The cycling world (at least in England) seems to be seething with rage about the conviction of Daniel Cadden for "Inconsiderate Cycling". He was riding his bike at a fair lick on a road with double white lines down the centre, so motorists wishing to pass him would be breaking the law if they did so. Police stopped and arrested him, initially for not riding sufficiently over to the left, tho' this was changed to not using a nearby cycle path. The Judge ruled that because the cycle path was available and he chose not to use it, he was being inconsiderate to other road users.
The path was not a good one, being covered with dog mess and broken glass; who wants to be repairing a punctured and ****-covered tyre? Also the design of the path made steady progress impossible. The DOT's own advice is that cyclists wishing to ride faster than 18mph should use the road rather than cycle paths.
Daniel Cadden was clearly not breaking the law, but the Judge (the same one who decided not to convict a police officer who drove along public roads at 160 mph to "familiarise himself with his car") fined him £100 with £200 costs anyway. Daniel Cadden has had a lot of support and cyclists have raised a lot of money to help with his appeal, but it is possible that no appeal will take place because he found the Judge's hostility in court so unpleasant that he is deterred from going back.
Unless I have missed something, there has been no mention of this on Cyclingforums up til now. This surprises me, it is a very significant legal ruling against all cyclists in this country, as well as being a great injustice against Mr. Cadden.
The path was not a good one, being covered with dog mess and broken glass; who wants to be repairing a punctured and ****-covered tyre? Also the design of the path made steady progress impossible. The DOT's own advice is that cyclists wishing to ride faster than 18mph should use the road rather than cycle paths.
Daniel Cadden was clearly not breaking the law, but the Judge (the same one who decided not to convict a police officer who drove along public roads at 160 mph to "familiarise himself with his car") fined him £100 with £200 costs anyway. Daniel Cadden has had a lot of support and cyclists have raised a lot of money to help with his appeal, but it is possible that no appeal will take place because he found the Judge's hostility in court so unpleasant that he is deterred from going back.
Unless I have missed something, there has been no mention of this on Cyclingforums up til now. This surprises me, it is a very significant legal ruling against all cyclists in this country, as well as being a great injustice against Mr. Cadden.