# Motorist Reports Self to Police



## spen666 (10 Sep 2014)

A bizarre incident on my commute. I had cause to speak to a motorist regarding his driving. Initially he was polite and chatty, until lights changed when he threatened me if I did not shut his door. He drove off. Incident over?

Next lights a 100 yards away I end up ahead of him as a result of advanced stop line. He drives behind me, sounding his horn and close passes me. When he passes he demands I pull over as he wanted a chat. I suggested we stop at police station nearby. He drove off.

I forgot about incident and carried on my way to work.

2 miles or so up the road I see on a slip road a police car with lights on and a vehicle stopped. Police are speaking to the driver. It is same driver from the incident before.

I decide if police have stopped him for something else, they should be made aware of the earlier incident. I speak to one of the police officers and as I do so, the man says to police "thats him".

At which point police arrest him. They take a statement from me and then tell me they had not stopped him, but he had approached them and confessed to a public order offence involving a cyclist! 

He was later interviewed for allegations of dangerous driving (overtake and threats), careless driving, initial incident and the public order offence!

Bizarrely if he had not stopped, the incident would never have come to police attention and I would not have approached the police car!

Karma?


----------



## 400bhp (10 Sep 2014)

Huh

Did you dream this. Unbelievable


----------



## Profpointy (10 Sep 2014)

maybe he "incriminated himself" complaining about you?


----------



## slowmotion (10 Sep 2014)

Maybe he just felt a sense of remorse? If so, chapeau to him.


----------



## mustang1 (10 Sep 2014)

Well that's aphen weird.


----------



## confusedcyclist (10 Sep 2014)

Hah!


----------



## raleighnut (11 Sep 2014)




----------



## Shut Up Legs (11 Sep 2014)

I just reread this thread, to be absolutely sure I didn't dream it, and the words are the same!


----------



## raleighnut (11 Sep 2014)

I get the feeling he had stopped to talk to the police about the 'hooligan' behaviour of a cyclist in hope of getting you arrested but it backfired on him, serves him right.


----------



## Keith Oates (11 Sep 2014)

It seems that he was worried you might report him to the police so he thought he'd better get in his version of it as quickly as possible !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Ganymede (11 Sep 2014)

You have to keep us up to date with this one, @spen666 - you might be called as a witness and we'll finally get to know what occurred. Maybe he got pulled over for some subsequent stupidity and blamed you for having been distracted or something.

It has created a dreamlike idea of a world in which motorists get out of their cars and abase themselves in front of the cyclists they have tormented, it's like Communist Self-Criticism.


----------



## Spinney (11 Sep 2014)

If it does turn out to be a dream, can I have some of what you're on??


----------



## fimm (11 Sep 2014)

I'm with Raleighnut - he stopped to complain to the police and then discovered that his idea of inappropriate behaviour and the law's are not the same...


----------



## Drago (11 Sep 2014)

Brilliant news!

A mate of mine inadvertently let his MOT run out and drove around without realising. When it came to light he immediate got it tested, and it passed.

When he recounted thus to me I jokingly told him he should turn himself in, because with anpr the dibble would know he'd been naughty and it would be a lesser punishment if he came clean before they caught up with him.

Alas, the daft eejut thought I was serious and turned himself it! Fortunately they politely told him to go away.


----------



## numbnuts (11 Sep 2014)

A good Catholic


----------



## glasgowcyclist (11 Sep 2014)

Maybe he decided to avoid the public embarrassment of Tweeting his crap behaviour and went straight to the cops instead.


GC


----------



## spen666 (11 Sep 2014)

Ganymede said:


> You have to keep us up to date with this one, @spen666 - you might be called as a witness and we'll finally get to know what occurred. Maybe he got pulled over for some subsequent stupidity and blamed you for having been distracted or something.
> 
> It has created a dreamlike idea of a world in which motorists get out of their cars and abase themselves in front of the cyclists they have tormented, it's like Communist Self-Criticism.


 

I had a phone call this morning from police. They are dealing with him for careless driving. He apparently admitted this in interview.

I had told the police that I was not bothered re the public order aspect. His behaviour was wrong, but I am big enough and ugly enough to not be caused harassment alarm or distress by his words ( but was by his driving).

So matey will be getting a little endorsement and points on his licence and a fine for his trouble. This will of course increase his insurance premium as well





Why did he stop to report the incident to the police?
- it may have had something t o do with trying to get his version in first given the mistaken belief he had about me and my status. I think he misinterpretated my cycling jersey as indicating my job


----------



## Ganymede (11 Sep 2014)

spen666 said:


> So matey will be getting a little endorsement and points on his licence and a fine for his trouble. This will of course increase his insurance premium as well



Good.



spen666 said:


> - it may have had something t o do with trying to get his version in first given the mistaken belief he had about me and my status. I think he misinterpretated my cycling jersey as indicating my job



What's on your jersey?


----------



## CopperBrompton (11 Sep 2014)

spen666 said:


> I had a phone call this morning from police. They are dealing with him for careless driving. He apparently admitted this in interview.


Sounds like he was saying that you had a go at him when he hadn't deliberately done anything wrong, he "just" didn't see you - voila, one admission of careless driving.


----------



## jarlrmai (11 Sep 2014)

Utterly weird, I tend towards the self incrimination line as well.

Or perhaps he saw the coppers, knew that you would too and wanted to get in early.

Still


----------



## jarlrmai (11 Sep 2014)

Ganymede said:


> Good.
> 
> 
> 
> What's on your jersey?



Hmmmmmm???


----------



## Arjimlad (11 Sep 2014)

Amazing behaviour !

What sort of motorist does this, I wonder ?


----------



## w00hoo_kent (11 Sep 2014)

Arjimlad said:


> Amazing behaviour !
> 
> What sort of motorist does this, I wonder ?


It sits perfectly with the threads about motorists not having a clue what the rights of other road users are. We can't presume at one moment that they don't know cyclists are allowed to ride two abreast, or take primary, and the like and then think that they would be stupid to report these 'infringements' if given the right circumstances.

Sounds to me like they got riled up in the first place, increased that when they realised that the bike was still in front of them despite them being in a car and everything and then spotted a copper and thought 'Right, I'm gonna get the cyclist sorted out'. Only then did they find out that they don't actually live in Clarksonland and they were in the wrong. I'd imagine they stopped by the police car expecting to tell their story and then have the cyclist stopped for a good telling off as they rode past.


----------



## spen666 (11 Sep 2014)

jarlrmai said:


> Hmmmmmm???


 


My jersey looks a little more official than that!


It is not available to the public to buy. Its not my fault if the motorist thinks it means I hold a role i don't.


----------



## jarlrmai (11 Sep 2014)

spill the beans then..


----------



## Drago (11 Sep 2014)

One does hope one isn't impersonating a police officer by "word or deed"


----------



## young Ed (11 Sep 2014)

spen666 said:


> My jersey looks a little more official than that!
> 
> 
> It is not available to the public to buy. Its not my fault if the motorist thinks it means I hold a role i don't.


oh come on, at least give us a photo?
Cheers Ed


----------



## classic33 (12 Sep 2014)

Drago said:


> One does hope one isn't impersonating a police officer by "word or deed"


Wouldn't he have been arrested as well if that was the case?


----------



## Crankarm (12 Sep 2014)

I suspect Spen will not be sharing a pic of his cycling jersey with us for fear of incriminating himself. He is not that stupid ……….

I suggest he buys a lottery ticket.


----------



## summerdays (12 Sep 2014)

Crankarm said:


> I suspect Spen will not be sharing a pic of his cycling jersey with us for fear of incriminating himself. He is not that stupid ……….
> 
> I suggest he buys a lottery ticket.


I can't remember the details but I'm sure I remember a post/photo of Spen666 taking part in some kind of ride in connection with the police, which might result in him having a jersey completely legitimately.


----------



## Peteaud (12 Sep 2014)

I want to know the jersey as well.


----------



## benb (12 Sep 2014)

If the police had their blue lights on, it suggests they stopped the motorist.
Would they bother putting them on if the motorist stopped by them?


----------



## raleighnut (12 Sep 2014)

benb said:


> If the police had their blue lights on, it suggests they stopped the motorist.
> Would they bother putting them on if the motorist stopped by them?


Safer than Hazard lights I'd say.


----------



## Cyclopathic (12 Sep 2014)

I've had a driver self report after smashing into my back wheel. I got off my bike with a somewhat confrontational demeanour and he reversed off at speed. I reported it to the police to only to hear that he had reported it himself and admitted fault. A copper came around to visit me, explained that he had fled in fear and was willing to pay for a new wheel. I didn't take the mic and just got a cheap replacement that was about the same as the one he'd broken and passed the receipt on through the police officer.
It was all handled rather well and sensibly. I was impressed with the way the police handled it. No fuss or drama, just kept everyone happy.


----------



## Drago (12 Sep 2014)

classic33 said:


> Wouldn't he have been arrested as well if that was the case?



Depends how arsed the bobbies were, and if that is indeed what he was wearing anyway. I'd settle for a quiet words in one's shell like myself.


----------



## Cyclopathic (12 Sep 2014)

Drago said:


> Depends how arsed the bobbies were, and if that is indeed what he was wearing anyway. I'd settle for a quiet words in one's shell like myself.


Are these "polite" tops illegal? I'd wear one if it means cars giving a bit more room.


----------



## Drago (12 Sep 2014)

The laws a funny thing. Much of it comes down to 'mens rea', on intent. If you're wearing one intending people to think you're a copper and thus treat you better on the road then you're committing the offence.

Additionally, as a police cyclist and cycle trainer I reckon it's a crock - motorists don't treat you any better, and a small minority may even single you out for special treatment.

Our local policy is a quiet word of education, as most offenders genuinely don't realise it's naughty to give another the impression 'by word or deed' they're a copper. To my knowledge everyone thus spoken with has repented.


----------



## spen666 (12 Sep 2014)

Cyclopathic said:


> Are these "polite" tops illegal? I'd wear one if it means cars giving a bit more room.


totally legal - offence is impersonating a police officer.

It is hardly impersonating a police officer to have the word polite on a hi viz vest.

If a police officer suggested to me I shouldn't be wearing one (not that I have one), he would be told politely where he could go.

Don't like people wearing it? - tough, its not illegal at all

Think otherwise, then prosecute me


----------



## Cyclopathic (13 Sep 2014)

spen666 said:


> totally legal - offence is impersonating a police officer.
> 
> It is hardly impersonating a police officer to have the word polite on a hi viz vest.
> 
> ...


Cool beans.


----------



## CopperBrompton (13 Sep 2014)

jarlrmai said:


> Hmmmmmm???



It strikes me that it could make for an interesting case.

"Any person who with intent to deceive impersonates a member of a police force or special constable, or makes any statement *or does any act calculated falsely to suggest that he is such a member or constable*, shall be guilty of an offence and liable on summary conviction to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months or to a fine not exceeding level 5 on the standard scale, or to both."

Clearly the only reason for wearing this design is to deceive drivers into thinking you're a police officer in the hope this will influence their driving. Yet once someone gets close, the deception ends. I would say the offence is committed when you put on the clothing, but the chances of being prosecuted for it are very low.


----------



## glasgowcyclist (13 Sep 2014)

Taken from another thread where there was a discussion about horse riders wearing these vests:



glasgowcyclist said:


> There's enough of these hi-vis jackets being worn that there is no shortage of people the police could charge so this guy's opinion could be tested in a court. The fact that no-one has yet been prosecuted suggests his opinion isn't shared by those who actually work the streets.
> 
> His view certainly isn't shared by ACPO's Lead of Mounted Policing, Commander Robert Broadhurst from the Metropolitan Police, who stated:
> 
> ...


----------



## spen666 (13 Sep 2014)

Trikeman said:


> It strikes me that it could make for an interesting case.
> 
> "Any person who with intent to deceive impersonates a member of a police force or special constable, or makes any statement *or does any act calculated falsely to suggest that he is such a member or constable*, shall be guilty of an offence and liable on summary conviction to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months or to a fine not exceeding level 5 on the standard scale, or to both."
> 
> Clearly the only reason for wearing this design is to deceive drivers into thinking you're a police officer in the hope this will influence their driving. Yet once someone gets close, the deception ends. I would say the offence is committed when you put on the clothing, but the chances of being prosecuted for it are very low.




How is it impersonating a police officer?

A high viz vest is not unique to a police officer unlike say the uniform.

The word polite does not suggest the wearer is a police constable.


Where do you draw the line?


no one being allowed to have anything on they person that contains any of the letters in the word "police"?



Incidentally, this is not just my opinion, I have spoken about this issue with senior police officers (ACPO level) who confirm no offence is being committed by wearing such a vest


----------



## Drago (13 Sep 2014)

People don't wear Sillitoe tartan with the word 'Polite' on it because they're pretty fluorescents. 

They wear them with INTENT to DECEIVE other road users that they are POLICE OFFICERS in the hope that those road users then behave better towards them. All the points to prove for the offences are met.

Westshire here is pretty rural and last year the lanes were heaving with horse riders wearing these and a lot of complaints from busy bodies soon followed. Our guidance comes from our Force solicitor via our DCC, himself a senior ACPO officer, and is to deal with the matter by way of words of advice where that advice is likely to be responded to positively.

If you can explain how an act of WORD or DEED with INTENT to DECEIVE ANOTHER into thinking that person is a POLICE OFFICER or SPECIAL CONSTABLE does not complete the offence then i'm sure our legal advisors would love to hear your reasoning, because the definition of the offence is perfectly met.

"(1)Any person who with intent to deceive impersonates a member of a police force or special constable, or makes any statement or does ANY ACT CALCULTATED TO FALSELY SUGGEST that he is such a member or constable, shall be guilty of an offence and liable on summary conviction to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months or to a fine not exceeding level 5 on the standard scale, or to both."


----------



## Brains (13 Sep 2014)

Several years ago Mrs Brains and I arrived at Reading Station on our way to a bike tour.
The place was swamped with Police from a number of different forces as their was some local football match starting and trouble was expected.
We were dressed in identical black cycle helmets, had identical hi-viz rain jackets, black leggings and were pushing bikes with identical yellow Ortlieb panniers.

We were amazed at how many Police nodded to us in recognition of being "one of their own", we had no problem pushing our bikes through the crowd and were let out of the potential Kettle they were forming without so much as a by your leave.

So it does not take much to fool people, even the Police, into thinking at first glance that you are one of them


----------



## Mugshot (13 Sep 2014)

Many years ago my mate was stopped by the polce and warned that he would be in trouble if he continued impersonating an officer. 
He was wearing a fishtail parka with a target on the back, dog tooth trousers, a white Fred Perry t shirt and bowling shoes


----------



## User269 (13 Sep 2014)

spen666 said:


> A bizarre incident on my commute. I had cause to speak to a motorist regarding his driving. Initially he was polite and chatty, until lights changed when he threatened me if I did not shut his door. He drove off. Incident over?
> 
> Next lights a 100 yards away I end up ahead of him as a result of advanced stop line. He drives behind me, sounding his horn and close passes me. When he passes he demands I pull over as he wanted a chat. I suggested we stop at police station nearby. He drove off.
> 
> ...


I know I should never have taken all those drugs back in the sixties...............oh well, I suppose the flashbacks can start anytime.


----------



## spen666 (13 Sep 2014)

Drago said:


> People don't wear Sillitoe tartan with the word 'Polite' on it because they're pretty fluorescents.
> 
> They wear them with INTENT to DECEIVE other road users that they are POLICE OFFICERS in the hope that those road users then behave better towards them. All the points to prove for the offences are met.
> 
> ...



I'll tell you what. Tell me which force area you are in. I will happily come there and ride in such a hi viz vest. Invite your officers to prosecute me.

I'm willing to bet that
a) No charges would be brought
or
b) the CPS would discontinued the case 
or
c) the court would throw the case out

Why?

Because no offence has been committed


In fact, how many people have been convicted for wearing such a hi viz vest in the UK? I'll give you a clue, the answer is less than 1

There is no offence in wearing a hi viz vest with the word polite on it. The police do not have a monopoly on wearing hi viz


----------



## upandover (13 Sep 2014)

On their website they thank greater Manchester police for giving out the leaflets at the motorbike show. I'd say that's a good indication for me.

I had a old police jacket I used to wear ocassioanly when I started cycling, on awful days. It didn't say police, but did have all the reflectives etc, and did seem to help with hesitant respect. I was passed by police a few times, and worked with officers who were amused and had a 'good for you' attitude. . Especially the cyclists!


----------



## Markymark (13 Sep 2014)

I was once sat on my arse eating donuts and am now worried I'll be done.


----------



## CopperBrompton (13 Sep 2014)

spen666 said:


> How is it impersonating a police officer?
> A high viz vest is not unique to a police officer unlike say the uniform.
> The word polite does not suggest the wearer is a police constable.


C'mon, be real, there is only one reason that particular design is used!


----------



## spen666 (13 Sep 2014)

Trikeman said:


> C'mon, be real, there is only one reason that particular design is used!


Its the most dreadful impersonation to wear something that is not part of the police uniform and is an item of clothing that is worn by millions everyday and has the word polite on it.

Can't see how that is impersonating a police officer


----------



## CopperBrompton (13 Sep 2014)

spen666 said:


> Can't see how that is impersonating a police officer


As per my earlier quote of the law: "*does any act calculated falsely to suggest that he is such a member or constable"*


----------



## spen666 (13 Sep 2014)

is impersonating a police officer? 

I'm closer to impersonating a police officer by wearing a white shirt and dark trousers and black shoes than I am wearing a high vizibility vest


No doubt, you think driving a car means all motorists are impersonating police officers as well, given that some police officers also drive motor cars



If you are correct, can you explain why there have been zero people convicted of impersonating a police officer for wearing such a vest


The evidence is very clear, wearing this hi viz vest is not an offence. Hence why there is no one who has been convicted of impersonating a police officer for wearing one. You may also care to think about why there are so many legitimate businesses that are openly selling such items with no action being taken against them


----------



## w00hoo_kent (14 Sep 2014)

spen666 said:


> You may also care to think about why there are so many legitimate businesses that are openly selling such items with no action being taken against them



I wouldn't go for that argument the differences between what you can stock, sell own and use are all over the place. You just have to look at the issues over 'legal highs' to see that.



Trikeman said:


> As per my earlier quote of the law: "*does any act calculated falsely to suggest that he is such a member or constable"*



I don't believe at any point he is intending to be given access to a police station, I don't think he would attempt to use any police powers or pass himself off, to anyone he was close to that he was a policeman. We're not talking a black and white rule here. People wear this clothing to get some of the perceived benefits from being visible and a bit official looking. If people mistake them for police officers then that says a lot more about the observation of the viewer than of the expectation of the wearer in my, and it would appear most officials, book. (That I might suggest my views are similar to those of members of ACPO in no way suggests I'm trying to impersonate them. :-) )


----------



## CopperBrompton (14 Sep 2014)

w00hoo_kent said:


> I don't believe at any point he is intending to be given access to a police station, I don't think he would attempt to use any police powers or pass himself off, to anyone he was close to that he was a policeman.


The offence, though, is complete when there is any act "calculated to suggest" that he is a police officer. None of your tests apply.

I don't, in practice, think it's likely to be prosecuted, but it does seem pretty clear the offence is committed when donning the item.


----------



## CopperBrompton (14 Sep 2014)

User said:


> Clearly not clear, hence the lack of prosecutions.


That doesn't follow at all. We have a great many offences that are typically dealt with by words of advice rather than prosecution, and others where there is an understanding that a blind eye is turned.


----------



## CopperBrompton (14 Sep 2014)

User said:


> Typically is not the same as universally.


There are other laws that are universally not enforced.


----------



## ClichéGuevara (14 Sep 2014)

User said:


> This is not a law that is universally not enforced though. This is a situation to which a law is universally seen as not applicable.



I've never seen the law of gravity enforced, only applied.


----------



## spen666 (14 Sep 2014)

Trikeman said:


> The offence, though, is complete when there is any act "calculated to suggest" that he is a police officer. None of your tests apply.
> 
> I don't, in practice, think it's likely to be prosecuted, but it does seem pretty clear the offence is committed when donning the item.



the use of a hi viz vest is not impersonating a police officer. Please explain how wearing a hi viz vest is impersonating a police officer. 
You seem to to be suggesting that wearing something that is not unique to a police officer (a hi viz vest - worn by millions, from school kids on trips, building site workers, and required by law to be carried by motorists in some countries!) and with a word on it (polite) that has no connection whatsoever with the police is impersonating a police officer.


----------



## raleighnut (14 Sep 2014)

I'd never wear one as when cut-up by a car or subjected to a close-pass I can be far from polite.


----------



## CopperBrompton (14 Sep 2014)

spen666 said:


> the use of a hi viz vest is not impersonating a police officer..


I never suggested that it was. Please read what I actually wrote.


----------



## spen666 (14 Sep 2014)

Trikeman said:


> I never suggested that it was. Please read what I actually wrote.


Well, we are debating the use of a hi viz vest and your incorrect assertions that it is illegal to wear one as you try to claim to wear one is calculated to impersonate a police officer


Please support your contention by some evidence like the name of anyone convicted of an offence for wearing a hi viz vest


----------



## Profpointy (14 Sep 2014)

spen666 said:


> Well, we are debating the use of a hi viz vest and your incorrect assertions that it is illegal to wear one as you try to claim to wear one is calculated to impersonate a police officer
> 
> 
> Please support your contention by some evidence like the name of anyone convicted of an offence for wearing a hi viz vest



Well wearing a high viz vest with police-like markings on it, with one letter changed is quite clearly intended to represent a police officer, whilst a standard road mender's high viz vest is clearly not so intended - I rather think you're being a bit mischievous in your argument.


----------



## glasgowcyclist (14 Sep 2014)

spen666 said:


> Incidentally, this is not just my opinion, I have spoken about this issue with senior police officers (ACPO level) who confirm no offence is being committed by wearing such a vest



Is this the unanimous view of ACPO?


GC


----------



## CopperBrompton (14 Sep 2014)

spen666 said:


> Well, we are debating the use of a hi viz vest and your incorrect assertions that it is illegal to wear one as you try to claim to wear one is calculated to impersonate a police officer
> 
> Please support your contention by some evidence like the name of anyone convicted of an offence for wearing a hi viz vest


1. I have made no such assertion, as you well know
2. I have already stated that I think prosecution for the offence to be unlikely

Misrepresenting what others have said just makes you look foolish.

http://www.cyclechat.net/threads/motorist-reports-self-to-police.164797/post-3276998


----------



## upandover (14 Sep 2014)

I have been wondering about getting one for a few weeks, for my new longer commutes. If I do, I'll let you all know if I have any difficulties!


----------



## CopperBrompton (14 Sep 2014)

User said:


> If I, for one, have managed to misunderstand this, I can only apologise.


Accepted.


----------



## shouldbeinbed (14 Sep 2014)

Obsolete and erstwhile scrap police jackets used to be available if you had a pal in the job who was refreshing their kit, as long as you removed the Police patch or at least put a strip of duck tape over all of it.

A few years ago that was stopped from the very top level in my local force as it was enabling people to get closer and closer to impersonating a police officer whether by accident or design & the cops were getting grief over it.

As a kid, a guy on out road had an Austin Allegro, at the time the cops used them, he painted and liveried it exactly as a police car and had 'Be Polite' decals made up, the 'Be' was miniscule and 'Polite' exactly as per Police livery of the time, he was spoken to and given the opportunity to tone it down but wouldn't and eventiually was prosecuted and penalised quite heavily for it.


----------



## fatblokish (14 Sep 2014)

http://ukcriminallawblog.com/2014/0...officer-by-wearing-a-toy-helmet-and-pig-mask/

http://www.karnival-house.co.uk/british-policewoman-adult-fancy-dress-costume-p-4602.html

Well I never !


----------



## CopperCyclist (14 Sep 2014)

In my opinion, there are two reasons why we don't prosecute or act against "Polite" hi-vis tips, despite as Drago's correctly says there being, in all likelihood an offence.

1. It's a mens rea offence, so if you aren't daft enough to actually say "yes I was trying to look like a police officer" then we are never going to be able to prove what was actually your true intent, with the burden of proof required for a court.

And... (and to be honest this is the MAIN reason as far as I'm concerned)

2. There's a world of difference between someone pretending to be a police officer for nefarious gains, and someone who is simply hoping a motorist might see them and think twice about their driving standard.

So, is there an offence - in all honesty yes. Would I care if I saw someone wearing one? Not a jot.


----------



## Profpointy (14 Sep 2014)

User said:


> Clearly not clearly, hence the lack of prosecutions.



No, that doesn't follow . Police /CPS can't be arsed prosecuting a marginal looking-rather-like police jacket.
Why have police like markings, and the rather unlikely word "polite" on it if the intent is not to look somewhat like a police officer.

Anyhow, please yourself, I'm not particularly bothered by people looking like police officers, nor cyclists RLJ-ing, nor having the wrong sort of pedal reflectors - even I'm guilty of the latter heinous crime


----------



## Dayvo (14 Sep 2014)

Mugshot said:


> Many years ago my mate was stopped by the polce and warned that he would be in trouble if he continued impersonating an officer.
> He was wearing a fishtail parka with a target on the back, dog tooth trousers, a white Fred Perry t shirt and bowling shoes



Maybe they thought he was impersonating someone from the MOD.


----------



## spen666 (14 Sep 2014)

The evidence is clear - there has never been a successful prosecution of anyone for wearing such a hi viz vest, nor of any of the many businesses selling such items

Those with an iq may be able to understand why this is


----------



## 400bhp (14 Sep 2014)

spen666 said:


> The evidence is clear - there has never been a successful prosecution of anyone for wearing such a hi viz vest, nor of any of the many businesses selling such items
> 
> Those with an iq may be able to understand why this is


Are you this nice in person?


----------



## CopperBrompton (14 Sep 2014)

spen666 said:


> Those with an iq may be able to understand why this is


Those with an IQ above room temperature will be aware that everyone has an IQ, even those who seemingly don't understand what the term means, and that it does not demonstrate a great deal of intelligence to continue to (a) misrepresent the topic of a debate in a written forum where anyone can see for themselves what was actually said, and (b) argue with the law even after the exact wording has been posted and a police officer has explained that it is an offence.


----------



## spen666 (14 Sep 2014)

Trikeman said:


> Those with an IQ above room temperature will be aware that everyone has an IQ, even those who seemingly don't understand what the term means, and that it does not demonstrate a great deal of intelligence to continue to (a) misrepresent the topic of a debate in a written forum where anyone can see for themselves what was actually said, and (b) argue with the law even after the exact wording has been posted and a police officer has explained that it is an offence.


Some people can't seemingly understand the obvious.

So what if a police officer has posted what the law is. I hate to tell you, police officers are not the law and it has been known for police officers to get the law wrong. You may just ask yourself why the CPS came into existence - yes, thats right because the police were not prosecuting cases properly and were not experts in the criminal process.

The responsibility of a police officer is not to know the criminal law, but to keep the queen's peace.


----------



## uclown2002 (14 Sep 2014)

spen666 said:


> ..................................................................
> *Why did he stop to report the incident to the police?
> - it may have had something t o do with trying to get his version in first given the mistaken belief he had about me and my status. I think he misinterpretated my cycling jersey as indicating my job*



That says everything!


----------



## CopperBrompton (14 Sep 2014)

spen666 said:


> You may just ask yourself why the CPS came into existence - yes, thats right because the police were not prosecuting cases properly


You don't have much experience with the CPS, do you ...


----------



## spen666 (14 Sep 2014)

Trikeman said:


> You don't have much experience with the CPS, do you ...




No, apart from working as a defence lawyer since the 1980s. So, no, I have no experience at all of the CPS. However, whether or not I have experience of the CPS is irrelevant to why the CPS were set up.


----------



## glasgowcyclist (14 Sep 2014)

spen666 said:


> Incidentally, this is not just my opinion, I have spoken about this issue with senior police officers (ACPO level) who confirm no offence is being committed by wearing such a vest





spen666 said:


> So what if a police officer has posted what the law is. I hate to tell you, police officers are not the law and it has been known for police officers to get the law wrong.



Hmmm..


GC


----------



## spen666 (14 Sep 2014)

[QUOTE 3279605, member: 45"]Key word in bold.[/QUOTE]
What is key about that?

I have worked as a prosecutor as well ( not for the CPS) and have spent years inspecting the CPS as well.


----------



## glasgowcyclist (15 Sep 2014)

CPS guidance on the offence supports @CopperCyclist's post:

_"You should consider the motive of the defendant. Where the impersonation involves a threat to the safety of any person, or to property, or is done with a view to financial gain, then a prosecution should follow."_​This is why you're highly unlikely to see a horse rider or a cyclist charged with the offence, they're probably doing it to obtain some safety benefit rather than for some criminal deception.

Now, if there were an offence of dressing like a nobber*...


GC

(* awaits the obvious reply!)


----------



## benb (15 Sep 2014)

It's pretty obvious that by the strict letter of the law, an offence is being committed, and equally obvious why no prosecutions have been brought.


----------



## spen666 (15 Sep 2014)

Just re reading this thread, I wanted to make it clear that I was not wearing a "Polite" Hi Viz vest nor do I own any such item


----------



## w00hoo_kent (15 Sep 2014)

spen666 said:


> Just re reading this thread, I wanted to make it clear that I was not wearing a "Polite" Hi Viz vest nor do I own any such item


Then, out of interest, when you suggested that the driver might have been confused about your attire, what were you wearing?

I had presumed it was something to do with the remembrance ride that you did, but then you made it seem that you fully agreed you were wearing a "Polite" Hi Viz so I presumed I was wrong. Had you fooled me in to thinking you were something you weren't?


----------



## spen666 (15 Sep 2014)

w00hoo_kent said:


> Then, out of interest, when you suggested that the driver might have been confused about your attire, what were you wearing?
> 
> I had presumed it was something to do with the remembrance ride that you did, but then you made it seem that you fully agreed you were wearing a "Polite" Hi Viz so I presumed I was wrong. Had you fooled me in to thinking you were something you weren't?


I was wearing as I normally do the jersey from the ride you refer to. It has emblazoned across it UK POLICE UNITY TOUR which is the name of the event

Why do I wear it?
a) I bought it, so why not wear it
b) I am proud to be a member of the Unity Tour
c) It raises awareness of the event


----------



## briantrumpet (15 Sep 2014)

spen666 said:


> What is key about that?
> 
> I have worked as a prosecutor as well ( not for the CPS) and have spent years inspecting the CPS as well.


Aha, so I put it to you, sir, that contrary to your earlier statement, you _have_ got some experience of the CPS. Why then should we believe anything you say?

(Sorry, I've watched too many episodes of Crown Court and Rumpole. My script is more Rumpole than Crown Court: please don't take a word of what I've said seriously.)


----------



## spen666 (15 Sep 2014)

briantrumpet said:


> Aha, so I put it to you, sir, that contrary to your earlier statement, you _have_ got some experience of the CPS. Why then should we believe anything you say?
> 
> (Sorry, I've watched too many episodes of Crown Court and Rumpole. My script is more Rumpole than Crown Court: please don't take a word of what I've said seriously.)


I said I did have experience of the CPS!

Nothing wrong with Rumpole


----------



## briantrumpet (15 Sep 2014)

spen666 said:


> I said I did have experience of the CPS!
> 
> Nothing wrong with Rumpole


I submit exhibit A, m'lud.


spen666 said:


> So, no, I have no experience at all of the CPS.


Is this in your own handwriting, sir?

(OK, I'll put the wig on. My great-great-great-great grandfather was a perukier, so I'm sure I can get a wig from the attic. It might be a bit moth-eaten though. Sorry.)


----------



## jarlrmai (15 Sep 2014)

Fair enough


----------



## spen666 (16 Sep 2014)

briantrumpet said:


> I submit exhibit A, m'lud.
> 
> Is this in your own handwriting, sir?
> 
> (OK, I'll put the wig on. My great-great-great-great grandfather was a perukier, so I'm sure I can get a wig from the attic. It might be a bit moth-eaten though. Sorry.)


And if you take the whole of the post from the last quote, I listed my working and said the sentence you quotes]d sarcastically after posting that I had been working with or against the CPS formy working career ie in 4 different decades


----------



## spen666 (16 Sep 2014)

jarlrmai said:


> Fair enough


That is not me in the pictures - far too slim


----------



## w00hoo_kent (16 Sep 2014)

spen666 said:


> I was wearing as I normally do the jersey from the ride you refer to. It has emblazoned across it UK POLICE UNITY TOUR which is the name of the event



Cool, and no explanations needed :-)


----------



## noodle (19 Sep 2014)

Want one of those high viz vests for work 
Any links


----------



## spen666 (19 Sep 2014)

Google polite hi viz vest. Loads of retailers sell them online


----------



## noodle (19 Sep 2014)

Cheers


----------



## spen666 (1 Oct 2014)

It gets more interesting!

I had a phone call from the witness care people this morning. Driver has apparently admitted offence, been fined & 3 points on licence. No surprise there, but witness care say was ordered to pay me £46 compensation as well.

I'm gobsmacked. I never expected any compensation order, nor do I understand how the unusual figure of £46 is arrived at.

If I get the compensation, it will be going straight to charity as I neither wanted or needed any compensation


----------



## Markymark (1 Oct 2014)

I thought they go to a victim's fund anyway? Good for you either way.


----------



## benb (1 Oct 2014)

Are you sure this isn't a Franz Fafka story?


----------



## spen666 (1 Oct 2014)

0-markymark-0 said:


> I thought they go to a victim's fund anyway? Good for you either way.


That was my thought, but they were insistent the money went to me. As I say if it does, its off to the COPS charity that I support


----------



## spen666 (1 Oct 2014)

[QUOTE 3306415, member: 45"]That's about the cost of a new jersey.[/QUOTE]
You think its a subtle message from the Mags re my attire?


----------



## glasgowcyclist (1 Oct 2014)

Do you think there's some poor sod on a car forum who has had the p*ss royally taken after recounting this story from his side? I'd love to see that thread!


GC


----------



## Markymark (1 Oct 2014)

glasgowcyclist said:


> Do you think there's some poor sod on a car forum who has had the p*ss royally taken after recounting this story from his side? I'd love to see that thread!
> 
> 
> GC


Yeah, like even with all facts blaming the motorists you think they'll not be blaming the cyclist for being on their road and not paying any tax or insurance?


----------



## glasgowcyclist (1 Oct 2014)

0-markymark-0 said:


> Yeah, like even with all facts blaming the motorists you think they'll not be blaming the cyclist for being on their road and not paying any tax or insurance?


 

That's par for the course. I want to know how he worded cutting up a cyclist then handing himself in to the first cop he saw. Nobber. (not you!)

GC


----------



## glenn forger (1 Oct 2014)

Post to make this thread into a film, one post, one vote.


----------



## raleighnut (1 Oct 2014)

glenn forger said:


> Post to make this thread into a film, one post, one vote.


Haven't we seen enough Mr Bean films yet.


----------



## benb (1 Oct 2014)

raleighnut said:


> Haven't we seen enough Mr Bean films yet.



If we have seen more than zero, then yes. Yes we have.


----------

