Do the Police not care?

[As Easy As Riding A Bike]

The point is, the man received a threat, from man who was - at that moment - in a position to endanger him.

This man - a criminal barrister - is firmly convinced that there is enough evidence to prosecute the driver. His reasons are clearly set out on his blog, and in the letter he sent to the CPS.

This, alone, has nothing to do with "the bigger picture". It's about pursuing justice.

Frankly I think the CPS - rather than weighing up the evidence submitted - just couldn't be bothered. Witness the fact that they still - to this date - have not even responded to his letter. Not even an email to acknowledge receipt.

Hopefully this will cause them some embarrassment, and the next time a driver threatens a cyclist, they will be far more ready to prosecute.

Am I going mad, or is that not a good thing?

 

[thomas]

Am I going mad, or is that not a good thing?

Of course you're bloody mad!!!!



















You're a cyclist, being a bit mad is a requirement

 

[As Easy As Riding A Bike]

I don't feel he felt endangered, because if he did he would have stopped and let the guy pass. All he does is tell the guy to go past because he can't hear him 'over the sound of his engine'.

Nope. That's the wrong part of the clip. Come on.

That's in very poor taste to be honest.

I think that's some pretty selective outrage, coming from someone who suggested that that kind of incident would be more useful for gaining cyclists some sympathy. To quote - "Therefore that type of article is much more likely to move hearts and minds."

[And yes, I was outraged and disgusted by that case, as someone who cycles in London on a near-daily basis.]

 

[As Easy As Riding A Bike]

Helmet camera footage, on the whole, isn't going to change 'hearts and minds'.

I'm still not sure I see the relevance. For a start, this case is only really appearing in front of the public because of Porter's frustration with the CPS.


And secondly, not every single thing a cyclist or cycle campaigner does has to advance the cause of "hearts and minds" of the general public.

In fact quite often I'm sure action will necessitate pissing them off, and I don't think individual cyclists should be the sacrificial lambs on the altar of the greater cycling good.



Edit - superfluous sentence

 

[Origamist]

Thomas, I have neither the time nor inclination to address most of your points (which are often irrelevant and poorly argued) but it seems that you are insinuating that inaction is the best stategy to deal with bullying and threatening behaviour on the roads (unless of course it reaches your life-or-death litmus test). I think this is a piss-poor position to adopt. What's more, even if you disagree with Porter pursuing this matter with the CPS (as there "are more important clips to try and get more recognition from"), surely you can see the benefit of shining a light on the CPS's and Met's decision making processes. As a barrister, Porter is able to challenge the incompetence and indifference that many of us have faced when dealing with the criminal justice system.

 

[magnatom]

Oh, I'm not surprised that he is being criticized - it is the extent, and nature of it, that is surprising me. Head over to bikeradar if you doubt me.




No, but you are implying - strongly implying - that he shouldn't, and that he has better things to be doing. How else am I to read this kind of comment?



That is - Martin Porter should think about the effect he is having on the public perception of "uppity" cyclists.

You were doing well until the cheap shot at the end. Why don't you ask Martin if he thinks I am uppity?

As for implying that he shouldn't, I think you will find (if you care to read the previous discussions above), that I wouldn't, and I stated my reasons for why I didn't think this video was the best video to be publicising in this way. I even pointed Martin directly to this thread so that, if he chose, he could take part in the discussion. He chose not to, but was happy for me to pass on his comments.

What you appear to be suggesting is that I should not air my opinions about this incident? Why? Do you think all cyclists should support other cyclists? Regardless of what they say or do? I'm sure you don't, and I'm sure you agree that progress is made through discussion and listening to different points of view. On this occasion I felt the need to say something and did. For that I will never apologise.

 

[As Easy As Riding A Bike]

You were doing well until the cheap shot at the end. Why don't you ask Martin if he thinks I am uppity?

Fair enough - I'll withdraw the "uppity" allegation. But I'm still a little bit troubled by that sentence of yours that I quoted. You are apparently worried about the effect on public opinion (of cyclists in general?) that videos - where the victim is perceived to be at fault - can have.

Well, I don't think there is any question about whether Martin Porter is at fault here. He is not. Now if some people do think he is at fault, or that he has done something wrong, then frankly I think they are already deeply prejudiced and no amount of "more serious" or "completely driver at fault" kind of videos are going to change their minds. At the margins, they are the kinds of driver like the one in the original video. The only thing that is going to change their minds is fear of punishment.

What you seem to be suggesting is that Martin Porter should be thinking about how the prejudiced might perceive this kind of video. I don't think that's a good way to proceed.

As for implying that he shouldn't, I think you will find (if you care to read the previous discussions above), that I wouldn't, and I stated my reasons for why I didn't think this video was the best video to be publicising in this way.

As I said to Thomas, so what? Maybe it isn't "the best". But that doesn't matter at all. Deal with this case on its merits. I certainly don't think Martin Porter should put up and shut up because his incident is not, apparently, serious enough.

Furthermore, I think you have misunderstood why this video has ended up being publicised. It is certainly not because Martin Porter thinks that is the absolute worst thing that can ever happen to a cyclist, or that it is an especially bad incident that needs to be publicised, in and of itself.

It is, rather, a direct consequence of his frustration with the CPS. If they had responded directly to his concerns, and/or given the driver the appropriate punishment (or even gone to question him, FFS) this video would never have seen the light of day (beyond the few views his normally unpublicised videos ordinarily get on youtube).

What you appear to be suggesting is that I should not air my opinions about this incident?

I think you will struggle to find evidence that I have done any such thing.

 

[thomas]

Furthermore, I think you have misunderstood why this video has ended up being publicised. It is certainly not because Martin Porter thinks that is the absolute worst thing that can ever happen to a cyclist, or that it is an especially bad incident that needs to be publicised, in and of itself.

It is, rather, a direct consequence of his frustration with the CPS. If they had responded directly to his concerns, and/or given the driver the appropriate punishment (or even gone to question him, FFS) this video would never have seen the light of day (beyond the few views his normally unpublicised videos ordinarily get on youtube).

That's a reason not to carry on right there....if the reason it carry on is just because CPS won't take it seriously.

I think Lee has probably made the best points for your argument so far. No problem with him going to the Police about it, I just think he is making too big a point out of it, for the reasons you say above.

 

[MartinC]

There are 2 issues here:

1. Is there evidence that an offence was committed?

2. Have the Police and the CPS fulfilled their obligations to the public?

The answer to 1 is yes. The answer to 2 is not yet. The blog contains the legal context for all of this.

It's disappointing to see all the usual dismissive attitudes get paradedn here. E.g "we (cyclists) shouldn't expect the motorist to be accountable because it will make us unpopular", "worse things happen so it doesn't count", "we're ever so humble and we shoudn't get in the important peoples way", etc., etc.

Good luck to Martin - he's doing everyone a public service, especially cyclists.

 

[thomas]

There are 2 issues here:

1. Is there evidence that an offence was committed?

2. Have the Police and the CPS fulfilled their obligations to the public?

The answer to 1 is yes. The answer to 2 is not yet. The blog contains the legal context for all of this.

It's disappointing to see all the usual dismissive attitudes get paradedn here. E.g "we (cyclists) shouldn't expect the motorist to be accountable because it will make us unpopular", "worse things happen so it doesn't count", "we're ever so humble and we shoudn't get in the important peoples way", etc., etc.

Good luck to Martin - he's doing everyone a public service, especially cyclists.

There isn't evidence though, or at least the evidence can be interpreted in different ways and any court would have to favour not guilty over guilty. I don't think it is unreasonable that the motorist could have been saying yes back sarcastically as he thought it was a propitiousness thing to think he said.

(I don't actually believe that was the case)

 

[magnatom]

There are 2 issues here:

1. Is there evidence that an offence was committed?

2. Have the Police and the CPS fulfilled their obligations to the public?

The answer to 1 is yes. The answer to 2 is not yet. The blog contains the legal context for all of this.

It's disappointing to see all the usual dismissive attitudes get paradedn here. E.g "we (cyclists) shouldn't expect the motorist to be accountable because it will make us unpopular", "worse things happen so it doesn't count", "we're ever so humble and we shoudn't get in the important peoples way", etc., etc.

Good luck to Martin - he's doing everyone a public service, especially cyclists.

I really can't understand why people are disappointed. Just because I have different views? and as for dismissive attitudes towards cyclists and the accountability of motorists....have you ever read anything that I've posted!

 

[magnatom]

What you seem to be suggesting is that Martin Porter should be thinking about how the prejudiced might perceive this kind of video. I don't think that's a good way to proceed.

Ah now we are getting somewhere. I have absolutely no reservations, whatsoever about Martin posting his video or commenting on it, blogging about it etc. However, martin has taken the next step of reporting it. I've no problems there either. What I do have some reservations about is that he is publicising the issue and trying to get the press to bite. Again, I don't have a problem with that in general, however, (and again I'll be 'uppity') and suggest I have some experience in this, if you want to make an impact on public perception then you need to be careful as to how the public will perceive the incident. Putting my Joe Public hat on, it all looks a lot of fuss over nothing. Unfortunately that is exactly how the majority will view this. (I have shown this to a few non-cyclists and that was their reaction). So, in that sense, do I think that Martin was right to 'publicise' this, in my opinion no. But then, that is just my opinion, and he can do and does do exactly what he likes.

I'd expect, and do get, the same scrutiny over nearl everything I post and do related to my videos.

As I said to Thomas, so what? Maybe it isn't "the best". But that doesn't matter at all. Deal with this case on its merits. I certainly don't think Martin Porter should put up and shut up because his incident is not, apparently, serious enough.

Furthermore, I think you have misunderstood why this video has ended up being publicised. It is certainly not because Martin Porter thinks that is the absolute worst thing that can ever happen to a cyclist, or that it is an especially bad incident that needs to be publicised, in and of itself.

It is, rather, a direct consequence of his frustration with the CPS. If they had responded directly to his concerns, and/or given the driver the appropriate punishment (or even gone to question him, FFS) this video would never have seen the light of day (beyond the few views his normally unpublicised videos ordinarily get on youtube).

Again the problem is the public perception, which I covered above.

I think you will struggle to find evidence that I have done any such thing.

That is my perception of your posts. It's a funny thing perception.....

 

[Origamist]

There isn't evidence though, or at least the evidence can be interpreted in different ways and any court would have to favour not guilty over guilty. I don't think it is unreasonable that the motorist could have been saying yes back sarcastically as he thought it was a propitiousness thing to think he said.

(I don't actually believe that was the case)

Not only are you able to read people's thoughts and understand how others felt at the time, you are now offering your learned opinion on legal matters! It seems to have escaped your attention that Porter is a QC who has acted on behalf of cyclists and probably knows a a little bit more than you, when it comes to the evidential test.

I really can't understand why people are disappointed. Just because I have different views? and as for dismissive attitudes towards cyclists and the accountability of motorists....have you ever read anything that I've posted!

You have every right to express your opinion and I have no issue with people whose views diverge from my own, however, I am surprised you cannot see why I and others are disappointed in your qualified, conditional, and luke warm support for someone attempting to do something constructive for cyclists, simply because you believe it doesn't play well to the gallery and is not an "open and shut" case...

 

[As Easy As Riding A Bike]

What I do have some reservations about is that he is publicising the issue and trying to get the press to bite. Again, I don't have a problem with that in general, however, (and again I'll be 'uppity') and suggest I have some experience in this, if you want to make an impact on public perception then you need to be careful as to how the public will perceive the incident.

Again, you seem to be implying that Martin Porter is doing this with the aim of altering public perception.

He is not.

He is doing it to - hopefully - give the CPS a kick up the arse.

You are coming at this from the wrong angle.

That is my perception of your posts. It's a funny thing perception.....

Is this a tacit admission that what you perceive is based on no evidence whatsoever?

 

[magnatom]

You have every right to express your opinion and I have no issue with people whose views diverge from my own, however, I am surprised you cannot see why I and others are disappointed in your qualified, conditional, and luke warm support for someone attempting to do something constructive for cyclists, simply because you believe it doesn't play well to the gallery and is not an "open and shut" case...

My qualification only extends to this particular video and the 'apparent' ambiguities surrounding it. However, in every other way I applaud what Martin is doing.