 You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
Occasionally people post on here about near-miss incidents when cycling on the road, with questions about what might follow in terms of police and potential court appearances. I went through the whole shebang last year, and wrote my experiences up for a local cycling group's newsletter.
If you're interested, or going through a similar process, you can read the long version of what happened from my perspective here: https://fromthecraggyhills.wordpress.com/2018/01/21/rule-163/
I remember this being discussed last year on the forum!
Can you do an executive summary of your paper, as although I am sure it is riveting reading, I got board after the first paragraph.
For FunkyDunk...the driver had previous but was used as mitigation as he wasn’t violent in this case ( though deliberately driving a two ton metal object at someone I would disagree). The magistrate had no idea about the Highway Code and thus sentenced the man extremely leniently.
Well done OP, shame it takes so much effort to travel the right road and that there are so many selfish shitbags to have to share the world with.
Thanks Op, good write up and by all accounts a sensible outcome. I think in cases like this I'd sooner rely on a magistrates 'knowledge' of the law rather than a jury though.
Nice one OP for seeing it through.
Is there no way in these proceedings for you to speak to prosecution when they are using incorrect or misleading terms as you suggest they did?
Maybe it was unusual, but in my case (I was victim), during my cross examination the judge was quite happy for me to challenge the terms the defence barrister was using - but then I had a jury and my judge came across as a right stroppy one...she was brill!
I agree, the court system is quite adversarial, I had to go as a witness for a football related violence incident some time ago. Coming out of a game, a group of men started walking close behind and standing on the backs of our heels. I didn't turn round but a friend did and said something to them, then turned round again, at which point one of the men punched him from behind and they then ran off.
Like in the case above, the police were excellent, took the statements from us both and took the case seriously. Based on my mate's description (quite a distinctive scar on the accused's face) they said he was a known trouble maker and got him in for an ID parade. My mate duly picked him out; I was perfectly honest as i'd never turned round and said I couldn't.
This was where it got more interesting - on the back of it being my mate's evidence that it was the guy the police 'knew' it was, but my evidence that I could only describe the incident and not the assailant, he/they* then went for a defence that my mate had threatened him when he turned round, and so it was pre-emptive self-defence rather than assault.
* putting a couple of mates up as witnesses that that was what happened.
It went to trial and we got excellent support from the court support people including cars from the station in case they tried to intimidate (were quite a nasty bunch of thugs by all accounts). So it was the word of a mate and I against three of them, but where we were telling the truth and they obviously weren't, under examination their statements fell apart and he changed his plea to guilty. But was still as described in the case above quite unnerving having given evidence to have to go and sit in the court or waiting area with the mates of the guy who was in the dock, even with police regularly coming and going.
But we have to collectively man-up and stand up for ourselves because if we don't then idiots like these get away with it.
The defendant in our case got a short prison sentence on the basis mainly of prior convictions. Only disappointment was his mates had clearly lied; found to have lied, as a result effectively withdrew their evidence and he changed his plea, yet they get no repercussion.
Probably, but I was fairly naive as a witness and it would have required interrupting the magistrate while he read his sentence from where I was sitting in the public viewing area. Because the accused changed his plea to guilty there was no way for me, as a witness, to make any kind of statement of evidence or contest anything that was said by the prosecution or the defence.
Great write up OP, I'm speechless that he was given leniency for not being violent. Horrified he wasn't immediately sent back inside TBH.
Driving should be a privilege not a right, once people see it like this they may change their ways.
In a Magistrate's court, the only person with any legal training is the Clerk. The prosecutor will have made his case and the magistates decide on whether the offence is proven.
They rely heavily on the Clerk for the actual law.
Still surprises me that a charge of Dangerous Driving can be heard either at Magistrates or Crown Court.