Incident and police response



P

Pob

Guest
"burtthebike" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> Update:
>
> The police have just left! Two of them, they took a statement, gave me
> the option of having them pursue it to court, which I declined in favour
> of them having a stern word with him. They left, promising that this
> would happen, and even possibly tonight, unless they get dragged off to do
> something slightly more urgent. Apparently he's not a Royal Mail worker,
> so apologies to all posties everywhere. He lives north of Bristol so he
> was probably on his way home.
>

Good response. I think a stern word is probably going to be the most
effective policy, and won't engender a vindictive/persecuted feel in the
perp.

> I feel a letter to the cheif constable coming on.

I think that would be a wonderful idea - or to the superintendant (or
whatever the rank in charge of a station is) of the station that you were
working with

Glad that your nasty problem has had a positive result.

pOB
 
T

Tom Anderson

Guest
On Thu, 21 Feb 2008, burtthebike wrote:

> The police have just left! Two of them, they took a statement, gave me
> the option of having them pursue it to court, which I declined in favour
> of them having a stern word with him.


When you say "having a stern word with him", do you mean "giving him a
police caution"? If not, that may be unpleasant for him, but is pretty
much letting him of the hook. The latter, on the other hand, won't lead to
any actual punishment in this case, but will remain on his criminal
record, which means that if he does something like this again, he's going
to get in proper trouble, and that's something that might actually have an
effect on his behaviour.

> I feel a letter to the cheif constable coming on.


Saying what? I'm not sure i've picked up what your feelings about this
whole shenanigan are.

tom

--
Once, at a fair on the Heath, [Geoffrey Fletcher] overheard a man saying
that Hampstead wasn't thrilling enough. Fletcher reached over in the
darkness and stuck an ice lolly down the back of his shirt.
 
R

Rog

Guest
"burtthebike" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> On monday, riding home, daylight, dry, good visibility, I had an
> "incident" with one of those strange people who drive cars. Going down
> steep hill, tailwind, 40mph limit, doing well over 30 (Filton Hill on the
> A38 north of Bristol for those who know it). Lights change at the
> junction at the bottom of the hill, so I start to slow down and I'm
> coasting to a halt at the lights, about 10m away, when a horn is sounded
> behind me, I'm my usual metre out from the kerb. I ignore the horn as it
> can't be anything to do with me. Wrong! A car pulls alongside, the driver
> winds down the passenger window and tells me to "effing get on the effing
> cycle path". I point out that it is perfectly legal to ride on the road,
> the lights change and we both move off, except that he stops 100m farther
> on, flings open his door and stands in my way. Thinking that I'd rather
> point out the error of his ways here and now, rather than having him
> driving behind me, I stopped. The conversation was pretty much what he'd
> already said though, but with a lot more effing and blinding and a finger
> shoved within an inch of my face, and accusing me of blocking the
> traffic - it's dual carriageway and plenty of room for buses to pass no
> prob. I could see that there was no point in carrying on the
> conversation, so I turned around to walk off, and as I did so, he gave me
> a shove, which made me stumble, but I managed to stay upright using my
> bike as a support. I turned around and said that I would be reporting him
> for assault, whereupon he threatened to run me over if he saw me riding on
> the road again. I took down his number and waited until he drove off
> before carrying on myself. It was only when I got home that I realised
> that there is no cycle path at that point, it starts about 300m farther
> on, not that it would have justified his behaviour anyway.
>
> When I got home, I wondered about reporting this to the police, having
> read of many instances on this group where they just weren't interested,
> and there were no witnesses. Whatever, I went on line and reported it,
> including as much as I could remember about the guy, but I wasn't
> expecting anything to happen other than a polite acknowledgement. I was
> pleasantly surprised to receive the polite acknowledgement and a phone
> call from the police at work early next morning, telling me that they were
> taking it seriously and that they would come to my house to take a
> statement, which should be happening tonight.
>
> The driver appeared to be a post office worker, there is a big depot on
> the A38 very close to where this happened, so I reported it to them too,
> but no response as yet.
>
> I'll post updates when there is anything to report.
>
> I am very impressed with the fact that the police are taking some kind of
> action and have responded quickly, so are the police taking this kind of
> thing seriously at last, or is this just a one off?


Any particular reason you were not using the (expensive) cycle track?
Rog
 
M

Martin Dann

Guest
Rog wrote:
>
> Any particular reason you were not using the (expensive) cycle track?
> Rog


Probably because like most "cycle tracks", it is not designed for
cyclists to use. It is merely a footpath with a bit of white paint
splashed on it.

Is there any particular reason the motorist was using the A38, not the
(expensive) motorways nearby?
 
P

Pete Biggs

Guest
Rog wrote:
>
> Any particular reason you were not using the (expensive) cycle track?


Any particular reason you are asking the question?

~PB
 
T

Tim Dunne

Guest
Rog <[email protected]> wrote:

> Any particular reason you were not using the (expensive) cycle track?
> Rog


Try reading the post again before trolling.

Tim


--
Sent from Birmingham, UK... all about me at www.nervouscyclist.org
'Now some people say that you shouldn't tempt fate, and for them I
cannot disagree - but I never learned nothing by playing it safe - I
say fate should not tempt me.' - Mary Chapin Carpenter
 
B

boulder

Guest
"burtthebike" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> On monday, riding home, daylight, dry, good visibility, I had an
> "incident" with one of those strange people who drive cars. Going down
> steep hill, tailwind, 40mph limit, doing well over 30 (Filton Hill on the
> A38 north of Bristol for those who know it). Lights change at the
> junction at the bottom of the hill, so I start to slow down and I'm
> coasting to a halt at the lights, about 10m away, when a horn is sounded
> behind me, I'm my usual metre out from the kerb. I ignore the horn as it
> can't be anything to do with me. Wrong! A car pulls alongside, the driver
> winds down the passenger window and tells me to "effing get on the effing
> cycle path".


I share his views.
Although the majority of car drivers would not have done that, you came
across an idiot.
I just don't get why you are all so militant and persecuted. I ride a bike
and drive a car, and
you need to compromise whilst doing both.
 
T

Tim Hall

Guest
On Fri, 22 Feb 2008 07:31:48 -0000, "boulder"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>
>"burtthebike" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]
>> On monday, riding home, daylight, dry, good visibility, I had an
>> "incident" with one of those strange people who drive cars. Going down
>> steep hill, tailwind, 40mph limit, doing well over 30 (Filton Hill on the
>> A38 north of Bristol for those who know it). Lights change at the
>> junction at the bottom of the hill, so I start to slow down and I'm
>> coasting to a halt at the lights, about 10m away, when a horn is sounded
>> behind me, I'm my usual metre out from the kerb. I ignore the horn as it
>> can't be anything to do with me. Wrong! A car pulls alongside, the driver
>> winds down the passenger window and tells me to "effing get on the effing
>> cycle path".

>
>I share his views.




The OP points out that there wasn't a cycle path to get onto.

"It was only when I got home that I
realised that there is no cycle path at that point, it starts about
300m farther on, not that it would have justified his behaviour
anyway."

>Although the majority of car drivers would not have done that, you came
>across an idiot.


Rubbish. He remained calm.

>I just don't get why you are all so militant and persecuted.


He got assaulted.

--

Tim

I understand very little of what's being discussed
but for some reason it's fascinating.

(Jon Thompson, urs)
 
B

burtthebike

Guest
"Tom Anderson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:p[email protected]
> On Thu, 21 Feb 2008, burtthebike wrote:
>
>> The police have just left! Two of them, they took a statement, gave me
>> the option of having them pursue it to court, which I declined in favour
>> of them having a stern word with him.

>
> When you say "having a stern word with him", do you mean "giving him a
> police caution"? If not, that may be unpleasant for him, but is pretty
> much letting him of the hook. The latter, on the other hand, won't lead to
> any actual punishment in this case, but will remain on his criminal
> record, which means that if he does something like this again, he's going
> to get in proper trouble, and that's something that might actually have an
> effect on his behaviour.


Let's be realistic here: no witnesses, no actual harm caused, very little
prospect of a conviction if it came to court. Given the lack of evidence,
the proposed action is probably the best that can be hoped for under the
circs, and certainly better than the police simply ignoring it, which seems
to have happened many times before, so let's give credit where it's due.
>
>> I feel a letter to the cheif constable coming on.

>
> Saying what? I'm not sure i've picked up what your feelings about this
> whole shenanigan are.


As stated above, no actual harm, the police are taking justified, reasonable
action, they were prompt and efficient, and above all, they didn't just
ignore it for lack of evidence.
 
A

Alan Braggins

Guest
In article <[email protected]>, Rog wrote:
>"burtthebike" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> that there is no cycle path at that point, it starts about 300m farther

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>Any particular reason you were not using the (expensive) cycle track?


Any particular reason you ask stupid questions without reading properly?
 
B

burtthebike

Guest
"Rog" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]
>
>
>
>
> Any particular reason you were not using the (expensive) cycle track?


Yes, there isn't one at that point. Comprehension not your forte is it?
But then, never was with trolls.

The cycle track that exists about 300m farther down could not be described
as "expensive" by any stretch of the imagination - cheap, nasty and
dangerous, yes. Even SGlos council which had it installed agree that it is
substandard but they won't do anything about it.

Back under your bridge, Rog.




> Rog
>
 
S

Simon Brooke

Guest
boulder wrote:

>
> "burtthebike" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]
>> On monday, riding home, daylight, dry, good visibility, I had an
>> "incident" with one of those strange people who drive cars. Going down
>> steep hill, tailwind, 40mph limit, doing well over 30 (Filton Hill on the
>> A38 north of Bristol for those who know it). Lights change at the
>> junction at the bottom of the hill, so I start to slow down and I'm
>> coasting to a halt at the lights, about 10m away, when a horn is sounded
>> behind me, I'm my usual metre out from the kerb. I ignore the horn as it
>> can't be anything to do with me. Wrong! A car pulls alongside, the
>> driver winds down the passenger window and tells me to "effing get on the
>> effing cycle path".

>
> I share his views.
> Although the majority of car drivers would not have done that, you came
> across an idiot.


I'm sorry, I don't see that at all. Burt was minding his own business on the
public road, and was first sworn at, then assaulted. What part of that
was 'being an idiot'?

--
[email protected] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/
;; Sending your money to someone just because they've erected
;; a barrier of obscurity and secrets around the tools you
;; need to use your data does not help the economy or spur
;; innovation. - Waffle Iron Slashdot, June 16th, 2002
 
S

Simon Brooke

Guest
Tim Hall wrote:

> On Fri, 22 Feb 2008 07:31:48 -0000, "boulder"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>"burtthebike" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>news:[email protected]
>>> can't be anything to do with me. Wrong! A car pulls alongside, the
>>> driver winds down the passenger window and tells me to "effing get on
>>> the effing cycle path".

>>
>>I share his views.

>
> The OP points out that there wasn't a cycle path to get onto.
>
> "It was only when I got home that I
> realised that there is no cycle path at that point, it starts about
> 300m farther on, not that it would have justified his behaviour
> anyway."


Even if there had been, what difference does that make? A cyclists has
a /right/ to use the road - unlike a car driver, who doesn't.

If 'boulder' really shares the views of the driver in this incident, he
should walk down to his nearest police station and surrender his driving
license, seeing he clearly isn't responsible enough to hold one.

--
[email protected] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/
;; Let's have a moment of silence for all those Americans who are stuck
;; in traffic on their way to the gym to ride the stationary bicycle.
;; Rep. Earl Blumenauer (Dem, OR)
 
S

Simon Brooke

Guest
Clive George wrote:

>> He has received a Caution, having admitted his wrongdoing to the Police.
>> In my experience, both times that I have reported people, the Police
>> have followed up.

>
> Is it worth getting these sorts of stories in the local paper? - the ones
> where the plod follow up and do something, that is. If people know it's
> wrong to do that having read such stories, are they less likely to do it?


Probably, yes. They already know it's wrong to do it before they do it, but
they are confident that they will get away with it. A regular reminder that
they may not could cut this sort of behaviour drastically.

--
[email protected] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/
Das Internet is nicht fuer gefingerclicken und giffengrabben... Ist
nicht fuer gewerken bei das dumpkopfen. Das mausklicken sichtseeren
keepen das bandwit-spewin hans in das pockets muss; relaxen und
watchen das cursorblinken. -- quoted from the jargon file
 
D

Dave Larrington

Guest
In news:[email protected],
boulder <[email protected]> tweaked the Babbage-Engine to tell us:
> "burtthebike" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]
>> On monday, riding home, daylight, dry, good visibility, I had an
>> "incident" with one of those strange people who drive cars. Going
>> down steep hill, tailwind, 40mph limit, doing well over 30 (Filton
>> Hill on the A38 north of Bristol for those who know it). Lights
>> change at the junction at the bottom of the hill, so I start to slow
>> down and I'm coasting to a halt at the lights, about 10m away, when
>> a horn is sounded behind me, I'm my usual metre out from the kerb. I
>> ignore the horn as it can't be anything to do with me. Wrong! A
>> car pulls alongside, the driver winds down the passenger window and
>> tells me to "effing get on the effing cycle path".

>
> I share his views.
> Although the majority of car drivers would not have done that, you
> came across an idiot.
> I just don't get why you are all so militant and persecuted. I ride
> a bike and drive a car, and
> you need to compromise whilst doing both.


Read the OP again. And this time do it properly.

--
Dave Larrington
<http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk>
und keine Eie.
 
D

David Hansen

Guest
On Fri, 22 Feb 2008 07:31:48 -0000 someone who may be "boulder"
<[email protected]> wrote this:-

>> A car pulls alongside, the driver
>> winds down the passenger window and tells me to "effing get on the effing
>> cycle path".

>
>I share his views.


Really.

>Although the majority of car drivers would not have done that, you came
>across an idiot.


Given that there was no cycle path at this point you might like to
look in the mirror when making claims about who comes across as an
idiot.



--
David Hansen, Edinburgh
I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54
 
M

Mark McNeill

Guest
Response to David Hansen
> >Although the majority of car drivers would not have done that, you came
> >across an idiot.

>
> Given that there was no cycle path at this point you might like to
> look in the mirror when making claims about who comes across as an
> idiot.



Is *nobody* reading this thread properly? Boulder's a twit, sure; but
it's pretty clear to me that he means "you met an idiot", rather than
"you came across AS an idiot".


What Boulder means by "I share his views", I neither know nor care; I
made my mind up about him a while ago, and have seen nothing since to
make me change it.


--
Mark, UK
"Oceania was at war with Eurasia: Oceania had always been at war with
Eurasia."
 
N

Nigel Cliffe

Guest
burtthebike wrote:
> "Tom Anderson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:p[email protected]
>> On Thu, 21 Feb 2008, burtthebike wrote:
>>
>>> The police have just left! Two of them, they took a statement,
>>> gave me the option of having them pursue it to court, which I
>>> declined in favour of them having a stern word with him.

>>
>> When you say "having a stern word with him", do you mean "giving him
>> a police caution"? If not, that may be unpleasant for him, but is
>> pretty much letting him of the hook. The latter, on the other hand,
>> won't lead to any actual punishment in this case, but will remain on
>> his criminal record, which means that if he does something like this
>> again, he's going to get in proper trouble, and that's something
>> that might actually have an effect on his behaviour.

>
> Let's be realistic here: no witnesses, no actual harm caused, very
> little prospect of a conviction if it came to court. Given the lack
> of evidence, the proposed action is probably the best that can be
> hoped for under the circs, and certainly better than the police
> simply ignoring it, which seems to have happened many times before,
> so let's give credit where it's due.


I think you are being reasonable. Had the police tried to build a case,
chances are that the lack of witnesses would result in CPS refusing to take
the case to court. Or when you get there, the defence barrister making out
that all cyclists are looneys trying to get themselves killed when not using
the cycle lane* and reported as such in the local paper.

However, AFAIK, a Police Caution does not require the officers to convince
the CPS of the merits of the case. And it stays on the books, so if the
muppet comes up again on another charge the Caution appears when another
officer looks into things.




* yes, well aware that there wasn't a cycle lane adjacent to the incident,
but it won't stop a defence barrister finding one somewhere in the town that
you could conceivably had used as an alternative, however much further your
journey may have been.




- Nigel




--
Nigel Cliffe,
Webmaster at http://www.2mm.org.uk/
 
P

Paul Boyd

Guest
Rog said the following on 21/02/2008 23:50:

> Any particular reason you were not using the (expensive) cycle track?


From the OP, I got the impression that there wasn't one. "I realised
that there is no cycle path at that point, it starts about 300m farther
on" is the clue.

--
Paul Boyd
http://www.paul-boyd.co.uk/
 
P

Paul Boyd

Guest
boulder said the following on 22/02/2008 07:31:

> I share his views.
> Although the majority of car drivers would not have done that, you came
> across an idiot.
> I just don't get why you are all so militant and persecuted. I ride a bike
> and drive a car, and
> you need to compromise whilst doing both.


I often find burtthebike's posts to be, um, rather odd, shall we say,
where he does come across as being very militant and anti-car. In this
case though, I cannot in any way see see how he comes across as an
idiot. He was riding his bike in the correct way in a manner that
frankly would not delay any motorists by more than a fraction of a
second, and probably not even that. There was nothing he needed to
compromise on in this situation, so where was the motorist's compromise?
It sounds to me that the driver thought he could jump the red lights
as is usual in Bristol, but 'burt' slowing down to stop may have robbed
him of that opportunity.

--
Paul Boyd
http://www.paul-boyd.co.uk/