
Why didn't the cyclist just cycle off? It's not difficult to lose the Feds!
That's always been a bug in my brain. Not been chased, but I really would be surprised if they [bike or car] can keep up with a fit MTBer hurtling down stairs, dropping off obstructions etc etc etc.

Anyone ever managed it?

errr.... well maybe. You have to know your way around pretty good tho' The rossers can easily come out in force. A handy change of coat/jacket helps too. Or, just turn your coat inside out/take helmet off etc:

Wouldn't do it now mind, as i'm respectable init.

Advance stop zones and the feeder lanes on the left of queing cars/trucks etc are the work of madmen and should be ignored.

I have seen this in London, cyclist just in front on ASL gets a fine, lorry taking up the ASL does not.

A busy junction where someone in the past has been killed by a lorry turning left, so the ASL is completely justified here.

Policeman was not at all interested in explaining why the lorry driver was not at fault even though he had a pack of cyclists questioning him.

And he would have seen the lorry drive into the ASL as he was waiting at the junction to catch any cyclists who did edge in front of the ASL box.

The a huge number, maybe the majority, of non traffic cases reported by the police involve them charging someone for committing a crime not observed by the cop doing the charging. This is no different. Information from reliable witness(s) is enough. The cop doresn't need to have seen it happen.

yeah, I get that, that the first Policeman counts as reliable witness, but I meant in terms of positive identification, obviously with cars it's easier, they have number plates but if the cyclist had simply said "no i didn't stop in front of the line and I don't accept the FPN" what is the next step at that point?

Can they then be compelled to identify themselves for future action? arrested on the spot? (what for?)

Not being awkward as I think if he did commit the offence he should get the fine? (but obviously we don't know all the circumstances)

just curious more than anything...

I have seen this in London, cyclist just in front on ASL gets a fine, lorry taking up the ASL does not.

A busy junction where someone in the past has been killed by a lorry turning left, so the ASL is completely justified here.

This is where it's even more peverse.

"A cyclist was killed here by a left turning lorry so we're here enforcing the law. Now stop rolling over the line and wait on the left of that left turning lorry or we'll give you a fine. It's for your own good y'know"

If the cyclist chooses to contest the facts/evidence he can simply fill in the section on the rear that elects to take it to trial. If he fails to give sufficient details for the service of a summons (ie fails to identify himself) then under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act he can be arrested in order to ascertain his identity.

thanks scapegoat, that's what I was after, didn't realise there was an option on the back like that.

I never go through a red light but sometimes just go onto the path and around, do people get fined for doing that ?

If "the path" is a pedestrian-only footway (i.e. not shared use) then yes they do.

I wouldn't go up the inside of another cyclist turning left. I wouldn't go up the inside of a car turning left. I sure as hell wouldn't go up the inside of a truck turning left. I'd either do what I could to SAFELY and LEGALLY get in front of them and then turn left in front of them, or I'd just wait.

Why is it so hard for some people to do that?

I wouldn't go up the inside of a car turning left.

The funny thing about ASLs is that, legally speaking, you can only enter them through the feeder lane, otherwise you are crossing a solid white line.

And of course 99 times out of 100 the feeder lane is on the left in the danger zone.

Why is it so hard for some people to do that?

*One course of action would be to back up behind the lorry but that would be tricky and take more time than half a pedal stroke to get you ahead of the lorry (and far enough ahead to take a good look at the driver and call him a few choice names)

And of course 99 times out of 100 the feeder lane is on the left in the danger zone.

@thisisnotaspoon

From what I've seen most bikepolis don't now how to change gear quick, let alone ride down a set of steps at speed while setting up for the turn at the bottom.

In addition they ride shite bikes. "Smith and Wesson Tactical Police Mountain Bike", anyone?

[img] [/img]

I'm not saying "I know I can outrun a bike policeperson", but I seriously think many people can. Though, as you say they would need to know where they were going, and as lardman pointed out, a change of clothes would be needed if one was to leave the area undetected.

This is all idle speculation, mind. As I mentioned the other day I've never been detained or arrested etc and in fact would love to work for the police.

Part of this was influenced by watching a police helicopter and several cars entirely fail to apprehend a teenager the other day on foot, in Kettering.

I never go through a red light but sometimes just go onto the path and around, do people get fined for doing that ?

I've both seen and told off a police cyclist doing just that. Turns out it's quite satisfying to shout "That's a £30 fixed penalty for what you just did, I hope you give yourself a stern talking to"

He didn't look pleased.

Anyone know which police force this was? CoL?