Dangerous driver convicted based on cyclist's headcam footage.

[Bonefish Blues]

And if there had been someone coming the other way there he would have had nowhere to go. in similar circumstances here a few years ago there was almost a multiple crash.

There wasn't though. It was an illegal manoeuvre but it didn't endanger the cyclist is my point.

 

[Deleted member 1258]

There wasn't though. It was an illegal manoeuvre but it didn't endanger the cyclist is my point.

My point is that if the circumstances had been different it could have done.

 

[Bonefish Blues]

My point is that if the circumstances had been different it could have done.

Well yes, that's why the offence exists, because it carries hazard that can in the 'right' circumstances create danger - we'd all agree with that, I'm sure.

 

[Daninplymouth]

There wasn't though. It was an illegal manoeuvre but it didn't endanger the cyclist is my point.

Say a child was crossing the rd to the middle island they wouldn’t expect a car to be coming down the wrong side of the rd and the speed he was driving at he wouldn’t have been able to see clearly. Then it’s he either plows through a child or swerves into the cyclist. And he wasn’t jailed for endangering the cyclist more for perverting the course of justice

 

[Bonefish Blues]

Say a child was crossing the rd to the middle island they wouldn’t expect a car to be coming down the wrong side of the rd and the speed he was driving at he wouldn’t have been able to see clearly. Then it’s he either plows through a child or swerves into the cyclist. And he wasn’t jailed for endangering the cyclist more for perverting the course of justice

But there wasn't on this occasion. We could create a thousand potential scenarios which could happen, but didn't.

That is why that manoeuvre is a driving offence though - it carries significant hazard over and above the usual act of driving.