The victim in that case, iirc, was both a lawyer and very persistent. The police were basically uninterested.

dunno if that’s the cyclingsilk but he has had a few uphill struggles to get **** driver behaviour taken seriously by the police/cps, if barristers struggle the rest of us are screwed.

If the letter had said “not enough evidence to secure a conviction on the rider of the moped but we’ve been around and told him in no uncertain terms his cards are marked” would atleast have been something. “I’ve jotted his reg down on a post-it and if anyone asks and we remember, it may be used if anything happens again….possibly” is shite

I would advise you that it is the policy of the Metropolitan Police Service to investigate cases that have a realistic prospect of achieving a successful prosecution at court.

The problem I have with this sentence is that as an investigating officer I don’t actually know what has a “realistic prospect of achieving a successful prosecution at court” until I’ve thoroughly investigated the incident/complaint.

Furthermore, it’s not actually the Police’s role to decide this, but the CPS’ once they’ve reviewed the evidence that I have gathered during my investigation.

I’d imagine it was The Cycling Silk. He has a reasonably well-informed rant about cycling here
http://thecyclingsilk.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/why-am-i-angry.html

Think of it like track racing

Indeed if everyone viewed the roads/commute/trudge to work like this it would all be so much safer for us all 😕

No idea how he got away with that

Might try this on a police cyclists and see what happens

I’m not sure there really is much actual video evidence caught of the attempted Kick

I presume the actual kick is at 16seconds which is only just in shot but there’s a second attempted kick straight after which is fully in shot.

Potholes can’t be as bad as cyclist claims as the moped would have hit them.

the moped with 4″(?) tyres and suspension?

Good one, miss interpreting what I wrote, I never said treat commuting like track racing only in terms of thinking about positioning, and minimising where things can come from.

In fact on further viewing there are no potholes on the inside of that road, you can see that on the vid. In fact I wish I had roads with that kind of quality of tarmac on my commute.

regardless of the potholes which the bloke who actually rides that road say are there and you (who presumably haven’t) say are not, sticking to the left would leave space for a silly* car driver to attempt to squeeze between the rider and the truck, which is not a good thing.

*a silly car driver would attempt it, a sensible car driver wouldn’t – I am not suggesting all car drivers are silly

Can I just check who on this thread is writing with professional experience? mildred is presumably a police officer – does cookeaa have any status in the legal system, or are you just spouting with no relevant experience?

Personally I’m still not quite sure how there is any lack of evidence of the rider aiming a kick.

The rider’s position is entirely irrelevant to the case.

The rider’s position is entirely irrelevant to the case.

unless the policeman/CPSer in question viewed it and said “cheeky ****er is in the middle of the road, screw him, he deserves it, helmet cam warriors really get on my tits!” in which case it is, sadly, quite relevant 😥

Can I just check who on this thread is writing with professional experience? mildred is presumably a police office

Yes, I am speaking from professional experience, but also as a daily cycle commuter. Contrary to popular belief the Police don’t hate cyclists because shockingly – many are also cyclists…!!!!!!

POV footage is great – do we doubt shop based CCTV when prosecuting shoplifters? No, course not. The thing is, video needs to be treated just like any other evidence. That is, it needs to be verifiable and integrity/continuity maintained. For example, in an incident where CCTV is available I will go and view it at source, and if it’s any use I will ’cause’ a copy or cd to be made. I will then ‘seize’ this evidence and book it into Police property, then have a number of viewable ‘working copies’ made (defence, prosecution etc…). This is all statemented and documented (even the booking in and out of the property store is documented) is used in the prosecution.

Quite often with POV you get a very selective edit presented in an indignant manner by someone who will settle for nothing less than a capital sentence; it’s also often been around the Internet, again undermining its utility. Common sense is needed; that and patience.

Don’t send it in the post – phone up report it as a crime. Get a Cop to visit you at home & offer a brew; show him or her the unedited footage and ask them their opinion. If you’re reasonable with them they’ll be reasonable with you.

Now I’m not suggesting that the cyclist in this footage hasn’t been anything other than honest – but some if the stuff I see and hear challenges belief. Use common sense.

does cookeaa have any status in the legal system, or are you just spouting with no relevant experience?

Personally I’m still not quite sure how there is any lack of evidence of the rider aiming a kick.

Unapologetically spouting of course (as that’s what we generally do on this forum IME).
I simply don’t think the footage is good enough quality and has the wrong angle to unequivocally say the moped rider was aiming a kick at the bike or its rider, I don’t doubt the cyclists testimony that said kick was attempted, yes you can partially see a leg off the moped, but the devil is in the detail…

I reckon the rozzers should have been clearer, and that it is a quality of available evidence/witnesses issue, basically if it ain’t quite in shot then unfortunately it didn’t happen…

However the footage/audio does show the moped undertaking a cyclist (In a Bus lane?) and then chooses to delay this dodgy method of making progress to have a shout at the cyclist, I think the Police could have successfully pursued him for that instead…

The rider’s position is entirely irrelevant to the case.

Totally agree.

That’s fair enough – I was wondering if your opinion was based on relevant experience and I should pay attention rather than just ignore you 😉

sound advice from Mildred there – thanks