CPS are idiots

[Miquel In De Rain]

A systematic breakdown in this drivers judgment & risk analysis? As in they're either accepting a high level of risk or do not understand the dangers that they're putting other people in.


I wasn't specifically addressing anyone in this thread per-se more the fact that there's a theme of "there's nothing wrong here" when clearly there is a problem with this drivers behaviour on the road.

I agree.

 

[MacB]

The excuse that they can't see the plate just demonstrates a lack of imagination from the CPS responder, whose instructions were probably:-

Ditch this farce before we're laughed out of court and use any old excuse to shut up the numpty that's pestered to get it this far in the first place.

The error seems to have been in taking the 'any old excuse' too literally and failing to be a bit more creative. Sadly I think the CPS responder also failed to consider, or care, about the potential fallout on cycling forums. As we're forced to endure yet another thread of 'outrage' from a cam warrior.

 

[Hawk]

Level crossings are dangerous places. But not when the barriers are going up.

This does seem a very minor thing to be using police time on. Instead of a traffic officer being on the streets where they can, rightly or wrongly, much more easily take action against dangerous drivers, they had to stay inside, watch your footage, fill out forms to refer the matter to CPS and the like.

In an ideal world, drivers like this would indeed have action taken against them for the reasons PPlasers and Mikey describe above; in our real world I feel this wasn't worth anyone's time.

 

[Hawk]

I'd possibly go as far as to suggest that this case would hinder rather than improve cycle safety on the road. That driver will have told all his friends about "some bloody cyclist" who was trying to get him prosecuted for "nothing". Will that driver take more care around cyclists in future..? 50/50. Will all his friends resent cyclists a little bit more? Probably.

 

[MrJamie]

I'm not bothered about leaving once the train had passed and the barriers had gone up, or the stopping a bit over the line in presumably unused space. The driving was poor, but unfortunately all too common, I dont think Id think twice about witnessing it. It looks like one of those Renault Sport Clio/Twingos I think.

AskMID shows it as uninsured now, maybe its no longer on the roads anyway

 

[Crankarm]

This really is a wind up right? What next, arresting people for walking on the cracks in the pavement? The OP clearly has too much time on his hands. Would he prefer that the police spent their time on non incidents such as this meaning that they are distracted from catching people who are genuinely dangerous and pose a real risk to society?

 

[BSRU]

In the past I have seen many times the barriers start to go up and before they have finished they suddenly start going down again.
That is why the lights keep flashing red until the barriers have completely finished going up and why you MUST wait until the lights stop flashing.

 

[BLUE(UK)]

Clown.

Who is this aimed at? You decide.

 

[campbellab]

In the past I have seen many times the barriers start to go up and before they have finished they suddenly start going down again.
That is why the lights keep flashing red until the barriers have completely finished going up and why you MUST wait until the lights stop flashing.

If thats the case then it makes it more serious, but even more serious is the ambiguity of the safety system that should keep the barriers down until it is certain that they aren't required. There may also be peds who are less likely to stay behind a stop line and obey the lights, they often start moving as soon as the barriers go up.

 

[Alun]

This thread shows why the CPS are so reluctant to prosecute for dangerous driving even after there's a RTC. Because the general public, the peers that will make up the jury, see driving like this as perfectly acceptable. Then people complain about close passes & lack of respect for cyclists on the road. Hey guys, you're part of the problem. You're helping to make inattentive driving & a high level of risk taking acceptable!

From my point of view this video is disturbing not because there's an extreme case of bad driving in it. Rather it's disturbing due to the fact it documents a number of high risk/inattentive manoeuvres in less than ideal situations in a very small window of opertunity.

1. An improperly sighted overtake near a junction.
2. Driving at excessive speed in potentially slippery conditions.
3. The inability to stop before a solid line on the road correctly.
4. Impatience in following road signs & signals.
5. A second case of driving at excessive speed in potentially slippery conditions.

Nothing major on their own but together show a systematic breakdown in this drivers judgment & risk analysis.

2 of your points concerned excessive speed. What speed was he travelling at ? How do you know this ?

 

[4F]

Has the right video been attached ? Looking at it again this today it looks even more of a non event than it did last night.

 

[Ivan Ardon]

A quiet word in the drivers ear from traffic police would have been an appropriate response here.

The flashing front light on the bike is a worse crime, IMO.

 

[400bhp]

Nothing major on their own. So what was a successful prosecuton expected for?

Nail - head.

 

[Mr wogwon]

A quiet word in the drivers ear from traffic police would have been an appropriate response here.

The flashing front light on the bike is a worse crime, IMO.

+1 .. OP get a life

 

[400bhp]

Almost the right question. How would you prove it in a court of law?

Nail - head x 2